Leadership | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Leadership’ Category

The Sky is Falling, or is it?

Posted in AI, Assessment, Banning, ChatGPT, Education, Generative AI, Leadership, PD, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Technology, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on November 30, 2023| 5 Comments »

Well, this is the first anniversary of the introduction of Generative AI in the form of ChatGPT to the world of education. Before it was a week old, over one million users downloaded it, and then, over the next two months, 100 million people signed on to use it. The website reportedly sees 1.5 billion visitors per month. That is a fairly good indication that ChatGPT is here to stay.

There are several lessons in this for educators to understand regarding the effect of technology in a modern, technology-driven culture. If we look at the number of users of ChatGPT and consider that the United States is the country with the largest TikTok audience in the world by far, with over 143 million users, and Google has 4.3 billion users worldwide, we realize that the world that education was first developed to serve no longer exists.

Educators can no longer dictate or limit what tools students may access. The other obvious lesson is that if students are accessing technology to assess and learn and create content, then at the very least, educators need an awareness of that technology their students are using.

The second lesson should be that the methods and assessments that educators have used for the last few centuries are no longer relevant in today’s world. When Google arrived on the scene, many educators were worried that kids could too easily google answers to their questions. Of course my somewhat snarky answer for those educators was; If kids can easily google your answers, you may need to examine your questions.

A year ago, the reaction to ChatGPT by the largest school district in the country was to BAN IT! There was great concern about the effect it would have especially on College applications where the “College Essay” was an essential part of the screening process for entry consideration. There were many knee-jerk reactions without a real understanding of the possibilities.

Comfort zones have always been the greatest obstacles to change in our education system. Educators are programmed to do things a certain way and through the years they grow comfortable with what they do, and how they do it. For a long time there has been little pressure for major changes. Education is not like business that is driven by competition, and profits. Change in education is often pressured by local public opinion. I imagine that is because local taxes fund education. This is the way it has been for centuries, I actually taught from the 20th into the 21st. I can only imagine it wasn’t much different in the 19th or even the 18th century. On April 23, 1635, the first public school in what would become the United States was established in Boston, Massachusetts. I tell you this for those naysayers who question and challenge me when I refer to a system that is centuries old.

Looking back to the start of public education it is easy to see that we had to change somewhat, from what and how we taught then, to how we teach and learn now. That seems obvious. That change however was incremental based on changes taking place over long periods of time. The difference in our society today is that there have been huge changes in technology over much shorter periods of time. This gives educators far less time to adjust and accept the needed changes. Comfort zones are quickly obliterated.

November 30, 2023, came at a time when education was coming out of a two-year hiatus from the classroom. Teachers were forced into uncomfortable and unfamiliar waters of online teaching while not sure who was going to be the next victim of a disease that we knew little about. Thousands of teachers left the profession. That was the untimely introduction of ChatGPT which was about to completely change the way teaching and learning will be done as we move forward. Timing is everything! Of course under those conditions, adding one more piece of tech to an already burned out group of educators, caused a predictable reaction. As Chicken Little predicted, “THE SKY IS FALLING!!!”.

Now a year has gone by, so let’s take stock in what we know. First, Generative AI is here to stay. People are using it professionally to do many things in industry and business settings. Its effect in education however, seems to be a little different. As I have traveled to a number of local and national education conferences, I have asked many educators about where their schools or districts stand on ChatGPT. Yes, it is not true research, but it is what I am going on for this post. It seems to me that school districts have taken one of three positions. The first is a ban on using ChatGPT. The second is a do-nothing policy, failing to recognize the existence of ChatGPT. The third is a recognition of ChatGPT and attempting to support educators with what they need to understand it.

There is now a problem that education, as an industry, is facing. This latest advance in technology is a year old, and the new, more advanced version of ChatGPT is being rolled out as you read this post. Putting aside a small group of college educators, a vast majority of today’s educators have never had any introduction to ChatGPT in any college course for teacher preparation.

Most educators are unaware of the potential uses of Generative AI. The fault does not fall on the educators. The fault is on the speed of change that technology produces. In the interest of informing educators here are a very few suggested ChatGPT uses:

1. Personalized Learning:

Generative AI can be used to create personalized learning experiences for students by tailoring instruction to their individual needs and learning styles. For example, AI-powered tutoring systems can provide students with individualized feedback and support, while AI-generated adaptive learning platforms can adjust the difficulty of content based on the student’s progress.

2. Language Learning and Translation:

Generative AI can be used to enhance language learning by providing students with opportunities to practice conversing with native speakers or translating texts in real-time. AI-powered language translation tools can also help students overcome language barriers and access educational resources in their native languages.

3. Content Creation and Curation:

Generative AI can be used to generate new educational content, such as practice problems, quizzes, and interactive simulations. AI-powered content curation tools can also help teachers find and organize high-quality educational resources from the vast amount of information available online.

4. Assessment and Feedback:

Generative AI can be used to automate the grading of assignments and provide students with immediate feedback on their work. AI-powered assessment tools can also help identify areas where students need additional support and provide personalized recommendations for further learning.

5. Accessibility and Inclusion:

Generative AI can be used to make education more accessible for students with disabilities, such as those with visual or auditory impairments. AI-powered text-to-speech and speech-to-text tools can help students access information and communicate effectively, while AI-generated transcripts can make lectures and other multimedia content accessible to deaf or hard-of-hearing students.

These examples illustrate how Generative AI has the potential to transform education by providing personalized, adaptive, and accessible learning experiences for all students. As AI technology will continue to develop, we can expect to see even more innovative and impactful applications of Generative AI in education.

The need to stay relevant as an educator relies on the need for professional development. The quality and success of Professional Development in education depends on its leadership. Teachers often are self-motivated to seek PD on their own. This self-motivation has become part of the PD model. The introduction of ChatGPT however will affect almost every educator on every level. This is an industry-wide need. What does the leadership plan to do in recognizing and dealing with this new gap in education? It is doubtful that self-motivated teachers alone will make enough of a difference? How many schools have even considered a flexible supportive policy to guide teachers to effectively and efficiently use Generative AI for teaching and learning.

With the recent political climate that has been targeting educators, it is necessary to protect teachers from stumbling into problems, because the school failed to provide guidelines that are not restrictive, but flexible, supportive, and informed.

In Conclusion:

Generative AI is not going away. Students can get access in many ways. The success of Chat GPT can be seen by how many tech platforms and applications are spending fortunes to include it in their products. There is no going back, or waiting for it to go away. It is not the pendulum in education reform we have all gotten used to. It is now with us and it will grow exponentially. The smart way to deal with it is to learn how best to incorporate it into teaching and learning. Embrace the change no matter how many comfort zones need to be shattered. Educators who are irrelevant will not serve their students well. The sky hasn’t fallen, but it may have awakened us to needed change. If we are to better educate our kids, we need first to better educate their educators.

Read Full Post »

Why Do Teachers Have Favorites?

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Education, Leadership, Observation, Pre-Service teachers, Professional development, Professionalism, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on February 22, 2023| Leave a Comment »

Do educators ever self-reflect on how they feel about their students in order to better understand how they assess each of their students? What are the considerations educators take into account while making such judgments? Is each student measured and weighed the same as every other student? If grading a piece of work requires a more subjective assessment, is a teacher really capable of assessing that work by each of his/her students, equally with the exact same bias-free subjectivity?

I know my answer would be sure, I view all my students the same. I am always fair and objective with every assessment. Of course, that would not be true, because I am human. There are things I favor, believe, love, and hate, as a result of my upbringing, education, spirituality, and life experience, all of which will affect every decision I make in life.

I guess I am asking how can educators be objectively unbiased when making subjective assessments of not only their students’ work, but their students as people as well? Teachers will make small decisions and judgments that when added up over a year will paint a certain picture of that student. Over 12 years of schooling does every student have an accurate picture of who they are, or are some kids a product of profiling by dozens of teachers’ biases?

Biases are not necessarily bad. Early on in life, we are asked about a favorite color, favorite type of music, favorite sport, and favorite player? We are programmed to like and consequently dislike. Our families also usually give us values, and spirituality. Teachers help form our academic beliefs. Life or “the school of hard knocks” often fills in the gaps with other beliefs. The end result is that everyone is an individual with unique beliefs and biases with hopefully an anchoring to societal norms.

What biases might a classroom teaching experience that would affect their ability to serve the best interests of their students? (Prompt ChatGPT)

Classroom teachers may experience various biases that can affect their ability to serve the best interests of their students. Some of these biases are:

Confirmation bias: This bias occurs when a teacher searches for or interprets information in a way that confirms their existing beliefs or attitudes. This can lead to the teacher ignoring or dismissing information that contradicts their beliefs or attitudes, leading to inaccurate assessments of students’ abilities and needs.
Stereotyping: Teachers may hold stereotypes about certain groups of students based on their race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics. These stereotypes can influence the teacher’s expectations of the students and their ability to succeed, which can lead to lower expectations and opportunities for those students.
Halo effect: This bias occurs when a teacher’s positive impression of a student in one area leads them to assume the student is strong in all areas. For example, a teacher may assume that a student who is well-behaved and polite must also be academically strong, leading to a lack of attention to areas where the student may be struggling.
Implicit bias: This bias is an unconscious preference or prejudice that can influence a teacher’s perceptions and behaviors. For example, a teacher may have an implicit bias against students who speak with accents or who come from different cultures, leading to a lack of understanding or support for those students
Self-fulfilling prophecy: This bias occurs when a teacher’s expectations of a student’s behavior or performance lead to that behavior or performance becoming a reality. For example, a teacher who expects a student to be disruptive may treat that student differently, leading to increased disruptive behavior.

It is important for teachers to recognize and address these biases in order to serve the best interests of their students and provide an equitable learning environment.

Teachers can work to overcome biases by seeking diverse perspectives, reflecting on their assumptions and beliefs, and implementing evidence-based strategies that support all students.

Self-reflection is one of the most important parts of good teaching, but it does not come easily. It requires a teacher to look inside to identify those biases that may affect their students. This is not something young teachers can usually do. I found that it comes with experience. I am a big believer that through time, we do become wiser. With age, we have a compendium of experiences to call upon for a more comprehensive self-reflection.

Some of these biases are very subtle. A teacher might have key students who that teacher most often calls upon in discussions, knowing that they will answer well, and move the discussion along. Of course contributions from the rest of the class go unrecognized.

Another bias probably more prevalent than we would care to admit is a bias for males over females, or females over males. This has a profound effect on learning. My youngest daughter is finishing up a Doctorate in Math. She has had classes of predominantly male students throughout her academic career. Of course, this is not news to STEM teachers.

A really gutsy lesson a teacher could do is to discuss biases with a class of students. After everyone understands bias, list the teacher’s biases, and sharing these biases with the class. If the teacher is really open to change, it will be helpful when the students point out the teacher’s biases when they see them pop up throughout the year. That is authentic learning that makes a difference.

Being a successful educator requires more than academic knowledge of a subject. It will take a constant effort to self-reflect and improve skills in developing relationships. It is through successful teacher-student relationships that quality learning thrives. If we are to better educate our students, we must first better educate their educators.

Read Full Post »

Chaos Learning: Classroom vs Online?

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, Connected Educator, Education, Internet, Leadership, Literacy, online learning, Poverty, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Social Media, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on April 10, 2020| 5 Comments »

It is very difficult to give weight to anything these days except for the conditions that we are now living and dying under, especially as a New Yorker. Time does not stand still however, so we need to assess where we are in order to adjust and move forward. If this pandemic has taught me anything, this would be my lesson learned.

When it comes to the American education system, I have experienced it in many ways and on many levels. I have been a student, a teacher, professor, a supporter, a critic, a follower and a leader. Now I deal with education as a speaker, writer, blogger, and podcaster. My focus in life has always been in education. As a critic I often engaged in theoretical discussions of how we could improve the system if we blew it all up and started anew. These were obviously theoretical discussions since a national education system cannot be physically blown up.

March of 2020 changed all that. March 2020 is when the American education system was blown up. There is no mistake about that. Schools were shut down. Testing was cancelled. Teachers were told not to concern themselves with grades, and even sports were stopped. All school related events were halted. The system, as we have come to know it after 200+ years, was shut down. It was blown up by the Covid-19 virus pandemic.

There was only one possibility available to educators. They immediately ran to the alternative that was discussed for the last decade. We have the technology! Why not transition the entire system to remote learning? Let’s mandate remote learning. Administrators will lead remotely, teachers will teach remotely, students will learn remotely. We have talked about it for years, so why not? That seemed like a sound fix for the problem, especially if it was to be a short-term need.

Well, the fix was not so simple. Although we have talked a great deal about remote learning over the last decade, we haven’t really taught teachers to do it. Since the actual practice of remote learning has been limited, few students are proficient, or even experienced in it. Many teachers and students are not even comfortable with it.

As educators we have also learned that Maslow truly comes before Bloom in learning. We need to address the emotional and physical needs of students before any learning can take place. Unfortunately, in a highly stressed environment, we have added more stress on teachers and students. We have not created stability, but rather added to the chaos in a very chaotic environment. It is amazing that many, if not most, educators have risen above all of this to make the best of a very bad situation.

Educators at every level have strived to use the technology to collaborate in finding solutions and methods to help themselves and their students through this mess. They strive to collaborate through catastrophe. By experiencing the use of technology in learning, the teachers are as much students as the younger people they are charged to teach. This may go a long way in accomplishing what countless sessions of professional development could not deliver. Experience is always the best teacher.

We have very quickly identified many problems with remote teaching. The greatest problem exposed is the digital divide caused by the economic divide. Zip codes still determine quality of education even more in a digital system. There are many drawbacks in digital systems that were less of an obstacle in face-to-face environments. Absenteeism is a big problem in remote learning. Getting to kids of large families with only one digital device in the family is a big issue. Having kids supervised at home can be a problem for many as well. Giving individual time to each student digitally is another problem that needs to be addressed.

Teachers need to shift their focus from summative assessment for grading purposes to formative assessment for actionable feedback. Teachers need to understand that piling up more work does not translate to more learning. Administrators need to learn that leading is much better that mandating. Collaboration is key to learning. If you have a thought share it. An idea not shared is just a passing thought. Sharing and modeling best practices is not bragging. Yes, these are phrases used all the time, but that doesn’t make them less important or less truthful. They were true in a classroom setting and they are true online as well.

My fear is that, when we come to an end of this catastrophe, which we now find ourselves in, we will look to assessing remote learning with a skewed perspective. We have come to grips with the priorities of the brick and mortar environment of our education system and found them in need of realignment. Teachers are trained for the classroom. Teachers have been programed for an environment of control and compliance. Their experience and training have little to do with student voice and choice in learning. Collaborative learning too often takes a back seat to lecture and direct instruction. These are tailored to classroom learning and far less effective in remote learning.

We need an honest look at both the classroom model and the remote model for learning and adjust accordingly. Face–to-face relationships between teachers and students are the best conduits for learning. Developing skills in students to be self-motivated and tech savvy to research, curate, communicate and create, as lifelong learners should be the goal of every educator. In our computer-driven world this will happen online.

We cannot look at the remote teaching and learning that is going on during this crisis as the model for online learning. Most of the teachers and students thrown into this were not prepared for, or equipped for any of this to happen, much like our medical community in handling this virus. We need to return to a system that will now and forever support a professional development system that is continual, supportive, relevant and adaptive. We cannot expect our students to strive for the best, ongoing, life-long education possible, if their teachers, mentors, and role models are not striving for that as well. We cannot waste one of the rare opportunities that this horrible disaster may have afforded us. Let us consider blending the best of both systems to reprioritize our goals for education, as well as the methods that we may use to get to those goals. We must be proactive in improving our teachers, which will in turn improve our students. It is not a passive exercise. It will not happen on its own. It will take a new mindset and of course money. Education is the best defense our country can have. Its value is worth the cost.

Read Full Post »

Where’s the Silver Lining for Education?

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, Connected Educator, Curriculum, Education, ISTE, Leadership, online learning, Parents, PD, PLN, Poverty, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Social Media, Standardized test, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on March 27, 2020| 5 Comments »

With the cloud of the Corona Virus hanging over us and growing by the hour, it is difficult to see any silver lining. Health and safety are our greatest concerns. The stakes are high and the consequences may be fatal to too many. Anything I discuss here should not in any way diminish the seriousness of our condition. The consequences of our nationwide quarantine however, may be having a profound positive effect on our education system. From an education perspective, there may be a silver lining to one of the darkest clouds to ever cover this country.

In the past, many discussions by several education leaders have sometimes suggested the idea of education reform needing to blow up the current education system in order to affect any real change. In March of 2020 in response to a life-threatening pandemic, our education system, as we have known it for centuries, was blown up. Schools across the nation closed their doors, but required their teachers to try to carry on educating their students using online technology. Overnight, discussions, which were in many cases theoretical about online teaching and learning, became a reality. It was a “ready or not, here we come” event.

Educators, who were trained and programmed to teach face-to-face with students in classrooms with a support staff within a larger school building, found themselves alone at home face-to-face with a blank computer screen. This nationwide experience exposed and underscored a number of deficiencies and shortcomings in the system that can now be addressed in many positive ways. How we respond to what we now know may very well evolve the education system in ways not possible before the nationwide lockdown blew it up. From chaos we now have opportunity.

The earliest indications of our preparedness to meet the online challenge to educators underscored the gap that exists in professional development for educators. Teaching online is not the same as teaching in the classroom. Many educators have not been updated in the use of technology and more specifically, online instruction. Of course the system until now was not dependent on online learning, but technology implementation is essential in our computer-driven society. Now that we have exposed the importance of technology in education, we can use this experience to push for more required, universal, and effective professional development. We can also more convincingly support PD with time, money, and structured follow-up.

We are more aware of the basic needs of kids to have a better working knowledge of technology skills. It is an opportunity to evaluate and evolve how we introduce kids to technology and how we incorporate those skills to enhance their learning. We need to develop their ability to be self-reliant in their learning to become lifelong learners.

We are also more aware of the need for a dependable online infrastructure, one that offers access to all. The digital divide must be addressed. Zip codes can no longer be the driving force of quality education.

Social distancing is a new concept for our country. It should be called physical distancing to be a more accurate description. Online we have all gotten closer through connections with colleagues and students. The idea of sharing ideas, and sources has grown as a result of educators needing to quickly grow and communicate effectively online. Another benefit from this collegial connection is a new appreciation, if not discovery for some, of online content. The use of online sources can enhance a text-based curriculum, or even replace it.

In order to change any system the first changes have to be made to the culture. With schools shut down parents have become more involved with their kids’ education. What parents see and experience, with their children learning through technology, goes a long way in educating parents as to what education in today’s world is all about. Of course this does not work as effectively if there are no online connections between educators and students for parents to experience.

Probably the biggest takeaway from this crisis in education is the absolute need for social and emotional learning for kids. We need to address physical and emotional needs before kids can learn. Maslow must always come before Bloom. Priorities need to be readjusted. We see schools adjusting their grading policies. Maybe grades aren’t what we have believed them to be for centuries? It may be time to reassess and adjust. Many schools have cancelled their need to give standardized tests. Again, maybe they need to move down on the list of education priorities. Let’s take the opportunity to talk it through and consider our experiences.

After each and every catastrophic experience this country has endured, it has reassessed, adjusted, and made positive changes for the benefit of all. Beyond the obvious health and safety issues that must be addressed, we need to address the issues of education. The kids who we are educating today will make the decisions of health and safety moving forward. We can’t educate them with the knowledge and skills that brought us to this point. They need more knowledge and more relevant skills to get beyond our limited capabilities. They will be living in a different world. This horrible event that we are now facing has actually given us the greatest opportunity yet to evolve our education system. We need to reassess, reevaluate and prioritize. This opportunity is the silver lining of that very dark Coronavirus cloud hanging over us.

Stay Healthy!

Read Full Post »

What’s the Goal of Education?

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Internet, Leadership, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Teched, Technology on April 25, 2019| 7 Comments »

As adults we generally learn about things that we need to learn about. Of course we also have an opportunity to learn about things we would like to learn about. We do not have anyone assigning us projects, or books or exams for which to prepare. The exception to that would be the job requirements in a job that we have chosen. Theoretically, we work in a job that has some personal appeal, and the required learning for that job is something that ultimately, we have chosen to accept. When what appeals to us about that job wanes, we hold on to that job only as long as it takes to find another with a better, more appealing position. The learning and application of that learning again is a choice that we make for that new position. The learning is relevant in our new role.

If all of this is true, then it should be evident that this is the life for which we are preparing our children. As a long-time educator, I am no longer convinced that we are adequately preparing our children with the needed skills to live, survive and thrive in their future life of that real world environment.

Additionally, I also question whether we, as education professionals, have been truly prepared for our present environment. Many of us grew up in a world where information came in printed form vetted by publishers. A world where TV producers vetted information produced for the airwaves. A world where opposing political views, for the most part, were discussed with words and not weapons. Yes, there were violent demonstrations, but nothing like the number of mass murder bombings of today. We trusted the printed word. We trusted the TV broadcasts. We, for the most part, trusted our political leaders. We trusted our institutions. We believed in the “tried and true”. With that as a background in our education, we now live in a world where little of that holds true. Any idiot can publish anything, truthful or not, and every idiot does. As adults, educated in an earlier time, are we prepared to learn and discern from the information delivered to us from news sources? In an age of instant access, are we skilled enough to analyze and understand what is being delivered to us second by second? Are we prepared to critically think about all that we are bombarded with daily? Are we prepared to accept that, just because things worked well in the past, they may need to be changed in this new world environment? What was once “tried and true” may now be tried, but irrelevant.

If the educators of our youth are struggling with skills required to strive and thrive in this, their own world today, how do they prepare children to learn, and adapt in the world in which these kids will be expected to live. A world that will advance even faster and more intensely than it is now. Technology only moves forward never back.

If we as adults have a say in what we want to learn, then why is this not what we are preparing our children to do. We assume that if we load them up with pre-selected content, that they will have enough preparation to handle anything in their adult life. Yes, we do need to give children a base of learned material from which they will be able to choose and make decisions, but we focus so much on building that base that we lose sight of why we are doing it. We never get to the part where kids pick what they want to learn, as well as how they want to go about learning it, and what platform to demonstrate their mastery of it.

The world in which our kids will live as adults does not look like the intellectually protected environment of the classroom. They will not learn things by subject categories in 45-minute segments. They will not have a person lecturing them on a given subject each and every day. They will not have the Internet, their main source of information, locked down or heavily scrubbed of sites. They will not have a prescribed set of standards to follow. They will not be limited by the shortcomings of anyone in charge of their information access. They should only be bound by their curiosity and love of learning, and not a lack of skills to retrieve, understand, critically analyze, and assess information.

Is this really the world that we are preparing them for? Are we stressing their curiosity? Are we challenging them to be critical thinkers? Are we enabling them with relevant technological skills to access, curate, communicate, collaborate, and create using information dealing with their passion? Are we allowing them to make mistakes and learn and adapt from them without consequences of punishment? Are we maintaining and advancing our own skills as professional educators to enable us to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world?

For some of these questions a very few educators can stand up and say, “Yes I do all of that”. Some educators could say, Yes, I do some of that”. We, as a system however, are falling way short in most of these important questions. What should our goal in education be?

We need to get our students in better position to make decisions in their own learning earlier on in the process and not assume that skill on graduation day. They need a greater voice in their own learning in order to own it before they leave our influence. They need to understand how to direct their curiosity to answer their own questions, to develop their own path, to address their own problems. We as educators need to shift the education dynamic of teaching kids what to learn to teaching kids how to learn. This is the best way we can provide for them a way to live in their world and not ours. Their world will come with all new rules and new problems that they will need to learn how to deal with in new ways unknown to us, their educators. Our goal should and must be to make our students self-motivated learners with all the skills needed to do that in their own world with their own tools for accessing information. Maybe instead of standardizing learning, we should work on standardizing teaching to be more openly supportive of teaching kids how to continue the process of learning in their lives beyond the classroom. If we are to better educate our kids, we need first to better educate their educators.

Read Full Post »

A Professional Development Alternative

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Andragogy, Assessment, conference, Education, Leadership, online learning, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Teacher, Technology on November 29, 2018| 3 Comments »

I recently attended the annual conference held by , the New York State ISTE affiliate organization. It is a favorite conference of mine, since I served as a board member of that organization for about six years. It is also both comprehensive and progressive in the way of education conferences. As with all education conferences it is easy to identify what trends in education have been most popular over the last year by the number of sessions being offered on any given subject. I was delighted to see that there were several sessions on Professional Development, which is what I believe to be a key in improving our education system.

I was pleased to hear that in the summary of these sessions that they would address the problems with professional development. In my mind I envisioned a list of the problems I hoped that would be addressed from a teacher’s perspective. I was sorely disappointed to see the focus on those problems in some of the sessions was from an administrator’s point of view. It was based more on delivery and less on quality or effectiveness. The list included: How to get teachers to sign up for PD, how to get teachers to fulfill seat-time requirements, how to assure that teachers taking online components were really who they said they were. I immediately thought about a doctor who placed all of the effort to addressing and fixing the symptoms of an illness and missing the obvious task of addressing the illness itself.

What was clear to me in most of the sessions was that there was little focus on the failures of the PD that was to be delivered. There was only one session that addressed an understanding of Andragogy, also referred to as adult learning, and how components of their program addressed it. This session presented a larger more flexible Internet delivery system. Delivering information electronically without considering adult learners as your students doesn’t work. This was the equivalent of delivering paper-printed worksheets digitally. The problems that come with printed worksheets travel well electronically. Just because a computer delivered it, it doesn’t make it better. Research tells us that lecture is not the most effective way to teach, so why would we think computer-delivered webinars would work any better? There was a limited amount of follow-up support, and that support had to be initiated by the teacher’s request. There was no mention of follow-up research to determine how effective the PD was in improving or even affecting student learning in the classroom. Of course I do not see this as a shortcoming of the educators who were charged with evolving this PD in their district. It was a short sighted direction to meet the immediate needs of their administrators to check off that box indicating that they offered PD to their teachers in terms they have come to understand after decades (maybe centuries) of the same old PD. Why do we question that teachers in overwhelming numbers list dissatisfaction with professional development as their number one concern?

The hard cold fact of the matter is that if we are to improve our education system, we must improve how we understand, deliver, and assess our professional development. That will not be comfortable for anyone in education. It will require commitment to time and money and that will affect teachers and administrators not to mention taxpayers. It is also why we haven’t made great strides in this area over the centuries that we have had a public education system.

We cannot assume that a four-year degree that addresses both mastering teaching, as well as additionally mastering a specific subject area, is enough to carry a teacher through an entire career in education. Many states require a Master’s degree, but many don’t. Of course that is only an additional two-year degree and careers are 35 to 40 years long.

I carried my concerns to another conference in NYC, The Software and Information Industry Association’s Education Business Forum (SIIA EBF). It is a great business education conference, rather than educators, it is made up of people representing the companies within the education technology publishers’ community. They provide the technology, systems, applications, programs, and consulting that schools purchase throughout the year.

I had dinner with an old friend whose career has been focused as a leader in professional development for educators. My question to him was based on my own concerns with PD in education. I asked, what should we do about the PD we are getting? His answer was simple, truthful, and I fear it to also be correct: Blow it up! We then spent our dinner conversation on WHY.

The bulk of “continuing PD” for teachers is a day or two during the course of the year, or during the summer, often to fill the gaps of the use of technology supported by the district. Additionally, teachers can take approved college courses or workshops that meet district requirements. Seat time is key to many of these courses in order to be approved. Seat time varies from place to place, but it all relies on a teacher being seated in a class for a specific number of hours and being able to certify it. With assessment being such a big part of what educators do, one would expect some assessment on what the teacher learned, or some assessment of the PD’s impact on that teacher’s students’ learning. For the most part that is not often done.

My friend at dinner pointed out that research shows successful methods of PD have common factors. Unfortunately, the first factor may make it a deal breaker for teachers and administrators. For PD to succeed, it must be at least fifty to eighty hours of continuous and continual instruction, practice, and coaching in order to attain mastery. This would require time from the teacher and money and support from the district. The obvious solution to this is to incorporate all PD into the job description of the teacher making it part of the workweek and supporting it with additional money for additional time and a professional coaching staff.

Further insight can be derived from The Learning Policy Institute: Effective Teacher Professional Development by Linda Darling-Hammond, Maria E. Hyler, and Madelyn Gardner, with assistance from Danny Espinoza

https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_BRIEF.pdf

Elements of Effective Professional Development Using this methodology, we found seven widely shared features of effective professional development. Such professional development:

Is content focused
Incorporates active learning utilizing adult learning theory
Supports collaboration, typically in job-embedded contexts
Uses models and modeling of effective practice
Provides coaching and expert support
Offers opportunities for feedback and reflection
Is of sustained duration

And here is another support from an older article that is still very relevant is: Teaching the Teachers: Effective professional development

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/research/teaching-teachers-effective-professional-development

Paying attention to any part of these lists of recommendations could make a small difference from the status quo of the past centuries of practice for PD. The idea of blowing up the entire thing and starting over, with all of the considerations that we have come to understand work, would be the best thing we could do to improve on what we have.

As educators, we are a community of learners first, and teachers second. As educators, we collaborate, reflect, and improve. As educators, if we fail, we assess, correct, and move forward. Knowing who we are, and what we do, why do we as educators continue to put up with a failing Professional Development approach that handicaps our profession and limits our students? Let us consider, reflect, collaborate, and improve what we know and how we learn it to affect the greatest and best change for our students.

If we are to better educate our kids, we must first better educate their educators.

Read Full Post »

Technology Beyond the Tools

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Leadership, Literacy, PD, PLN, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on September 13, 2018| 3 Comments »

Book:kindle I recently read a blog post about how teachers will never be replaced by technology. The author stated that technology was just a “tool for learning”. This had to be among literally hundreds, if not thousands, of similar posts and comments that I have read over the years. Since I was teaching from the early 70’s, I tended to agree with that way back then. Today, however, I am not so sure that technology in education hasn’t grown into something beyond a “tool for learning”. I often thought that the support garnered for this idea about a “tool for learning”, from educators was based in their fear from an unfounded belief by Sci-Fi authors who often suggested the replacement of teachers by technology in the future. Sci-Fi doesn’t always get it right. Where are the flying cars?

Tech has always been a factor if not the driving force in the advancement of culture. One of the greatest tech influences in education was Gutenberg’s printing press, followed by the chalkboard, audio tape, film, television and the personal calculator which all preceded personal computers in their various portable forms today. The implementation of the most recent devices however is where I believe many educators have tunnel vision on the influence of tech in education.

All tech has a limited shelf life. It is constantly evolving. Both its users and its developers influence this evolution. Society itself is the loudest voice demanding speed and efficiency in the way it communicates, collaborates, and creates. The tools for each of these components are constantly evolving at a pace we have never before experienced in history. This technological paradigm shift has created its own literacy. Literacy has always been a goal of education. It was necessary in order to communicate, collaborate, and create in order to further educate. The literacy required in any century was limited to the technology that enabled it, but that technology was often separate from the literacy. You didn’t need to know about how to print on a printing press in order to read a printed book. Writing implements were readily available in various forms in order to record thoughts, as well as communicate with them. The use was simple requiring nothing more than penmanship.

The rapid advancement of technology has changed this. Tech has evolved so quickly and so universally in our culture that there is now literacy required in order for people to effectively and efficiently use it. That rapid tech evolution however leaves many people whose age was not synched with that tech advancement in a learning gap. Kids growing up with the tech are immersed in it from birth and evolve their tech literacy with age. We have all seen the video of the baby trying to page swipe a printed magazine

Unfortunately, lifelong learning is a goal that is often discarded because life itself gets in the way of continual learning. Consequently, most adults will always be playing catch-up with kids in order to stay relevant in a modern society. The gap is the problem for our education system since our educators are adults and our students are kids.

If we buy into the idea that technology requires tech literacy, then we must also accept that evolving tech requires an evolving literacy. This requires adjusting that which we have already learned, and change is difficult. It requires an ongoing development for professionals to maintain the smallest gap between what they know to what they need to know in order to maintain relevance in a rapidly changing environment.

Professional development can no longer be a haphazard choice by folks who don’t like making uncomfortable choices. Comfort levels are the greatest obstacles to change.
Professional development can no longer be just a check box on a list of things educators should do. It must be prioritized, supported and, most importantly, implemented.
Professional development can no longer be a “one and done” concept delivered once at the beginning of the school year. It must be an ongoing part of an educator’s job description.
Professional development must be supported with follow-through and follow-up. Supporting educators with both time and coaching to apply their professional development is essential for success.

Our society today does not collaborate, communicate, or create the way it did as far back as the 20^th Century, so why would we teach using concepts and methodologies of the 20^th and in some cases the 19^th century? To succeed in our education system in the past, our students needed to be literate in reading and writing. Today, in order to use the tools needed to accomplish almost any task a society demands, the users must be technology literate. It is no longer a choice made by any educators whether to teach students to be technology literate or not. Educators have a moral obligation to educate kids in order for them to survive and thrive in a technology-driven society. School districts have a moral obligation to give their educators effective and efficient professional development to enable them to accomplish this.

Yes, technology provides “tools for learning” and teaching, which cannot replace a relevant teacher. The teacher/student relationship is credited for great strides in learning. That however may not always hold true for an educator who is no longer relevant because his or her district did not support its educators with ongoing and effective PD. Students properly motivated may circumvent teachers and self teach with the “tools of learning”. Irrelevant educators and a thirst for authentic learning may be that very motivation needed for some students.

We have the tools for all the professional development we need to provide. We can provide worldwide collaboration. We can provide individualized support. We can provide the ability to time shift things to accommodate personal scheduling.

We can’t provide progressive innovative thinking on the part of school districts. We can’t provide the supportive culture to promote educators seeking life long professional learning. We can’t provide educators with an open mindset opening them to the possibility of change. We can’t provide a promise that a commitment to change will be comfortable.

Professional development will not just happen on its own. The concept of personalized learning through collaboration in social media is wonderful, but it may never take off with a majority of educators. I haven’t seen great involvement in the last 12 years or so. The whole idea of learning is not a passive exercise. It requires work on the part of those providing the teaching as well as those benefitting from the learning. Reading and writing as a literacy was hard enough for many of us, and now we are seeing that there is a whole new literacy that needs to be not only learned, but taught by us as well. It is overwhelming. It is however an important and often unsupported part of the profession that we chose to enter. In order to better educate our kids, we must first better educate their educators.

Read Full Post »

Old School Doesn’t Work

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Anndragogy, Leadership, Literacy, Mentoring, PD, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on August 29, 2018| 6 Comments »

PD CLASS 1950s If a doctor, who is faced with a patient exhibiting multiple symptoms of an unknown disease, were to address each of the symptoms rather than addressing the disease itself, he/she might find the outcome for that patient to be disastrous in the long run. The patient might have had the symptoms lessened, but the disease would eventually win out with a poor outcome for the patient.

Our education system is extremely complicated. There are many parts to that system, many of which have undergone change based on cultural and scientific influences. Many problems of today’s education system did not exist in past generations or even the most recent past decade. With so many facets, many in a state of flux, it is impossible to point to one solution that will fix all that is wrong with the education system and also expect it to work forever. The best strategy might be to identify those problems that can have the greatest impact on change. Of course many educators might find it difficult to reach agreement as to which problems should be first addressed, depending on their own biases and experiences with teaching and learning. The opinions of other stakeholders in the system further complicate this including: administrators, students, parents, and taxpayers. The question we first need to address, if change can happen in a positive way to improve education in our country, in my opinion should be about educating educators.

Teachers in the system come from varied backgrounds with varied levels of education. They are from varied races and have varied life experiences as well as varied professional experiences. With these vast differences in those who are responsible for educating our kids, can we say that all of these educators are using the best practices, and methodologies to get the most out of those students they are responsible for?

Using the term of “standardization” is a slippery slope. Too often, when we talk about standardization, we also imply a rigidity that prevents us from revisiting any component of that standardization to test its relevance. This requires work to re-evaluate and change and re-educate large numbers of educators if any component of the system loses its relevance. Some changes are obvious when we consider technology. Consider the demise of: typewriters, mimeograph machines, record players, VCRs, cameras, projectors, telephones, and filmstrips. All of these, as well as many others, were recognized as ineffective tools for education and were replaced by more efficient and effective tech tools. Upgraded and improved tools are also continually replacing these new tools.

Now let’s consider our educators with their varied experiences spread out over their generations of experience. Do their current practices include: problem based learning, project based learning, student voice and choice, student centered learning, voluntary homework, formative assessment, flipped learning, design based learning, the use of rubrics, authentic learning, school culture, new education technology, and many more methodologies?

Do we have a responsibility to make sure our educators are as relevant as the technology they are required to use? Do we have a responsibility to make sure any school we walk into in our country has educators who are versed in the most recent and effective methodology in their field of education?

A common complaint among most educators is their dissatisfaction with the professional development provided to them. The requirements for PD differ from state to state and town to town. Some schools support PD within the culture of the school. Other schools rarely address PD beyond what the state may require.

“A Level Playing Field” is a really overused expression, but it seems to fit in what is needed to improve deficiencies in our education system. If we truly want to improve the education of our students, we need to first improve and support the education of their educators. The practices of PD over the last decades have failed to do so. The speed at which change takes place is faster than ever before in history. We need to account for change and adjust accordingly to maintain relevance in our community of educators. If we want “The Best Bang for the Buck” PD is the key. If we fail to prioritize professional development, we are not prioritizing education. All that political rhetoric about improving education is a hollow promise of something that politicians have little understanding, but that is nothing new for politicians. They too should consider some improved form of professional development for their own profession.

Prioritizing PD will be costly to implement and maintain but it is an investment in our system. It is not just throwing money at a problem without a plan. We need not standardize curriculum if continually educate educators in best practices. Yes there will be fads in educational approaches that we will need to root out, but will have a better ability to judge such things as more educators are engaged in the leading ideas of their profession.

For the best and most effective changes in our education system we need a bottom up movement to improve Professional Development. We need to teach educators as adults who learn as adults learn. We need to respect them for who they are and what life experiences they bring to the table. We need to teach them things today that they can use in class tomorrow. We need to recognize their goals and help achieve them. We need to provide practical and relevant solutions to help their teaching as well as their learning. We need to provide coaches on the school staff to monitor guide and reflect along with our educators to reinforce and support their efforts.

Without a new and supportive approach to professional development for our educators, we will continue to struggle. After two centuries of a scattered approach to PD without consideration to adult learning, we are not far from where we were back in the 18^th century with the exception maybe of improved bells and whistles. Educating educators in better ways and supporting that learning is the best and most effective way to improve the education of our children. Rather than standardize curriculum and testing, let us consider standardizing a thoughtful, supportive, national approach to professional development for educators. If we are to better educate our kids, we must first better educate their educators.

Read Full Post »

Why an Education Philosophy?

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Connected Educator, cooperating Teacher, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, PD, PLN, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on July 25, 2018| 3 Comments »

Philosopher 2 Often in teacher preparation classes students are asked to develop an education philosophy based on their course studies and observations, or student teaching experiences. For many of these students who go on the pursue careers in education, that might be the only time anyone asked for that philosophy. Of course the best time to develop any philosophy on one’s overall impact of a career may not be to do it before one enters and experiences the full force of that career over a period of time. This is a discussion I often had with my student teachers. They should develop an education philosophy, but it should never be etched in granite, especially with their limited teaching experiences. By the nature of the job, changes are to be inevitable, so self-reflection and flexibility are important elements that must be requirements of the profession at any level.

The reality however, is that aside from possibly in a job interview; few educators are ever asked about their personal education philosophy. This might be because it must require more than just a “Feel Good” one-sentence cliché. Education, which involves teaching and learning, is far more complicated than one sentence can explain.

I always felt that there were at least three factors affecting my education philosophy: my personal experiences, the culture of the school in which I taught, and prevailing education thought leadership. My ability to affect any of these three factors was limited but possible with some effort and more often work. The biggest deterrent is the time need to do this.

However, if I viewed my career as a passive experience, my education philosophy would be “catch as catch can”. I could go along with the status quo, making few waves and little innovation. I could simply follow directives, “go along to get along”, and limit my professional development to whatever my school prescribed.

The alternative however would take more effort and consequently it would be more work and time. I could reflect on my students’ summative assessments to adjust my methodology and seek to improve it, or abandon parts of it altogether. This would establish my choices for effective methodology.

I could examine and reflect on my school’s culture to determine if it is advancing, or stifling my efforts as an educator. To change a system, we need to first change the culture. My philosophy may include taking an active role in affecting change in my school’s culture in order for me to be a better educator.

As for following the lead of educators and sharing the latest education initiatives, I would need to work at connecting and collaborating with education thought leaders. In years gone by this was done through universities and journals, but real connections were limited. Today, technology provides, for those willing to work for it and use it, the ability to communicate, connect and collaborate with thought leaders for the purpose of creating a means to better educate our students.

As educators we have to decide on dozens of ways to effectively interact with kids including but not limited to:

Teaching methodology
Lesson plans
Homework policy
Attendance
Appropriate lessons
Interpersonal student relationships
Extra credit
Grading
Formative assessments
Summative assessments
Test preparation
Teachable moments
Classroom behavior
Bathroom breaks
Parent communication
Technology

How does one handle any of these without some thoughtful reflection on what each is and how does it fit in with what needs to be accomplished for kids to learn effectively and efficiently. Every educator should give thought to each and all of the elements that he/she is responsible for in order to do the best that they can. It is also NOT a “do it once and done” project. It is an ever-changing dynamic that will need to be revisited and reflected upon on an ongoing basis. Principals should know the education philosophies of their teachers. Principals need to support the school culture that challenges and supports their educators. They need to promote reflection and provide time in support of that endeavor. Maybe try having a faculty meeting with personal education philosophies as the main topic of discussion. There may be surprises both good and not so good as an outcome, but it will give a clearer picture of where the staff is as educators. At the very least it will enable people to better understand their own school culture. All of this should be included in a Principal’s leadership philosophy, but that’s for another post.

Read Full Post »

What if we don’t know what we don’t know?

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Education, Leadership, PD, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform on July 6, 2018| 4 Comments »

Several decades ago I read an article that I believe was in Time Magazine on the most difficult jobs in America. The article defined a difficult job based on the number of impactful decisions a person had to make in a day. Listed, as one of the most difficult jobs, was that of an eighth grade English teacher. I was surprised to read that, but I was in full agreement, since I was at the time an eighth grade English teacher. A decision is made by considering the information available and making a choice, or taking a course of action. The best decisions can be made when the best and most complete information is available.

A glaring obstacle to change and hopefully improvement in our education system, which needs to be addressed, is that educators don’t always know what they don’t know, but make decisions with the information they have. Making decisions with limited information often limits the potential of progress.

If there is one fact that can be established as a result of the use of technology it is that technology promotes and accelerates innovation and change. The rate of change in our computer-driven society is happening at a pace never seen before in history. These changes affect almost every aspect of our lives. Keeping up with these changes has become a challenge for everyone. We can argue whether this change is good or bad, but the fact is that this change is real and ongoing, like it or not. Making decisions becomes more difficult because the information used to make the decision might be different within a year. This has been underscored time and time again when we consider industries like: typewriters, telephones, Kodachrome film, cassettes, record albums and the list goes on.

Teaching deals with information in all of its forms. Teaching kids how to curate, analyze, critically think, collaborate, communicate and ultimately create information is the goal of education. We are also trying to instill a love of learning and flexibility to change in order to promote life long learning in every student. In order to do that effectively and efficiently is difficult enough, but in today’s world we need to do that with as much relevance as possible. We need to be relevant today because our kids will be living in a world that will be more advanced than we are now as a result the effect of technological influences for change.

As a teacher of the 70’s I can say that it was certainly easier back then. Things were more rigid and more reliable. Change was slow. Teachers could teach the same curriculum year after year and be considered to be a dependable educator. This is not what we want for our kids today, but for the most part, this has changed, or at least we would like to think so.

If we want our educators to make the best decisions for our kids, we need to insist that they consider the best and most complete information available. We need to make decisions that are based on relevant information. Relevance has become a component of education in a system that is so affected by rapid change, a difficult task indeed.

Teachers may no longer earn a degree and expect that degree to carry them through a 30-40 year career without some additional form of training or education to retain their relevance. Does our present system promote or even allow for this? Do districts provide relevant professional development for their educators? Are the decision-makers, who are deciding on relevant PD, relevant themselves? If teachers are to make their own choices on PD, are they making the right choices? Do they select PD choices that are needed, but might be uncomfortable to do? Are they up to date on what areas in education are leading edge ideas? Are they aware of all of the choices available to them?

If we all agree that Professional Development should be prioritized, ongoing, and supported with time and money, than let us consider what PD we actually have. Relevance is a key factor in making PD decisions. A big problem with our current system may be that decision makers who need to make relevant decisions are themselves irrelevant. How can educators make decisions on the best PD to enrich them, when they are unaware of the PD strands that are current or even available?

It is a problem when we reach a point where educators don’t know what they don’t know.

Adult learning, collaboration, and social media should all be components of our Professional Development. Time for collaboration, common planning periods, and reflection time should be included in our Professional Development. Having staff members in some form supporting or coaching teachers developing and adopting new methodology should be included in our Professional Development. Moving from the 20th century teacher-centered methodology and mindset to a more student-centered 21^st century approach should be included in our Professional Development. Supporting educators to believe they can expand and change with a supportive school culture should be included in our Professional Development. The idea that we are all life long learners becoming a belief and not just an alliterate phrase should be included in our Professional Development.

If we are to better educate our kids, we must first better educate their educators.