#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: 

1. Every child's current level of achievement is based on their past experiences and we need to honor those experiences.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.

Botton line: put the students at the center of the learning. Listen to them. Trust them. This is how you bring positive change - NOT change for change's sake - to a school.

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.