I'm giving an assessment today to my sixth grade science students. It's a common assessment, developed by all the members of my PLC. We planned the unit according to our state objectives and county pacing guide. The assessment itself is open book and open notes. It's our attempt at emphasizing skill development instead of fact regurgitation. This is only a recently agreed upon approach in our PLC. It's one I've been insisting on and we've all finally come to agree that it is the best approach.
I've been teaching my kids from this perspective the entire year. I've told them from day 1 that I hate grades and would never give another if I didn't have to. I've told them the most important thing for them to learn this year is how to learn, how to ask the right question, how to analyze a situation, how to recognize and evaluate various relationships among data, concepts, etc. All of our class assignments and instructional strategies happen this way.
Yet, every time they take a common assessment, they form a line at my desk, asking "What does this question mean?" or "Is this the right answer?" or "I don't understand what this is asking?" It's not like the assessment is so drastically different from what they've seen before. It's nearly identical! It becomes so frustrating because roughly 80% of their questions are unnecessary because they have not read the directions or they are too worried about a grade.
We have done such a disservice to our children. In our attempts at proving we are doing our jobs we are force feeding tons of content knowledge, giving standardized tests with low level norms established as passing grades, and giving crash diet remediation to allow underachievers to retake our already low expectation tests again. In the process, students have lost the ability to think for themselves. They don't read directions because someone has always told EXACTLY what to do. They are afraid to think because the right answer is too important.
But what about the growing number of classrooms like my own where there is pushback against such culture, where on a daily basis the students thrive in an environment that provides the opportunity to explore and learn and they consistently demonstrate a mastery of not only the content but the development of those higher order thinking, creative, and collaborative skills? We put a mandated common assessment in front of them and they suddenly become different children. It's like Order 66 has been activated and completely new personalities take over, erasing any prior history, training, or allegiance.
It's frustrating because I begin to feel like a failure as a teacher. It's frustrating because it feels like all that we have accomplished as a class has been for naught. It's depressing because you begin to wonder if you will ever help these precious children you've been given to overcome this curse. I don't have a solution. I just need to rant. Anybody else know what I'm talking about?
Friday, February 12, 2010
Monday, February 8, 2010
Access for Everyone
It's Sunday night and eyes all around the world are focused on the Super Bowl. Quite a few members of my PLN are working steadily on sending out links and resources via Twitter with one eye on the game and providing updates on their favorite commercials. I'm no different, except now I find myself preparing the pre-game show for Tuesday night's #edchat. I regret that class will keep me from participating Tuesday night, but I want to express some of my thoughts now anyway.
One of the topics in this week's #edchat poll is How can we guarantee equitable access and use of technology to ensure tech literacy and to support meaningful learning for all students? In my opinion this issue itself should drive the need for classroom instruction embedded with technology more than the workforce's need for 21st Century workers. Why would I say such a thing? I'm glad you asked. If you do not embed technology in your instruction, many of your students will NEVER, I repeat, NEVER, get exposure to, much less develop skills with, the technology.
Now for a disclaimer. I realize that I may have initially misinterpreted the question. My first reaction was to read this question in terms of economic access in the home setting, i.e. outside of school. Shelly Blake-Plock (aka R. Richard Wojewodzki) has begun quite an interesting conversation about this over at TeachPaperless. That is certainly an issue worth debating, but that's not my task for this post. Upon further reflection, I think the intent of the question relates more to equitable access WITHIN the school, not outside of it. That also is an issue in this day of limited resources.
Regardless of how one interprets the question, I think the answer lies in the notion of embedded instruction. Yes, I'm using that term again. Most of the people who will read this post will agree that the use of technology in the classroom should be transparent, or unseen, because it is a natural part of what happens there. Technology is not just a game day in the lab or special art project on the laptops or our once-a-month-do-something with the iPods. It is used as an appropriate tool for the task at hand. So, how do we make that happen?
First, appropriation of funds have to change. Our county took a 90% budget cut this school year in our technology funding because of the state government's own economic woes. That's screwed up thinking. Technology should not be a line item. It should be part of instructional and curricular materials. As a side note, there is rumor we will delay updating and changing the standard course of study because we cannot afford to buy new textbooks. Another example of misguided thinking - textbooks (and their publi$her$) should not drive curriculum changes.
Aaron Eyler has written an excellent post about how we could rework our budgets to begin to bring more technology into the schools. I don't think his proposal is all that crazy. Here are my ideas. This is a pic of a mini laptop cart that was put together by our tech facilitator. Total cost: about $2700. You might could do it cheaper - our district quote sheet is lame. Get one for every class. Quit buying new textbooks every time the standard course of study changes. Find a good solid text with the essentials in it and purchase a classroom set.
Will every class need the same amount of technology? It should need some, even the PE teachers. My friend David Hines uses a wiki with his weight training class. At the risk of sounding elitist or trying to make the rich richer, outfit those who already use the technology first. Tell the others their cart is coming and in the meantime get them trained and get them using it. At a local high school the principal gave an LCD projector to every teacher who took the Intel Teaching Essentials class. Amazingly, he had almost 100% participation.
In terms of training, provide REAL professional development. Don't bring in someone with a cookie cutter approach that demos all the Gee Whiz features of their product. Have real live actual teachers show how things can be embedded (there's that word again). Have math teacher share with math teachers, science teachers with science teachers, etc. Provide a demo at every faculty meeting so teachers can see examples from other content areas and cross pollination can occur.
I go back to the need. One-third of my students do not even own a computer at home. Roughly ten percent were unable to process simple tasks like sign on to their school provided email address, change their passwords, etc. at the beginning of the year. If I (and I mean I- not many others are providing that opportunity) do not provide access to the technology, these students will never touch a computer, or an iPod, or whatever gizmo we use. Whether we like it or not, schools have become the guardian of civilization. We have access to the students. Let's give them access to the tools.
One of the topics in this week's #edchat poll is How can we guarantee equitable access and use of technology to ensure tech literacy and to support meaningful learning for all students? In my opinion this issue itself should drive the need for classroom instruction embedded with technology more than the workforce's need for 21st Century workers. Why would I say such a thing? I'm glad you asked. If you do not embed technology in your instruction, many of your students will NEVER, I repeat, NEVER, get exposure to, much less develop skills with, the technology.
Now for a disclaimer. I realize that I may have initially misinterpreted the question. My first reaction was to read this question in terms of economic access in the home setting, i.e. outside of school. Shelly Blake-Plock (aka R. Richard Wojewodzki) has begun quite an interesting conversation about this over at TeachPaperless. That is certainly an issue worth debating, but that's not my task for this post. Upon further reflection, I think the intent of the question relates more to equitable access WITHIN the school, not outside of it. That also is an issue in this day of limited resources.
Regardless of how one interprets the question, I think the answer lies in the notion of embedded instruction. Yes, I'm using that term again. Most of the people who will read this post will agree that the use of technology in the classroom should be transparent, or unseen, because it is a natural part of what happens there. Technology is not just a game day in the lab or special art project on the laptops or our once-a-month-do-something with the iPods. It is used as an appropriate tool for the task at hand. So, how do we make that happen?
First, appropriation of funds have to change. Our county took a 90% budget cut this school year in our technology funding because of the state government's own economic woes. That's screwed up thinking. Technology should not be a line item. It should be part of instructional and curricular materials. As a side note, there is rumor we will delay updating and changing the standard course of study because we cannot afford to buy new textbooks. Another example of misguided thinking - textbooks (and their publi$her$) should not drive curriculum changes.
Will every class need the same amount of technology? It should need some, even the PE teachers. My friend David Hines uses a wiki with his weight training class. At the risk of sounding elitist or trying to make the rich richer, outfit those who already use the technology first. Tell the others their cart is coming and in the meantime get them trained and get them using it. At a local high school the principal gave an LCD projector to every teacher who took the Intel Teaching Essentials class. Amazingly, he had almost 100% participation.
In terms of training, provide REAL professional development. Don't bring in someone with a cookie cutter approach that demos all the Gee Whiz features of their product. Have real live actual teachers show how things can be embedded (there's that word again). Have math teacher share with math teachers, science teachers with science teachers, etc. Provide a demo at every faculty meeting so teachers can see examples from other content areas and cross pollination can occur.
I go back to the need. One-third of my students do not even own a computer at home. Roughly ten percent were unable to process simple tasks like sign on to their school provided email address, change their passwords, etc. at the beginning of the year. If I (and I mean I- not many others are providing that opportunity) do not provide access to the technology, these students will never touch a computer, or an iPod, or whatever gizmo we use. Whether we like it or not, schools have become the guardian of civilization. We have access to the students. Let's give them access to the tools.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Does curriculum need to go on a diet? A follow-up to #edchat
As expected, tonight's #edchat was not disappointing as we talked about how to deal with an overloaded curriculum. It was as fast and furious as ever. There are some things I'm sure I missed and probably will miss even after reviewing the archive dozens of times. After trying to pre-load the discussion earlier, I came away with even more questions and ideas tonight. These are the ones that were most impactful to me.
At the risk of sounding like a traitor, sometimes I wonder how many times we as teachers are responsible for our own problems? A lot of discussion centered around teaching standards, not long lists of content. Out of curiosity, I ran the North Carolina Standard Course of Study for sixth grade science through Wordle and was surprised at the results, particularly the prominence of the higher order verbs "analyze" and "evaluate". Of course there is the possibility of the curriculum writers covering themselves to look good. For the sake of argument, let's say that is the case. If the "official" curriculum is stated this way, the teacher now has plenty of freedom on how she or he teaches the course. We just don't do it.
Let's look at a different curriculum such as math. I'm also a math teacher and math always seem to stand as the exception to the possibilities. Math tends to be skilled based, at least for K-8. Doing the same thing as with the science curriculum, the results are dramatically different. It's hard to find the verbs. When you do, they are lower level. Waldo is easier to find than the verb "analyze". Two dynamics are at work here. One, math is just a different beast. Two, maybe it's not as rigorous as we'd like to believe. HOWEVER, I do think that it is possible to weave the goals and strands in such a way as to cover concepts that are demonstrated by all the skills we worry about being on the end of year test.
Another common error we make as teachers is confusing curriculum with the textbook table of contents. Textbooks are even more arbitrary than curriculum is. This fallacy is not as common as it once was because of district imposed pacing guides. Now the pacing guide becomes the curriculum impostor. As someone said tonight, it's interesting that we are told to focus on higher level thinking skills with particular concepts that are given one day on the pacing guide. How one should deal with the pacing guide is a more delicate matter. It is largely dependent on your school and/or district admin. For some the consequences can be quite severe if the pacing guide is not strictly followed. That's a sad indictment on the state of education.
Moving away from condemning ourselves, another very important point was made tonight. Content cannot be thrown out. Even if a conceptual framework is going to drive future curriculum development, then it is still permissible to select particular content to teach those concepts. Someone else noted that there are some important content pieces that are being cut out, perhaps wrongly so. The example given was the Holocaust. Of course, these will always be subjective judgments.
After tonight, I'm not as dismayed about the future as some. Despite what the talking heads and policy makers tell us, I think we can make it work as the folks on the front line. What do you think?
At the risk of sounding like a traitor, sometimes I wonder how many times we as teachers are responsible for our own problems? A lot of discussion centered around teaching standards, not long lists of content. Out of curiosity, I ran the North Carolina Standard Course of Study for sixth grade science through Wordle and was surprised at the results, particularly the prominence of the higher order verbs "analyze" and "evaluate". Of course there is the possibility of the curriculum writers covering themselves to look good. For the sake of argument, let's say that is the case. If the "official" curriculum is stated this way, the teacher now has plenty of freedom on how she or he teaches the course. We just don't do it.
Let's look at a different curriculum such as math. I'm also a math teacher and math always seem to stand as the exception to the possibilities. Math tends to be skilled based, at least for K-8. Doing the same thing as with the science curriculum, the results are dramatically different. It's hard to find the verbs. When you do, they are lower level. Waldo is easier to find than the verb "analyze". Two dynamics are at work here. One, math is just a different beast. Two, maybe it's not as rigorous as we'd like to believe. HOWEVER, I do think that it is possible to weave the goals and strands in such a way as to cover concepts that are demonstrated by all the skills we worry about being on the end of year test.
Another common error we make as teachers is confusing curriculum with the textbook table of contents. Textbooks are even more arbitrary than curriculum is. This fallacy is not as common as it once was because of district imposed pacing guides. Now the pacing guide becomes the curriculum impostor. As someone said tonight, it's interesting that we are told to focus on higher level thinking skills with particular concepts that are given one day on the pacing guide. How one should deal with the pacing guide is a more delicate matter. It is largely dependent on your school and/or district admin. For some the consequences can be quite severe if the pacing guide is not strictly followed. That's a sad indictment on the state of education.
Moving away from condemning ourselves, another very important point was made tonight. Content cannot be thrown out. Even if a conceptual framework is going to drive future curriculum development, then it is still permissible to select particular content to teach those concepts. Someone else noted that there are some important content pieces that are being cut out, perhaps wrongly so. The example given was the Holocaust. Of course, these will always be subjective judgments.
After tonight, I'm not as dismayed about the future as some. Despite what the talking heads and policy makers tell us, I think we can make it work as the folks on the front line. What do you think?
Monday, January 25, 2010
Content vs. Concept or "How do I cover all this stuff?"
In anticipation of the January 26 edition of #edchat, @paulawhite and I are going to try to preload some thoughts for deeper discussion. I agreed to take on topic #1 in the poll – With an overloaded curriculum, what should be emphasized and what should be eliminated? A few disclaimers ahead of time:
1- There are a lot of people out there much smarter than I on this subject.
2- There are a lot of people out there much more articulate on the subject than I.
3- I'm very opinionated, handicapped by numbers 1 and 2 above.
4- I teach a course that "doesn't matter". More on that later.
1- There are a lot of people out there much smarter than I on this subject.
2- There are a lot of people out there much more articulate on the subject than I.
3- I'm very opinionated, handicapped by numbers 1 and 2 above.
4- I teach a course that "doesn't matter". More on that later.
Here's where I predict #edchat will go on this subject. Eventually, if not quickly, the subject of end-of-year summative assessments and their knowledge based, level 1 questions will come up. The topic of NCLB, RttT, and all other insufficient (first instance of strong opinion) means of measuring success will get thrown around. We will all protest that these measures “require” us to squeeze in an impossible amount of content to be regurgitated at the end of year. We will all lament not being able to teach thinking skills, how to learn, creativity, etc. or as someone will call them, 21st Century skills, starting a sidebar argument about that label.
I currently teach a course that “doesn't really matter” - sixth grade science. Here's why it doesn't matter – there is no end of the year test. In North Carolina, there are end of grade tests for fifth and eight grade science, but not sixth. This year, NC temporarily discontinued the eight grade computer skills test because of funding. The scores were not part of NCLB rankings, so money was diverted elsewhere. By the way, this goes to show that we aren't all that concerned about testing what really matters are we? (there's that opinion thing again) Last year when I taught seventh grade math, the stakes were much higher for me, or so it felt. All year my PLC was frustrated because, in our opinion, most of the standard course of study was above where seventh grade students are developmentally.
Before I answer the real question, a few paragraphs heavy on philosophy, opinion, and perspective. After school today my teammates and I were discussing this very issue in the context of whether we are adequately preparing our students for next year, i.e. next year's teachers. As a team, our quarterly assessment scores generally run higher that the rest of our grade level. We have far less behavior problems. Most students who have been predicted to not meet proficient standards (“pass”) on the end of year assessments are performing well above expectations. Our final grades for the grading period are generally higher than the rest of grade level.
The question we tried to answer was, “Are we being too soft or too easy on these kids?” We concluded that we are not. We are rigorous in the content and skills we expect the students to master. We have a shared philosophy regarding grades in that everything is basically seen as a formative assessment. You get to retake an assignment as often as necessary to master the material. We have frequent and immediate remediation on all tasks. NOTE: This does not mean simply re-doing the same exact assignment. In a nutshell, our philosophy as a team is that we believe we should be teaching skills and concepts, not force feeding knowledge.
As we discussed this matter, we had a sudden light bulb moment that enabled us to formulate a hierarchy of what the major focus should be in various grade levels of school. We concluded that we believe that elementary school (K-5) should focus on building prior knowledge and reading. Middle school (6-8) should focus on developing skills such as how to do research, how to learn, how to think, how to work collaboratively, problem solving skills, etc. High school then becomes a place where the focus can be to build specialized areas of content by building on prior knowledge and applying the skills learned in middle school. This might not be original, but it was new to us today.
It became even more apparent why the current system just isn't working. As policy makers complain that we are not preparing students for the current economy and current high school students have tuned out because they don't understand the basics, it has been erroneously concluded that the solution is to push more of the content down to lower grades. Therefore, sixth graders need to start taking Algebra 1, which is false because most of them are not developmentally ready (another opinion but one I think is correct).
So, what does all this have to do with the question of what to emphasize in an already overloaded curriculum? If the division of education foci I propose above has any merit, then the answer will require some tweaking for each level. What I believe is constant across all levels is the need to identify those essential standards and connecting concepts across the standard course of study. As a sixth grade science teacher in North Carolina Public Schools, I don't think it's all that important that a kid be able to classify a sedimentary rock into any particular subgroup of said rocks. However, it is important that a student understand that the earth's surface is in a state of constant change as various geologic forces act together, shaping continents, providing the dynamics necessary to drive the rock cycle, and produce the various minerals and other natural resources we use in a variety of ways. Scott McLeod shares a similar story regarding knowledge of a neuron.
I am a firm believer that understanding of a concept leads to better content retention. I have colleagues who go from steps in a process to grasping the larger concept in their instruction. I tend to work from grasping the larger concept to guiding the students in discovering the steps themselves. Either way will appeal to different groups of individual learners. The common theme is getting to the point of grasping the concept. That conceptual framework provides connections to many more points of content.
Hopefully I have set the stage for a more in-depth discussion of this topic. Before #edchat ever takes place, seeds of thought can begin to germinate. Long after the unofficial time constraint of one hour has passed, this can be a place to debate and flesh out ideas as they surface. I haven't given any specific strategies. That's one place where we can all begin to contribute more, not just in 140 characters on Twitter, coming fast and furious, but in well thought out replies. #Edchat will provoke dozens of other ideas. Let's not lose the possibility to capitalize on those once the hour is done.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
The Joy of Learning
My wife and I are both the oldest children in our respective families. Naturally, we started having kids before our sibs. It's interesting to watch all my nieces go through the stages we have already passed through. Sometimes it's a relief to say, "I'm glad we're through that!" and other times it's "I miss when they were that age." My youngest niece is 7 months old. Her entire life centers around exploring and learning. She is so excited about everything around her. I really do miss that stage of my boys lives. Samantha is learning so much in such a short period of time.
A kindergarten teacher told me today that she chose that grade level because "it's the last fun grade in school." What?! That can't be. Certainly it takes us at least three or four years to beat the enjoyment of school out of them doesn't it? Thinking about my niece made me think about how I could create that type of environment in my classroom. What would it take to foster a "I want to learn and explore everything" attitude in my classroom full of learners? Tonight's #edchat addressed that very thing. How do we best promote student ownership in their learning?
There were a lot of great ideas thrown out. I'm looking forward to trying some of them out. Heck, I'm even looking forward to trying out some of my own ideas :-) That's part of the problem. My friend @kellyhines concluded her participation in tonight's #edchat with this tweet:
Last fall I set up all sorts of goals. My classroom was going to be a "learning community". Students would be self-directed, wholly invested learners. It went great for the first quarter. Then I got tired of staying up until 1:00 am every night. All sort of other deadlines hit me. I was negotiating philosophical perspectives with my PLC. All I had time for was the usual. Our first week back from winter break, one of my kids asked, "When are we going to do all the stuff like we used to do?" I was caught red-handed. I was convicted of my own sin.
To answer Kelly's question, it's hard to make it happen every day. Some of us have a lot of bad habits to unlearn and even more good habits to learn. There is the reality of NCLB, RttT, and every other false measure of accountability (editorializing? yep!). There is the pressure we all feel to make the grade. We talk about wanting to dig all the way to the bottom of Bloom's, but something about those pacing guides and standardized testing keeps us from leaving the shallow end of the pool. But we still have to strive for it everyday!
I'm idealistic enough to believe we will see more student ownership of learning. I believe it will happen because the number of us who share our own joy of learning is growing each day. It will happen because there will be enough of them who don't get sucked dry by the system and they will become teachers themselves. They will force shared ownership/leadership in their schools and districts. And I believe I will see it in my day.
A kindergarten teacher told me today that she chose that grade level because "it's the last fun grade in school." What?! That can't be. Certainly it takes us at least three or four years to beat the enjoyment of school out of them doesn't it? Thinking about my niece made me think about how I could create that type of environment in my classroom. What would it take to foster a "I want to learn and explore everything" attitude in my classroom full of learners? Tonight's #edchat addressed that very thing. How do we best promote student ownership in their learning?
There were a lot of great ideas thrown out. I'm looking forward to trying some of them out. Heck, I'm even looking forward to trying out some of my own ideas :-) That's part of the problem. My friend @kellyhines concluded her participation in tonight's #edchat with this tweet:
Something about tonight's #edchat isn't sitting well with me tonight. We know the what & the how, so why isn't "ownership" happening?I confess. Ownership isn't happening in my classroom as much as I'd like. Sure, almost all of my kids enjoy my class, even love my class. What kid wouldn't when their teacher is as big a goofball as I? Plus, I'll stop a lesson on a whim or a student prompted question to go off on a tangent and project all the findings on the screen. But where is the ownership?
Last fall I set up all sorts of goals. My classroom was going to be a "learning community". Students would be self-directed, wholly invested learners. It went great for the first quarter. Then I got tired of staying up until 1:00 am every night. All sort of other deadlines hit me. I was negotiating philosophical perspectives with my PLC. All I had time for was the usual. Our first week back from winter break, one of my kids asked, "When are we going to do all the stuff like we used to do?" I was caught red-handed. I was convicted of my own sin.
To answer Kelly's question, it's hard to make it happen every day. Some of us have a lot of bad habits to unlearn and even more good habits to learn. There is the reality of NCLB, RttT, and every other false measure of accountability (editorializing? yep!). There is the pressure we all feel to make the grade. We talk about wanting to dig all the way to the bottom of Bloom's, but something about those pacing guides and standardized testing keeps us from leaving the shallow end of the pool. But we still have to strive for it everyday!
I'm idealistic enough to believe we will see more student ownership of learning. I believe it will happen because the number of us who share our own joy of learning is growing each day. It will happen because there will be enough of them who don't get sucked dry by the system and they will become teachers themselves. They will force shared ownership/leadership in their schools and districts. And I believe I will see it in my day.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
A Week of Faves
Tonight I sorted through about five days worth of links I had tagged as favorites on Twitter. Some I retweeted out immediately. Others, those listed below, I wanted to send out but pose my own take or question for further reflection, inviting discussion on those issues. So, without further ado . . .
- The Reflective Teacher: a Taxonomy - These are great ways to reflect upon our practices. How can we ensure that we incorporate such reflection in our practices, PLC's, etc.?
- How to Put a Laptop in the Hands of EveryStudent - Are any of us willing to sacrifice to make this a reality? How forceful should administrative policy/direction be to make this happen?
- We Have to Model Failure - How many of us really think failure is a good thing? How many of us are willing to admit failure? How many of us are ready to let a student demonstrate they know more than we?
- Making Teaching a Profession - Some will be offended or insulted by this article. Once you get over that, reflect on how you implement some of the recommendations even though you are already out and working. I like this suggestion: "the problem he has seen at dozens of programs was that there was 'no connection between the clinical experience and what went on in the university.' Ideally, he said, students 'would teach in the morning, spend the afternoon learning theory connected to what went on that morning, and then preparing for the next day.' ”
- A 21st Century Drill/Warmup - An awesome exercise. A great springboard to help us create other similar practices with our students and utilize all the tools out to their fullest.
I liked several others enough to bookmark them on Delicious. Check out the one's I saved today .
Thursday, December 31, 2009
2009 - the year in review
Last year, 2009, was the single most pivotal year of my teaching career. This is my eighth year teaching, spread out over twenty years. The thing that made this particular year so important is the development of my personal learning network, or simply my PLN.
The development of my PLN was part serendipity, part intention. In March, I attended a weeklong workshop on Web 2.0 tools at the NC Center for the Advancement of Teaching (which IMHO is THE most incredible perk available to NC teachers. Go if you get the chance!). My purpose for attending was to learn about all these new tools so I could implement them in my classroom FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE STUDENT. I became a far better teacher, not because I suddenly integrated all this cool technology in my classroom, but because I began using it my personal life. I already used blogs quite regularly, including one I personally maintained. The morning we learned about Twitter, everything changed.
I already had a Twitter id that was collecting digital dust due to its lack of use. I knew it was useless without followers or people to follow. However, I had no idea how to begin forming those lists. One of the people I met in my workshop that week was David Hines, aka @olballcoach. Don't let the fact that he is a J-I-M teacher fool you. He's a great teacher who integrates technology into yes, his P.E. classes. His school is lucky to have him. David's wife, @kellyhines, was already well connected at this point. With a couple of emails, text messages and DM's to Kelly, a few of us had networks of about fifty followers by the end of the day.
My PLN has been an incredible asset to me this year. I've formed relationships with educators from all over the world. I have conversations with people on all levels of administration and the classroom. I have received tips, hints, advice, suggestions, etc. on so many things education related. I have experienced professional sharing and encouragement like never before. I may never teach in the same school with any of my PLN, but I feel like a part of their successes and failures when I hear about them. I have received far more than I ever imagined and definitely more than I have given.
As I look ahead to 2010, I am excited about the possibilities. I know my PLN will continue to be a large part of my professional development. My success will be owed to them in someway I'm sure.
The development of my PLN was part serendipity, part intention. In March, I attended a weeklong workshop on Web 2.0 tools at the NC Center for the Advancement of Teaching (which IMHO is THE most incredible perk available to NC teachers. Go if you get the chance!). My purpose for attending was to learn about all these new tools so I could implement them in my classroom FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE STUDENT. I became a far better teacher, not because I suddenly integrated all this cool technology in my classroom, but because I began using it my personal life. I already used blogs quite regularly, including one I personally maintained. The morning we learned about Twitter, everything changed.
I already had a Twitter id that was collecting digital dust due to its lack of use. I knew it was useless without followers or people to follow. However, I had no idea how to begin forming those lists. One of the people I met in my workshop that week was David Hines, aka @olballcoach. Don't let the fact that he is a J-I-M teacher fool you. He's a great teacher who integrates technology into yes, his P.E. classes. His school is lucky to have him. David's wife, @kellyhines, was already well connected at this point. With a couple of emails, text messages and DM's to Kelly, a few of us had networks of about fifty followers by the end of the day.
My PLN has been an incredible asset to me this year. I've formed relationships with educators from all over the world. I have conversations with people on all levels of administration and the classroom. I have received tips, hints, advice, suggestions, etc. on so many things education related. I have experienced professional sharing and encouragement like never before. I may never teach in the same school with any of my PLN, but I feel like a part of their successes and failures when I hear about them. I have received far more than I ever imagined and definitely more than I have given.
As I look ahead to 2010, I am excited about the possibilities. I know my PLN will continue to be a large part of my professional development. My success will be owed to them in someway I'm sure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)