Purpose Driven Meetings

/ Catherine Cabiness-Atkinson, Ed.D. / Leave a comment
Faculty meetings. Department chair meetings. Meetings, in general. We’ve all been there. But how many times have we walked away from those meetings inspired for the rest of the day? How many times have we engaged in active discourse with our peers? How many times have we said, “That was fun, I can’t wait for the next time!” I bet that you and I could count those times on one hand…together. And if you cannot, consider yourself lucky because you are not the norm.

As I’ve gotten older, I’ve become more possessive of my time. You can never, EVER get back lost time. So I have very little patience for things that do not add value to me, to my craft, to what I do with my students, or to my professional goals. I fail to see the purpose in coming together to simply be talked at. Dissemination of information does not need to be done face to face. 
I mean, we’ve spent all of this time and energy discussing ways to make learning engaging for our students. In fact, it’s an expectation in my district that the teacher is not the center of the learning process. Sure there’s a time and place for DI but that’s not what I’m talking about. In a 21st century classroom, learning is student-centered not teacher-directed. And for those of us who conduct PD, engagement is an instrumental part of the PD process otherwise all you will have are a bunch of angry teachers giving you dagger looks as you waste their time. The whole idea of bringing 21st century learning into the classroom can and should have a place in meetings. We shouldn’t simply be talked at, but rather this valuable face to face time should…no must include some of the very skills that we want our students to acquire: communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity. 
Sure communication may be in the form of talking…but productive communication is a two-way street. Why not approach these meetings with the intent that teachers will be active participants? Why not bring in topics that foster collaboration between teachers and admins? Why not take the time to introduce a topic that might elicit some type of problem-solving or maybe some type of task that involves creativity?
I don’t have my administrative credential for a reason. I like being with my students but I do consider myself a leader. In fact, I’ve served as department chair for 19 years (at two different school sites). Needless to say, I’ve conducted my share of department meetings and collaborations. But when I create the agenda, it’s done after talking with department members. I take what we’ve discussed in emails or in passing and put that on the agenda to discuss when we have a formal meeting. But the key thing is…these are mutually determined topics. Anything that is purely informational is written on the agenda and my colleagues can ask for clarification (or not). The majority of our department meetings are spent working on lesson ideas, discussing common grading practices, reviewing student data/achievement, etc. We utilize our entire 60 minute collaboration meeting time and then some. And I can honestly say that when we leave, we’re revved up, inspired, and usually still discussing topics as we walk out the door to start our day. Our meeting time is collaborative, includes a great deal of communication (sometimes it’s even a bit spirited…we’re history teachers, what can I say?) and problem-solving as we continue to develop lessons and activities that are not only rigorous but engaging for our students (and to the same extent, us). 

Can “other” meetings be run the same? I ask, “Why not?” Why can’t faculty or department chair meetings be conducted more like an opportunity for PD? There’s an increasing amount of research out there about adult learning theory which is why there is a such a huge need for personalized PD. But since there’s never enough time in the day for all of the things that we want to do…that we need to do…why not change the purpose of those meetings so that we leave feeling that our time together added value to what we do with our students (Barth, 2013)? Information can be relayed via email. It’s done all of the time. And sometimes too much with the “reply all” feature, if you know what I mean. But I digress.

I think we need to move beyond bringing people together for a sit and get…and utilize that valuable time together to help each other grow professionally (Hagan, 2014). To figure out how to solve-problems that may be plaguing our campus. To discuss ways that we can help our students attain 21st century skills. Those are all value-added options and something that would give us (the participants) a purpose. 
Here’s to purpose driven meetings.
References

Barth, R. (2013). The time is ripe (again). Educational Leadership, 71(2), 10–16.

Hagan, D. (2014). Catholic school faculty meetings: A case study linking catholic identity, school improvement, and teacher engagement. Dissertations. Paper 58.

Beyond Memorization

/ Catherine Cabiness-Atkinson, Ed.D. / 2 Comments
Teaching history is one thing…teaching students how to think is a whole other beast. Gone are the days of having students memorize names/dates and color in maps. Technology has opened the doors for teachers to change the way students learn. It starts with a mindset shift. Teachers need to understand why we need to change the way we teach but also how to best integrate technology create an authentic learning environment that is engaging and meaningful for our students.
I am lucky to have a group of teachers with whom to share my thoughts about how best to create an active learning environment for my students. Most students enter my classroom (I teach 7th grade) with the idea that they hate history. H.A.T.E. I’m not sure why or how this happened…but I have an inkling that it probably had something to do with them being forced to memorize useless information that could easily be Googled today. 
In my class do students have to remember things? Absolutely. I’m of the mindset that students cannot write or articulate their thoughts without remembering certain things. But I think that if you create a learning environment that is engaging, students will remember things. They’ll do it because it’s part of the active learning process.
Creating a classroom culture and learning environment to allow for this is not impossible. I cringe when I hear my own students talking about having to memorize passages from Shakespeare’s plays. I mean, unless they are going to become a thespian focusing on Shakespearian plays…how is that in any way adding value to their learning? 
In fact, just the other day, a colleague of mine (from a different school) told me that he heard AP US history students at his school were having to memorize the order of our presidents. Seriously? In an APUSH class? 
Why not utilize technology to make learning relevant? Why not ask students to create something that demonstrates their learning? Put the onus of learning on the student. Give them a choice in demonstrating what they have learned. But don’t make them memorize things. We’re in the 21st century and our students deserve better than that.

Time to Face the 21st Century

/ Catherine Cabiness-Atkinson, Ed.D. / Leave a comment

I have a ton of projects that I should be grading but first I have to share something frustrating? disheartening? unbelievable?…that I heard today.

At our district department chair meeting we were discussing the draft of the new history/social science framework.  Though it’s coming up for its second field review (which means nothing is finalized), we were discussing how this “new” framework would impact what we do with our students.  At first glance, most of the topics seem the same…some wording has been changed…and it looks like there’s more of a global (thematic) outlook.  All in all, it didn’t look too bad.

But a question was brought up about how much autonomy would we have with the benchmark testing.  Currently we do not administer the CST in history…only the benchmarks that were created by an outside company with no input from the teachers.  Benchmarks which sorely need to be revised.  But I digress.

The idea of the cost of revising the benchmark came up because now that our district is moving towards administering the benchmark via Illuminate, it means that we should be able to easily revise the questions because there’s no monetary cost to reprint test booklets…just the cost in man-power to revise the questions online.  We’ve been pushing for revised benchmarks for years…to no avail.

Then another department chair brought up the question about textbook adoption.  Apparently we’re slated to adopt new history/social science textbooks in two years.  Do we wait on the pilot until the “new” standards have been finalized?  Can the textbook companies align their product with the standards in time?  Everyone knows that California is very picky when it comes to textbooks.  Case in point, I have a couple of textbooks which are specifically labeled “California Edition”…

It was at this time that I decided to add my two cents.  I asked…why not just skip the textbook adoption and just use OER?  Each content area could build a site that curated primary and secondary sources…and that way we could easily revise the resources because they aren’t in print form.  I mentioned that modern US and world history textbooks cannot keep up with the changes.  If we utilize online sources, we could keep up with new information.  And save money in the process.  Maybe we could truly go 1:1 with the money we’d save by NOT purchasing textbooks.

I think that my point was well received by the department chairs.  There’s no one there who is married to our current textbooks.  In fact, most of us have supplemented (er, supplanted?) our textbook with other sources anyway.  But then one of the administrators in attendance said something to the effect, “Our district will never go away from print.” Her comment effectively shut down the conversation.

Nice.

Way to keep a closed mind.

When are we going to join the 21st century?  I certainly hope it’s before the 22nd one comes along.