I'm wrapping up Jay Cross's Informal Learning, a book I started between semesters this winter and picked back up after wrapping up my last final at UWM. The New Social Learning and Personal Learning Networks started to reframe my thinking on what we need professional development to be - learner centered, flexible, online, informal...not top down, large group, "formal" classes or sessions. I think that this change is obvious, especially in light of the push for Professional Learning Communities that help create job-embedded learning opportunities for staff. But it's not an easy sell, at least for me, to the powers that be. They seem to not know anything else, other than the tried and true after school session, workshop or mashed together credit-worthy professional development class.
Development opportunities, some think, need to have a date on the calendar or event, with a stopwatch keeping track of the time. Could their be a more top-down approach to learning? It's no different than the seat time requirements the state mandates for non-charter public schools. I understand that we need to offer some traditional type classes or sessions to offer many types of opportunities, but it shouldn't be the focus of the professional learning district wide. It's especially difficult to swallow in the face of evangelizing flipped classrooms, problem/project/challenge-based learning and guiding learning over dictating instruction. At some point in time we have to walk the talk. We need to be in the schools meeting one-on-one or in small groups with teachers. In my experiences, those the best band-for-your-buck learning opportunities with staff - meeting their needs and tailoring solutions to their specific situation.
I try to make the case as often as I can to decision makers. Perhaps I need to put them in informal learning opportunities so they see the advantages. This past Thursday I had a great meeting with a high school teacher during his study hall period. He was hammering out questions and inquiries as fast as I could churn out my best attempts at an answer. You don't get that in a traditional development session. Those are all about here's the information, figure it out - not how many solutions can we find to your specific classroom needs.
How do we get there? How do we move decision makers past the stogy old ideas of professional development? How do we refocus them on learning goals, rather than goals that fill a calendar that look good on ginned up class offerings statistics?
I'm also personally struggling with the usefulness of traditional conferences. For the past four years, I've been pretty anti-conferences, only going when absolutely made to. I just figure I can learn about more recent trends via blog posts and Google searches from wherever I'm at in my district - plus do the job they pay me to do. I feel money is better spent on sending classroom teachers who need have their eyes opened to all that is out there. Seems reasonable. But I've taken to heart the opinions of some - like Dr. Annette Smith - who in the latest Shifted Learning podcast commented on the importance of the face-to-face interactions we randomly have with people during conferences. I think I may need to re-evaluate my stance on conferences for the next school year.
Development opportunities, some think, need to have a date on the calendar or event, with a stopwatch keeping track of the time. Could their be a more top-down approach to learning? It's no different than the seat time requirements the state mandates for non-charter public schools. I understand that we need to offer some traditional type classes or sessions to offer many types of opportunities, but it shouldn't be the focus of the professional learning district wide. It's especially difficult to swallow in the face of evangelizing flipped classrooms, problem/project/challenge-based learning and guiding learning over dictating instruction. At some point in time we have to walk the talk. We need to be in the schools meeting one-on-one or in small groups with teachers. In my experiences, those the best band-for-your-buck learning opportunities with staff - meeting their needs and tailoring solutions to their specific situation.
I try to make the case as often as I can to decision makers. Perhaps I need to put them in informal learning opportunities so they see the advantages. This past Thursday I had a great meeting with a high school teacher during his study hall period. He was hammering out questions and inquiries as fast as I could churn out my best attempts at an answer. You don't get that in a traditional development session. Those are all about here's the information, figure it out - not how many solutions can we find to your specific classroom needs.
How do we get there? How do we move decision makers past the stogy old ideas of professional development? How do we refocus them on learning goals, rather than goals that fill a calendar that look good on ginned up class offerings statistics?
I'm also personally struggling with the usefulness of traditional conferences. For the past four years, I've been pretty anti-conferences, only going when absolutely made to. I just figure I can learn about more recent trends via blog posts and Google searches from wherever I'm at in my district - plus do the job they pay me to do. I feel money is better spent on sending classroom teachers who need have their eyes opened to all that is out there. Seems reasonable. But I've taken to heart the opinions of some - like Dr. Annette Smith - who in the latest Shifted Learning podcast commented on the importance of the face-to-face interactions we randomly have with people during conferences. I think I may need to re-evaluate my stance on conferences for the next school year.
Comments
Post a Comment