If I liked The Innovator's Mindset before, I LOVE it now. The first three chapters are useful, reflective, and show that George Couros understands what it's like to be on the receiving end of change, not just an innovator. One of the main problems that I have with educational consultants and other people who try to push their programs on schools is that they start from a place that assumes there are major flaws in the organization and that people don't really want to change. This book doesn't assume that; in fact, it assumes the opposite. I love that. It makes me WANT to change. And, with the idea that "...innovation is not about changing everything; sometimes you only need to change one thing. That experience can lead to new and better learning opportunities" (60), it makes me hopeful that I CAN and WILL change.
One thing that really resonated with me at the beginning of this book was the idea linked to Simon Sinek's "Start with Why" idea (his TED Talk is one that I have been shown by several administrators, and it's actually pretty good). I have often said that we have complicated teaching beyond all reason, and to see this idea echoed in a book that I think is very practical and important is affirming. Couros writes that "...it scares [him] to think that we have taken the most human profession, teaching, and have reduced it to simply letters and numbers" (18). Grading, standardized tests, data meetings - these have their place, but I would argue that we have elevated them beyond that place. Instead of focusing on these things, Couros says that we need to empower our students and inspire innovation instead of demanding compliance. As Katie brought up a while ago, there is a time for learning the rules and following them (as a society, we agree to rules and consequences if those rules are broken, and they have their place in school as well), but there is also a time for making sure that learners can come up with their own paths.
I like the "learner/leader" instead of "student/teacher" dichotomy because it reminds me that teachers are also learners and students are also leaders. This is something that I will try to remember as I continue to teach. Sometimes, I need to give my students information quickly and efficiently so they can do something with that information, and I have no problems with lecturing at those times. But what this section of the book made me think about was if there are times when I can change that to let them discover the information on their own. Ideas like "...translating knowledge into action is perhaps even more important than acquiring information" (34) and "Innovation starts not by providing answers, but by asking questions" (38) make it clear that the students are missing out on crucial opportunities for learning when I am the one who is posing the questions (even if I DO have them look for answers on their own). The example of the mitosis lesson that Lisa changed in chapter three was a great example of how this can be done simply but effectively. I sometimes think that "Would I want to be a learner in this classroom?" is a difficult question for me to ask myself because I'm usually the happiest in what we would call a "traditional" classroom. I like to listen, I like to take notes, and I generally don't like to be asked to work in groups or be creative with showing my learning. But I do have to be responsive to my learners, and although I'm sure there are learners like me in my room, I am equally sure that there are learners totally unlike me who need me rethink some of my techniques.
Finally, the inclusion of empathy and reflection in this section, especially the third chapter, gave me hope and made me very happy. I think these are two essential qualities for all humans, regardless of age, career, background, etc., and the importance that is placed on them for innovation makes me think that perhaps, becoming better innovators can make us better people.
19 June 2017
#IMMOOC Episodes
Reading the introduction of The Innovator's Mindset was easy for me and, for the most part, I agreed with what George Couros had to say. Watching the #IMMOOC Season 1, Episode 1 and the #IMMOOC Season 2, Episode 1 was a different experience for me. They were longer (more than 30 minutes for both) and conversations between several people instead of just a written piece, which made it a little more difficult for me to follow. However, I found that by listening to them and doing something else at the same time, I was able to pick out what resonated with me instead of feeling like I had to listen to everything carefully and take a ton of notes. (I mean, who am I kidding, though? I still took a ton of notes). I'll separate thoughts by episodes in case you want to watch any segments on your own.
Season 1, Episode 1
Right out of the gate, I was turned off by Dave Burgess, Mr. Teach Like A Pirate, saying that we should generate "buzz" for our classes the way that PR people generate buzz for product launches. I understand what he's saying, I think - we should get kids as excited for our classes as they are for games or movies or other things - but I equated his "buzz" with "selling" school, which is something that I refuse to do. I DO want kids to be excited about their classes, which I think is the main point he's trying to make, but I think that by trying to "sell" stuff to kids, we are underestimating them. I hope that part of my job is to show students how learning itself can be fun and engaging without having to resort to too many over-the-top techniques. One of the things a professor told me when I was a preservice teacher was that at the beginning of his career, he felt like he had to put on a show - a "circus in the suburbs!" - for the kids every day. That's what I DON'T want to do. However, I could be making too much of this because later in the episode, Dave says that he doesn't try to sell books, he tries to spread the message of the books, which I totally agree with. That PR thing really gets me, as I'm sure you can tell.
Another thing that I had mixed feelings about was the use of cell phone or other personal devices in the classroom. One excellent point that was made was that we always talk about preparing kids for the "real world" in school, but we don't let them have "real world" experiences. In the real world, kids will have cell phones and iPads and everything, and they also won't have us telling them what to do every step of the way. So, I want to approximate that experience, but I also know that kids aren't always responsible with their device use even WHEN they are monitored. And I do not agree that kids will only be distracted when they are bored, and I know that kids can get distracted with pens and paper, and I get that they won't ever learn how to manage their devices and distractions if we don't give them to chance to practice. But how do I balance all of that in the classroom? When the choice is manage one more thing (a cell phone) or continue to expect them to NOT be in the classroom, right now, I choose to manage one FEWER thing and not have them. In the long run, I have no answers. Just more questions.
Some great points were made that clarified important ideas to me:
Season 2, Episode 1
I am failing again at being short. Sorry! I get excited about trying to be a better teacher...the good thing is that several ideas are repeated in this episode, so I don't have to repeat myself (and I'll try not to).
A central idea of this episode was that if kids are given the chance to take hold of their own learning, they will do it. An excellent, appropriate example of gamification was given where elementary students saw that no one in their school was recycling - they fixed it by creating a basketball hoop over the recycling bin, awarding points per item recycled, and having an overall winner of the most points at the end of the school year. I love this! It's real-world problem-solving: see an issue, figure out how to fix it, and implement a system.
Another important point was that new isn't necessarily better and that schools are creative places now - we are not in crisis mode and having to start from scratch (this is on average - I acknowledge that some schools ARE in crisis and need interventions). For example, a student can learn a lot about systems thinking from playing chess: they don't need a fancy app or expensive computer lab for that.
One of my new favorite terms is "content-agnostic." I think I'm interpreting it correctly when I say that it means the changes we make and the teaching strategies that we implement shouldn't be about the curriculum: they should be about the students, and therefore they would be applicable across classes. Again and again in these conversations, the point is made that we shouldn't teach curriculum, we should teach our students. I totally believe this. It's why I have a hard time answering the question, "What do you teach?" I always say "Seventh and eighth graders" and people want to know, "No, what subject?". Of course, I present curriculum to students, but if I'm teaching them something that is ONLY applicable in our Language Arts classroom, I think I could improve upon that teaching strategy. In other words, curriculum should inspire possibilities, not squash (very technical term) them.
I will leave you with a few thoughts about reflection. It was pointed out in this episode that teachers have time for reflection and planning (although never as much as we would like) and that students should have that time too. They need timely, specific feedback (NOT necessarily grades), and they need to have their natural curiosity encouraged. Anyone who learns anything becomes more curious; "lifelong learning" is not just a buzzphrase - it should be something we are modeling and encouraging every day. Just like shared inquiry, which I spent time exploring with my colleagues last week, in a truly reflective environment, students will never really reach an "answer" for some of these big questions if we and they are learning organically. Yes, students need to know the right answers for things like parts of speech and punctuation, but I believe we need to move away from "How can I get an A on this assignment?" to "How can I learn more about this topic?". From this conversation, I also learned that there is no such thing as a "shallow topic." Sometimes, we are reluctant to let kids do all of their work on one topic - basketball, dance, reptiles, etc. However, if they are truly interested in that topic, it becomes a wealth of possibilities for research and inquiry. And if that's what we want students to be practicing, it shouldn't matter the topic. This, and building relationships with our students, are critical pieces of the puzzle of learning.
Season 1, Episode 1
Right out of the gate, I was turned off by Dave Burgess, Mr. Teach Like A Pirate, saying that we should generate "buzz" for our classes the way that PR people generate buzz for product launches. I understand what he's saying, I think - we should get kids as excited for our classes as they are for games or movies or other things - but I equated his "buzz" with "selling" school, which is something that I refuse to do. I DO want kids to be excited about their classes, which I think is the main point he's trying to make, but I think that by trying to "sell" stuff to kids, we are underestimating them. I hope that part of my job is to show students how learning itself can be fun and engaging without having to resort to too many over-the-top techniques. One of the things a professor told me when I was a preservice teacher was that at the beginning of his career, he felt like he had to put on a show - a "circus in the suburbs!" - for the kids every day. That's what I DON'T want to do. However, I could be making too much of this because later in the episode, Dave says that he doesn't try to sell books, he tries to spread the message of the books, which I totally agree with. That PR thing really gets me, as I'm sure you can tell.
Another thing that I had mixed feelings about was the use of cell phone or other personal devices in the classroom. One excellent point that was made was that we always talk about preparing kids for the "real world" in school, but we don't let them have "real world" experiences. In the real world, kids will have cell phones and iPads and everything, and they also won't have us telling them what to do every step of the way. So, I want to approximate that experience, but I also know that kids aren't always responsible with their device use even WHEN they are monitored. And I do not agree that kids will only be distracted when they are bored, and I know that kids can get distracted with pens and paper, and I get that they won't ever learn how to manage their devices and distractions if we don't give them to chance to practice. But how do I balance all of that in the classroom? When the choice is manage one more thing (a cell phone) or continue to expect them to NOT be in the classroom, right now, I choose to manage one FEWER thing and not have them. In the long run, I have no answers. Just more questions.
Some great points were made that clarified important ideas to me:
- Every child's current level of achievement is based on their past experiences and we need to honor those experiences.
- You cannot go into an organization and immediately start changing everything. Don't try to change anything until you have a list of each person in that organization and at least one of their strengths so you can lift them up and make them better.
- When we ask, "What is best for this learner?", is it difficult NOT to move forward. Don't focus on the changes, focus on the children and what is best for them. Any changes made need to be in service to the learners.
- If we do too much, we are taking the learning away from the students. We need to be prepared, but we also need to make sure the students are doing the learning, and that means not OVER-scaffolding.
Season 2, Episode 1
I am failing again at being short. Sorry! I get excited about trying to be a better teacher...the good thing is that several ideas are repeated in this episode, so I don't have to repeat myself (and I'll try not to).
A central idea of this episode was that if kids are given the chance to take hold of their own learning, they will do it. An excellent, appropriate example of gamification was given where elementary students saw that no one in their school was recycling - they fixed it by creating a basketball hoop over the recycling bin, awarding points per item recycled, and having an overall winner of the most points at the end of the school year. I love this! It's real-world problem-solving: see an issue, figure out how to fix it, and implement a system.
Another important point was that new isn't necessarily better and that schools are creative places now - we are not in crisis mode and having to start from scratch (this is on average - I acknowledge that some schools ARE in crisis and need interventions). For example, a student can learn a lot about systems thinking from playing chess: they don't need a fancy app or expensive computer lab for that.
One of my new favorite terms is "content-agnostic." I think I'm interpreting it correctly when I say that it means the changes we make and the teaching strategies that we implement shouldn't be about the curriculum: they should be about the students, and therefore they would be applicable across classes. Again and again in these conversations, the point is made that we shouldn't teach curriculum, we should teach our students. I totally believe this. It's why I have a hard time answering the question, "What do you teach?" I always say "Seventh and eighth graders" and people want to know, "No, what subject?". Of course, I present curriculum to students, but if I'm teaching them something that is ONLY applicable in our Language Arts classroom, I think I could improve upon that teaching strategy. In other words, curriculum should inspire possibilities, not squash (very technical term) them.
I will leave you with a few thoughts about reflection. It was pointed out in this episode that teachers have time for reflection and planning (although never as much as we would like) and that students should have that time too. They need timely, specific feedback (NOT necessarily grades), and they need to have their natural curiosity encouraged. Anyone who learns anything becomes more curious; "lifelong learning" is not just a buzzphrase - it should be something we are modeling and encouraging every day. Just like shared inquiry, which I spent time exploring with my colleagues last week, in a truly reflective environment, students will never really reach an "answer" for some of these big questions if we and they are learning organically. Yes, students need to know the right answers for things like parts of speech and punctuation, but I believe we need to move away from "How can I get an A on this assignment?" to "How can I learn more about this topic?". From this conversation, I also learned that there is no such thing as a "shallow topic." Sometimes, we are reluctant to let kids do all of their work on one topic - basketball, dance, reptiles, etc. However, if they are truly interested in that topic, it becomes a wealth of possibilities for research and inquiry. And if that's what we want students to be practicing, it shouldn't matter the topic. This, and building relationships with our students, are critical pieces of the puzzle of learning.
16 June 2017
The Innovator's Mindset Introduction
One of the things that I struggle with while writing blogs is keeping the length short. When I was in grad school, I took an international education course where we did a lot of writing, and one genre was blogging. One of the key points that my teaching fellow hammered home was that blogs should be SHORT. I failed in every way at that teaching point. I'm trying to be more focused and concise, but it's actually really hard for me. I'm working on it!
After reading the introduction to The Innovator's Mindset, I was inspired to rethink how I look at teaching. I don't know that there were many concrete ideas in that section - and George Couros even said that his book was not a "how-to" playbook - but three ideas really stuck with me:
After reading the introduction to The Innovator's Mindset, I was inspired to rethink how I look at teaching. I don't know that there were many concrete ideas in that section - and George Couros even said that his book was not a "how-to" playbook - but three ideas really stuck with me:
- "If students leave school less curious than when they started, we have failed them" (4).
- "We are spending so much time telling our students about what they can't do that we have lost focus on what we can do" (7).
- The concept of the "adjacent possible" (8).
So much has been written about how students are engaged in boring, meaningless tasks in school: tasks that aren't respectful, tasks that make them less curious and more compliant. We put off questions because we have to get through curriculum, and quite frankly, many students' questions can derail a discussion in less than two seconds. I try very hard to nurture individual curiosity and encourage their autonomy in selecting topics to learn about while at the same time making sure that I can assess and understand their growth. This relates to something that was brought up in Season 2, Episode 1 of the #IMMOOC discussions: research is something that kids do naturally. A two-year-old does research to figure out the world, so why have we scaffolded and complicated the subject so much? Engage their natural curiosity and give them more autonomy in their learning, and I think we will have done our job. My cooperating teacher during my student teaching experience said that our job is to make ourselves unnecessary; in other words, students should be able to seek out learning opportunities and advocate for themselves successfully. They shouldn't need us to tell them what to do every step of the way.
The second point was not so new to me, but I was struck by the change from "they" to "we" in the sentence. This was in reference to telling kids they can't use their cell phones in class even if it's a 1:1 district with laptops, iPads, Chromebooks, etc. - I like the analogy of saying that we don't spend time telling kids to NOT stab each other with pencils when they write, but we do spend time telling kids to NOT play on their iPads in class. (Notwithstanding the fact that I actually have had to tell kids to stop stabbing each other, I think the analogy works.) I don't have anything new to say about how to manage personal devices because I'm still in the "no cell phones" camp, but maybe this will give me some new thoughts about it. WE can do a lot of great things with kids if we stop focusing on DO THIS, DON'T DO THAT, but I don't know how to switch mindsets when I have seen with my own eyes that some kids will play on their district-provided iPads in class if I don't watch them. It's a mindset shift for sure that I'm still working on.
Finally, I loved the section about the "adjacent possible" - basically the idea that the more they learn or you allow kids to do, the more they CAN do. The analogy given was if you walk into a room that has four doors, opening one door will lead to even more doors, and so on until you have a palace that has hundreds of rooms. This clearly relates to the second point, and it's one of the things that I love about teaching but that also scares me: there is so much to learn and explore that I feel overwhelmed thinking about how I can reach all my students at their individual places and nurture their individual interests and curiosity in the ways that work best for them.
I'm going to stop here and make my thoughts about the two #IMMOOC sessions a new post because I'm trying to be brief(ish)!
I'm Back!
I look at my last post from August 22, 2016, and I love that I thought I was going to be able to revisit and post throughout the school year. :) I can't believe that it's been another school year and I'm back here already. I DID implement some of the tech that I learned, some successfully and some not so much, so at least that part went according to plan.
But this summer, I'm not focusing on technology. This summer, I'm taking several classes, and they're focused on a variety of things but somehow still work together. For example, the critical reading seminar that I went to earlier this week used To Kill A Mockingbird as a mentor text for teaching annotation, and I'm also taking a "Teaching Mockingbird" course from Facing History and Ourselves (if you don't know about them, check it out!). I'm also doing an immersion French class, a course exploring George Couros' book The Innovator's Mindset, and a mindfulness class through Mindful Schools that comes in handy when balancing all of this work! I'm also teaching a "Harry Potter Adventures" class that I'm nervous about because I want it to be super fun and I'm not very creative, but I'm trying, and the internet is a great place to teach me how to grow mandrakes and make our own wands.
This is all to say that I'm back here to process the learning I'm doing. I hope you join me...and maybe this year, I'll actually continue updating.
But this summer, I'm not focusing on technology. This summer, I'm taking several classes, and they're focused on a variety of things but somehow still work together. For example, the critical reading seminar that I went to earlier this week used To Kill A Mockingbird as a mentor text for teaching annotation, and I'm also taking a "Teaching Mockingbird" course from Facing History and Ourselves (if you don't know about them, check it out!). I'm also doing an immersion French class, a course exploring George Couros' book The Innovator's Mindset, and a mindfulness class through Mindful Schools that comes in handy when balancing all of this work! I'm also teaching a "Harry Potter Adventures" class that I'm nervous about because I want it to be super fun and I'm not very creative, but I'm trying, and the internet is a great place to teach me how to grow mandrakes and make our own wands.
This is all to say that I'm back here to process the learning I'm doing. I hope you join me...and maybe this year, I'll actually continue updating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)