Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Internet stunts students desire to do research?
In an interesting poll, teachers think that the internet makes finding information easier, but also creates problems with students' ability to do real research as well as discourages them from looking at other sources of information. Having taught adult learners in college for years, I tend to agree. What do you think? What can charter schools do to improve students' research skills?
Interesting proposal for teacher certification
If the American Federation of Teachers is serious about this new certification exam, it could do a lot for the teaching profession. I wonder about a couple of issue with it.
First, in light of another article on what professors can learn from preschool teachers, it's clear that teaching isn't all about knowledge or even knowing what to do. It's clear that teaching is an art and testing art is very difficult.
Second, I'd be more likely to support such an aggressive test for teacher certification if the test eliminated certain other criteria for teaching, such as specific degree requirements or increased pay for extra degrees.
Third, I wonder if the exam might need to be different for different grades. For example, going back to the preschool example, perhaps the exams or certification program might be divided between Pre-K and K, 1st through 3rd, 4th and 5th, 6th through 8th, and 9th through 12th. Those divisions are a bit arbitrary based on my experience observing schools and students, but I'm sure that at least some of the factors that make a good teacher are different at each level and kids definitely behave differently at those different age groups.
I don't think there is much of a question that teacher education schools don't always get or accept the best students. Studies on average GRE scores show that entrance requirements for teacher education programs accept well below what other disciplines require.
I wonder how such an exam might be applied retroactively and also how it might be applied to people, who decide to go into teaching later in life, may have lots of teaching experience, and have excellent knowledge either learned on the job or through other alternative means aside from a formal degree program. For example, I know many good writers who do not have English degrees. They know their grammar and their literature better than many with a bachelor's degree and a Master's in Education. Would those people be allowed to test in?
In other words, if a certification examination could both restrict who gets into the field as well as opens up who gets into the field at the same time, I'd support that in a heartbeat. My fear is that the unions somehow will use such an exam to protect its members and exclude those who don't want to be members. For example, would the union favor such a program to increase teacher quality if it meant that unions would be largely no longer necessary or not have the influence that they've had in the past? What if some legislator picks up this AFT proposal and says, "Hey, that's a great idea, let's do that and at the same time let's eliminate all of the other requirements for teachers that don't tell us if they'll be good teachers or not."
I admit that I'm cynical about the AFT, but making sure that our teachers are truly highly qualified to teach their subjects is a great goal, and I applaud the AFT for making a first step in moving that direction.
First, in light of another article on what professors can learn from preschool teachers, it's clear that teaching isn't all about knowledge or even knowing what to do. It's clear that teaching is an art and testing art is very difficult.
Second, I'd be more likely to support such an aggressive test for teacher certification if the test eliminated certain other criteria for teaching, such as specific degree requirements or increased pay for extra degrees.
Third, I wonder if the exam might need to be different for different grades. For example, going back to the preschool example, perhaps the exams or certification program might be divided between Pre-K and K, 1st through 3rd, 4th and 5th, 6th through 8th, and 9th through 12th. Those divisions are a bit arbitrary based on my experience observing schools and students, but I'm sure that at least some of the factors that make a good teacher are different at each level and kids definitely behave differently at those different age groups.
I don't think there is much of a question that teacher education schools don't always get or accept the best students. Studies on average GRE scores show that entrance requirements for teacher education programs accept well below what other disciplines require.
I wonder how such an exam might be applied retroactively and also how it might be applied to people, who decide to go into teaching later in life, may have lots of teaching experience, and have excellent knowledge either learned on the job or through other alternative means aside from a formal degree program. For example, I know many good writers who do not have English degrees. They know their grammar and their literature better than many with a bachelor's degree and a Master's in Education. Would those people be allowed to test in?
In other words, if a certification examination could both restrict who gets into the field as well as opens up who gets into the field at the same time, I'd support that in a heartbeat. My fear is that the unions somehow will use such an exam to protect its members and exclude those who don't want to be members. For example, would the union favor such a program to increase teacher quality if it meant that unions would be largely no longer necessary or not have the influence that they've had in the past? What if some legislator picks up this AFT proposal and says, "Hey, that's a great idea, let's do that and at the same time let's eliminate all of the other requirements for teachers that don't tell us if they'll be good teachers or not."
I admit that I'm cynical about the AFT, but making sure that our teachers are truly highly qualified to teach their subjects is a great goal, and I applaud the AFT for making a first step in moving that direction.
Develop your strategic plan at a record pace
Have you ever begun a strategic plan for your charter school just to bog down in the minutia or detail or simply because volunteer board members don't have the time to commit to the plan? Using a facilitator can help you facilitate the process and get the plan finished--and do it so fast that your peers will be amazed.
Not just any facilitator will do the job. Sometimes a school will get an "independent" parent to facilitate the process. The problem is that even with the best intentions, these parents are often not skilled at facilitating. They may have led meetings at work, but they do not have specific training in facilitating or they do not have expertise in strategic planning. I've even seen people who have gone through strategic planning on their jobs try to facilitate a charter school strategic planning session, but they use the same techniques that take twenty people three months to create a strategic plan at their office. That won't work for a charter school with volunteer board members and busy administrators.
So, what can a good facilitator do for you?
A good facilitator should be able to sift through the mire of ideas and conversation without letting people grand stand or let discussion go on, even after it's clear that a decision has been reached. In short, a facilitator will help you cut to the chase and get at the elements of a strategic plan quickly and without time wasting. The facilitator will keep participants on task. I can usually take a board through at least a skeleton of a strategic plan in less than a day's working session. That includes getting through the major goals and at least the high level tasks that it will take to get there.
Often an effective school can take the ball from there and finish the strategic plan within a week or two. If they do need additional facilitation, then another half day or so usually can clear things up. In other words, we can often have a complete strategic plan in a weekend. The only thing left is to tidy it up.
A strategic plan doesn't have to take months or years as I've seen some take. It is true that sometimes a school will need to do additional research into some details in order to fine tune the plan. There are times when the goals are so big that additional information is needed, but that often does not change the plan, it only clarifies the tasks or what it will take to achieve the plan.
If your school is taking forever to develop a strategic plan, hire a good facilitator. When you consider the cost of the time of the people involved and the cost to the school of running without a plan, the cost of a facilitator is well worth it.
Not just any facilitator will do the job. Sometimes a school will get an "independent" parent to facilitate the process. The problem is that even with the best intentions, these parents are often not skilled at facilitating. They may have led meetings at work, but they do not have specific training in facilitating or they do not have expertise in strategic planning. I've even seen people who have gone through strategic planning on their jobs try to facilitate a charter school strategic planning session, but they use the same techniques that take twenty people three months to create a strategic plan at their office. That won't work for a charter school with volunteer board members and busy administrators.
So, what can a good facilitator do for you?
A good facilitator should be able to sift through the mire of ideas and conversation without letting people grand stand or let discussion go on, even after it's clear that a decision has been reached. In short, a facilitator will help you cut to the chase and get at the elements of a strategic plan quickly and without time wasting. The facilitator will keep participants on task. I can usually take a board through at least a skeleton of a strategic plan in less than a day's working session. That includes getting through the major goals and at least the high level tasks that it will take to get there.
Often an effective school can take the ball from there and finish the strategic plan within a week or two. If they do need additional facilitation, then another half day or so usually can clear things up. In other words, we can often have a complete strategic plan in a weekend. The only thing left is to tidy it up.
A strategic plan doesn't have to take months or years as I've seen some take. It is true that sometimes a school will need to do additional research into some details in order to fine tune the plan. There are times when the goals are so big that additional information is needed, but that often does not change the plan, it only clarifies the tasks or what it will take to achieve the plan.
If your school is taking forever to develop a strategic plan, hire a good facilitator. When you consider the cost of the time of the people involved and the cost to the school of running without a plan, the cost of a facilitator is well worth it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)