21st Century Pledge: A curricular commitment from each teacher
This commitment is figure 2.1 page 22. How might this fit in with your goals? What do you think would happen at HSSD if every staff member took this pledge? Do you think the pledge is realistic? Why/why not?
I think that this is totally realistic! We are given 45 minutes every week to work together during PLC. Rather than wasting this time like many PLCs do, what if every PLC worked on these committments one at a time. It would require no extra time committment which is often the number one reason why teachers would not want to take a pledge like this. Our administration has to take a stand and say that we must work on these committments and not continue to allow each PLC to interpret what PLC is and what to do during the time given each week for themselves.
I love the pledge and think that every staff member would be up to taking the challenge! Taking on the challenge and wanting to take on the challenge is a different story, though. I think at first, like many things, there would be resentment to change. Human beings tend not to act nicely and welcome change. Heidi brings up a good point about time. We often are giving tasks and no time to do them in. If the district sold the idea, got the buy in, and offered time, I think this plan could be a success. I also think that the district would have to offer training, not just staff development, to teach all the "tools." This would be helpful for teachers who are less comfortable with technology. Also, some teachers want to use technology, they just don't know what is out there.
I also like how the pledge emphasizes to only revise one unit, not everything at once. It clearly states that each teacher is to take "one specific unit to revise" (22). One unit does not seem that daunting.
This fits into my goals in that I plan to change my LA 101 class into project based this year. I am starting with Speak, and hoping that I can change the other units as I teach. I also plan to change LA 201 to project based in the 2012-2013 school year. Instead of changing one unit, I am changing one class at a time.
The framework provided in a 21st century pledge should not be a pipe dream. In fact, I currently see a lot of the themes and ideas being implemented in the courses throughout Bay Port. However, this is not a widespread thing and is happening on a individual teacher basis. If this commitment was made and followed through by the entire faculty at Bay Port, I believe that we would be doing the students a great service in preparing them for the world outside of Bay Port.
However, I could foresee a lot of resistance in the implementation of pal like this commitment. I reluctantly state this due to the lack of communication and relationship among some staff members at Bay Port. Even simple common assessments and plans have been a struggle to implement in some cases. Things as simple as a common final assessment have created tension between teachers and despite agreements being made by all teachers involved have not come to fruition. I feel the reason behind this is due to the fact that teachers have a great deal of autonomy at Bay Port. While this does create a lot a positives, a major drawback to this laissez-faire approach makes it very difficult for over 100 teachers to work together and be on the same change. Unless there is a drastic change in this laissez-faire approach, unfortunately, the framework provided in figure 2.1 of Curriculm 21 may indeed be more of a pipe dream than reality
I definitely relate to Jacobs’ idea that “we like the idea of becoming 21st century teachers [but] we just don’t know what to do differently” (p. 21). The pledge she promotes, along with other sections of her book, help teachers see what they can do differently. There are many positive aspects to the pledge that offer a clear path to improving and modernizing teaching and learning. Her pledge fits with my immediate goal to redevelop one of my weaker journalism units for this class and my larger goal of collaborating with Ryan Leland to refine the AP Language course.
The section of the pledge listing what teachers must commit to do could go a long way toward moving Bay Port into the 21st century. Teachers should be familiar with all technological resources in the district that can aid and enhance their practice. The LMC’s online databases provide a great example of a resource that is underutilized by teachers in part because they are not familiar with the resources. Just taking the time to use Facts on File or the Gale Virtual Reference Library would go a long way toward improving student research. Too many teachers rely on Google as heavily as students.
As far as hardware resources, it is easier to take the glass half empty approach to access rather than utilizing the resources we do have. When Jacobs writes that the commitment is not “using an interactive whiteboard versus an LCD projector” (p. 22), she reminds me of my experiences last year borrowing Senteo clickers from the LMC. The clickers enhance the effectiveness of Smart Boards by making them interactive for students. Instead of just one student interacting with the touch screen at a time, the clickers allow all students to answer questions, respond to polls, or participate in review games. Even though I enjoy having access to the clickers, it is also disappointing that I never had a problem checking them out with virtually no notice. Their regular availability means that teachers in the building are simply not using them.
With the rest of the pledge, Jacobs targets the aforementioned teachers who want to join the 21st century but don’t know what to do. She makes the commitment small, prompting teachers to revise one unit rather than their entire curriculum. She advises them to share the unit with colleagues, something that could be done in PLC as Heidi mentioned. Through a focused approach and an emphasis on collaboration and sharing, the reform that Jacobs advocates could really gain momentum at Bay Port. Still, I understand Aaron’s point about resistance and expect that this fall may be a difficult time to convince anyone to change anything.
There will always be those that close the door and do the same-old-same-old. That is where our presentations we are creating to "cheerlead" for a particular Web 2.0 tool for this class comes in. If we share these with our co-workers and offer to assist them with any of it, then we would be following Jacobs advise of sharing. Although I feel this can be effective, having the suggestion and assistance coming from the top down would help also.
I do not feel that it is realistic to think that all staff would be willing to take the pledge. If they were forced to take it they would but I do not think that they would implement it in their classrooms. While I think that it would be great if all teachers would agree to work on implementing opportunities for students to gain the 21st century tools I find myself feeling pessimistic. The reason for this pessimistic feeling is that I have spent the past year in a PLC where we have made decisions as a group and then watched as people went off to do their own things anyways. If everyone would take the pledge I think that our schools would be much better. Teachers would share common goals and students would see the importance of learning the skills they will need for their futures. In addition, students will be able to get lots of experience working with those skills.
I think that this is totally realistic! We are given 45 minutes every week to work together during PLC. Rather than wasting this time like many PLCs do, what if every PLC worked on these committments one at a time. It would require no extra time committment which is often the number one reason why teachers would not want to take a pledge like this. Our administration has to take a stand and say that we must work on these committments and not continue to allow each PLC to interpret what PLC is and what to do during the time given each week for themselves.
ReplyDeleteI love the pledge and think that every staff member would be up to taking the challenge! Taking on the challenge and wanting to take on the challenge is a different story, though. I think at first, like many things, there would be resentment to change. Human beings tend not to act nicely and welcome change. Heidi brings up a good point about time. We often are giving tasks and no time to do them in. If the district sold the idea, got the buy in, and offered time, I think this plan could be a success. I also think that the district would have to offer training, not just staff development, to teach all the "tools." This would be helpful for teachers who are less comfortable with technology. Also, some teachers want to use technology, they just don't know what is out there.
ReplyDeleteI also like how the pledge emphasizes to only revise one unit, not everything at once. It clearly states that each teacher is to take "one specific unit to revise" (22). One unit does not seem that daunting.
This fits into my goals in that I plan to change my LA 101 class into project based this year. I am starting with Speak, and hoping that I can change the other units as I teach. I also plan to change LA 201 to project based in the 2012-2013 school year. Instead of changing one unit, I am changing one class at a time.
The framework provided in a 21st century pledge should not be a pipe dream. In fact, I currently see a lot of the themes and ideas being implemented in the courses throughout Bay Port. However, this is not a widespread thing and is happening on a individual teacher basis. If this commitment was made and followed through by the entire faculty at Bay Port, I believe that we would be doing the students a great service in preparing them for the world outside of Bay Port.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I could foresee a lot of resistance in the implementation of pal like this commitment. I reluctantly state this due to the lack of communication and relationship among some staff members at Bay Port. Even simple common assessments and plans have been a struggle to implement in some cases. Things as simple as a common final assessment have created tension between teachers and despite agreements being made by all teachers involved have not come to fruition. I feel the reason behind this is due to the fact that teachers have a great deal of autonomy at Bay Port. While this does create a lot a positives, a major drawback to this laissez-faire approach makes it very difficult for over 100 teachers to work together and be on the same change. Unless there is a drastic change in this laissez-faire approach, unfortunately, the framework provided in figure 2.1 of Curriculm 21 may indeed be more of a pipe dream than reality
I agree with you 100%, Aaron, with the laissez-faire approach. Some teachers will just shut their door and do what they want.
ReplyDeleteI definitely relate to Jacobs’ idea that “we like the idea of becoming 21st century teachers [but] we just don’t know what to do differently” (p. 21). The pledge she promotes, along with other sections of her book, help teachers see what they can do differently. There are many positive aspects to the pledge that offer a clear path to improving and modernizing teaching and learning. Her pledge fits with my immediate goal to redevelop one of my weaker journalism units for this class and my larger goal of collaborating with Ryan Leland to refine the AP Language course.
ReplyDeleteThe section of the pledge listing what teachers must commit to do could go a long way toward moving Bay Port into the 21st century. Teachers should be familiar with all technological resources in the district that can aid and enhance their practice. The LMC’s online databases provide a great example of a resource that is underutilized by teachers in part because they are not familiar with the resources. Just taking the time to use Facts on File or the Gale Virtual Reference Library would go a long way toward improving student research. Too many teachers rely on Google as heavily as students.
As far as hardware resources, it is easier to take the glass half empty approach to access rather than utilizing the resources we do have. When Jacobs writes that the commitment is not “using an interactive whiteboard versus an LCD projector” (p. 22), she reminds me of my experiences last year borrowing Senteo clickers from the LMC. The clickers enhance the effectiveness of Smart Boards by making them interactive for students. Instead of just one student interacting with the touch screen at a time, the clickers allow all students to answer questions, respond to polls, or participate in review games. Even though I enjoy having access to the clickers, it is also disappointing that I never had a problem checking them out with virtually no notice. Their regular availability means that teachers in the building are simply not using them.
With the rest of the pledge, Jacobs targets the aforementioned teachers who want to join the 21st century but don’t know what to do. She makes the commitment small, prompting teachers to revise one unit rather than their entire curriculum. She advises them to share the unit with colleagues, something that could be done in PLC as Heidi mentioned. Through a focused approach and an emphasis on collaboration and sharing, the reform that Jacobs advocates could really gain momentum at Bay Port. Still, I understand Aaron’s point about resistance and expect that this fall may be a difficult time to convince anyone to change anything.
Great reflections on the reading. . .
ReplyDeleteThere will always be those that close the door and do the same-old-same-old. That is where our presentations we are creating to "cheerlead" for a particular Web 2.0 tool for this class comes in. If we share these with our co-workers and offer to assist them with any of it, then we would be following Jacobs advise of sharing. Although I feel this can be effective, having the suggestion and assistance coming from the top down would help also.
ReplyDeleteI do not feel that it is realistic to think that all staff would be willing to take the pledge. If they were forced to take it they would but I do not think that they would implement it in their classrooms. While I think that it would be great if all teachers would agree to work on implementing opportunities for students to gain the 21st century tools I find myself feeling pessimistic. The reason for this pessimistic feeling is that I have spent the past year in a PLC where we have made decisions as a group and then watched as people went off to do their own things anyways.
ReplyDeleteIf everyone would take the pledge I think that our schools would be much better. Teachers would share common goals and students would see the importance of learning the skills they will need for their futures. In addition, students will be able to get lots of experience working with those skills.