I took interest in the President’s message, titled “Twenty-First Century Thinking,” a report from her (and the ASCD Board of Directors) attendance at the Australian Council of Education Leaders Conference (ACEL).  The theme of this year’s conference was “New Imagery for Schools and Schooling: Challenging, Creating and Connecting.”  According to the president, the speakers represented the theme through words like reinvent, reimagine, rethink and re-create. We must respect the past, assess the current, and look forward to the future. The keynote speaker made a convincing case for rethinking a new essential curriculum and challenged attendees to throw off the shackles of 19th century schooling and rethink how learning happens.  Throughout the conference speakers echoed this sentiment, saying that the world is smaller and more interconnected. Basically, this sums up the first 3/4 of the message.  So, how did this theme impact the ASCD Board?  Read on–

 In the Board Meeting, they discussed ways of reimagining, rethinking and re-creating ASCD.  The current strategic plan is 5 years old, and they are in the process of developing a new one. The ACEL conference sparked a rethinking of their planning process.  They articulated an understanding that an organization like ASCD needs to be flexible and forward thinking.  The moment a plan is written down, it can become an anchor to the past rather than a pathway to tomorrow. They realized that the format of the strategic plan constrains creative thinking.  The planning process continues, but in a different way than in the past.  They don’t know what it looks like, but it appears there may be a new path for envisioning the future.

 Yup, that’s it - re-imagine, re-think, re-invent, re-create, re-gurgitate.  Is this the best that our educational leaders can do? Or, is this just a fancy cover for them having too much fun in Australia and not enough work?

Here’s my challenge to anyone that made it through the buzzwords.  Stop re-thinking and start doing.  What are the “shackles of 19th century” curriculum and what should a 21st Century curriculum focus on?  Should the pedagogy be different, or should we start actually doing what research has told us is good teaching?

PLN’s are a fantastic example of social constructivism in action.  These loose networks of individuals create new knowledge socially, but each individual interprets and uses it differently. Anecdotes are thrown around throughout the network about new things that were learned, reflections on applications of new ideas, and collaborations opening new paths of thinking.  It is obvious to those “inside” a network that learning is occurring and new knowledge is being created.  If you are inside a network, you understand the power that they have for professional growth.

Theory and practical experience both show that PLN’s are valid. What will it take for them to go mainstream?  We can turn again to theory here by looking at Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD).  Each individual has a body of “knowledge” that they can master without help.  They also have a body of knowledge that is impossible for them to master (at least at this stage of their learning).  The zone in between those two bodies is where proximal development occurs.  It is the body of knowledge that can be learned with assistance from experts (either directly through mentoring or indirectly through well crafted text, videos, etc.)  — ie, scaffolding.  It is unlikely that many educators will jump straight from a simplistic use of e-mail and web browsing to an effective learning network without this scaffolding.

Many of these scaffolds already exist. The difficulty is that they are often scattered across multiple sites. I would suggest that we create a central (more likely, multiple centers) “hub” that can be used in traditional professional development to help introduce educators to the ideas of PLNs.  The hub would provide common tools and resources for each of three developmental stages  of creating a PLN.  It would include things like video introductions to Google Reader (or similar), del.icio.us, and other ‘must have’ personal tools, a “sandbox” blog with multiple authors that could showcase easy to use web2.0 tools (ie: flickr) with comments on application examples, a list of twitterers with “model” networks, etc.  We could also modify a good idea  and create “60 days to a PLN.” I do have an empty wiki @ http://plnmentor.wikispaces.com/  if anyone wants to collaborate!  The wiki is empty now, so please let me know if you want to help build it.

In 2001, Garret and his colleagues identified multiple components of effective professional development.  The two most important components are duration (60-80 hours) and collaboration.  Additionally, it was vitally important that the experience aligned with participants’ goals.  The Science and Engineering Indicators 2008 provide evidence that, in practice, professional development seldom matches these components. Rarely, is it a dynamic, collaborative experience conducted over an extended period of time.

Not too long ago I was introduced to the concept of personal learning networks.  It didn’t take me more than a day or two to realize the power of PLNs as a way for educators to take control over their own professional development.  Learning from (or more appropriately, with) my PLN is dynamic, collaborative, focused on my goals, and sustained.  Of course, if you are reading this, you get it.  I’m relatively tech savvy (aren’t we all).  Compared to you I’m probably a novice, but compared to most of my colleagues, I am an “expert.” So, what can we do to bring PLN to the masses?

(NOTE: I’m not writing this in a vacuum. This post  and those it references address this question and many others….a MUST READ!)

I think we need to take a developmental approach to PLNs. At its core, constructivist learning can be broken into three phases – engagement, building knowledge, and applying knowledge.  In the engagement phase, educators need to become comfortable with the landscape. They need to learn how to ‘organize’ the web. They should learn how to use an aggregator and social bookmarking. They need to identify a few blogs and begin reading and commenting. As they gain comfort, they should join a community (ie: classroom2.0) and eventually start following people on Twitter. 

In the building knowledge phase, educators are ready to start ‘messing about’ and contributing.  They should define a purpose for their participation in their PLN and set some goals. A manageable goal may be to try one “new” thing each month. As they mess about with new ideas, they should start a blog to make their experiences public.  Periodically, they should assess their PLN and add (and remove) new resources.

 The applying knowledge phase needs to take Scott Schwister’s  question head on. “How do we show the learning that happens through personal learning networks?” Educators need to become active inquirers as they try out new ideas.  In the building knowledge phase, educators were ‘messing about’ and making decision on reflection and gut instinct.  They were playing with new ideas.  This is a great way to explore, but it doesn’t necessarily provide evidence that the new ideas are improving teaching and learning.  In the applying knowledge phase, I would suggest that become more rigorous in how they try new things.  Ted McCain’s 4D problem solving model can provide a structure here (Define, Design, Do, Debrief). Define questions that you want to answer, design a way to collect data, do it!, and then debrief…did it work.  

Wow…this post got really long.  I would really appreciate feedback. Will you give me the nickname ‘Captain Obvious’ or is this the beginning of a solid framework?  I’ll post soon on this topic with some ideas for an infrastructure needed to help navigate this developmental approach.    

1. Is the technology being used “Just because it’s there”?
2. Is the technology allowing the teacher/students to do Old things in Old ways?
3. Is the technology allowing the teacher/students to do Old things in New ways?
4. Is the technology creating new and different learning experiences for the students?

http://www.thethinkingstick.com/?p=623

“Drunken Pirate” – Will you Hire me?

This is a tough post to write.  I don’t want to come off sounding like “father knows best.” The point of this post is not to say that pre-service teachers shouldn’t party, instead it is meant to make you think about the public persona that you project. For better or for worse, what you do on the web might become part of your future job application.  Social networking sites are not just limited to those under 30.  Many administrators, teachers and parents are savvy enough to check up on student teachers and job candidates.

Olson and Penning (2007) discussed the expectation that teachers, especially those at the elementary level, should be good role models for their students. The draft Iowa teaching expectations state that pre-service teachers should endeavor to meet the standards expected of a teacher such as appropriateness of dress, grooming, demeanor, punctuality, tact, discretion, courtesy, etc. All of these are fair expectations in professional situations, but should college students (and in-service teachers) be held to these standards in their personal lives?

Partying is definitely nothing new on college campuses, neither is taking pictures of friends in compromising situations or telling drinking stories.  However, what is new is the ability to easily and publicly share these images and stories with friends and anyone else with an Internet connection and an interest in looking. 

As an elementary principal, how would you react if you looked up an applicant’s Facebook page and saw a girl flashing gang signs, posing so the camera got a good look down her shirt all while sitting on a toilet with her pants down? I would guess that most would move on to the next resume! This was one of many images that two Iowa State University researchers found when surveying elementary pre-service teachers’ Facebook pages (Olson & Penning, 2007).  Of the more than 400 elementary pre-service teachers that they researched, 32% had unrestricted Facebook pages and another 44% had pages restricted to friends only.  Of those that were unrestricted, 68% had images or comments that were deemed inappropriate or marginally inappropriate.

Behavior was deemed inappropriate if it would be offensive to administrators or parents, including excessive drinking, underage drinking, provocative dress or poses, sexual contact (more than a simple kiss), gang or violence references, etc.  The researchers also coded strong political comments and religious evangelism as marginal or inappropriate.

Negative repercussions from posts on a social network are not just a future possibility, they are a reality. CBS reported that an estimated 20% of companies search for online profiles as part of the hiring process. DeMello, a consultant and analyst, states “I think some of these sites out there are going to be the most expensive free Web sites to their careers that they’ve ever seen.”.  A student teacher at Millersville University learned this the hard way when University officials saw a picture of her drinking out of a cup and wearing a pirate hat.  The picture of the 25 year old student was labeled “Drunken Pirate” She was kicked out of the teacher ed program for unprofessional behavior.  She’s suing the University and I hope she wins!

For better or for worse, when you post your private life online it becomes part of your professional portfolio.

Reference-

Olson, J.K. & Penning, K. (October 2007) “Elementary Teachers Gone Wild? An Analysis of Public Image and Historic Conceptions of Elementary Teachers.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Northcentral Association for Science Teacher Education, Madison, WI.