Feeling a little torn between “yay” and “oh dear!” today.

Did we just belly flop in the shallow end or have we launched a 10 metre 3.9 degree of difficulty, with pike? Quality learning style that is.

Sitting here on Saturday and reflecting on the past 48 hours of Quality Teaching and Professional Learning, I have mixed feelings on the experience. It was mostly positive of course, but I also sense the lost opportunities when my employer still delivers 20th century PD almost a decade into the 21st.

The 70:20:10 rule is also still alive and well but I sense our leaders are aware of, if not yet on top of, the dilemna this causes. One of my concerns is articulated by a valuable presenter we had the pleasure to work with. Tony Ryan says;

Many annual conferences are designed predominately as an entertainment and social function. Naturally, this is an important focus for that vital time-out every year.
Unfortunately, the quality of learning that takes place is often much less effective. Delegates regularly leave the venue and remember little of the necessary information that has been shared with them.

Tony Ryan has some thought provoking ideas on future learning when he says;

who we are as educators will be more important than what we teach.”

Energisers, ethicists, entrepreneurs and environmentalists”

You’d think I’d be as happy as a pig in the proverbial having just spent 2 days here, with 500 colleagues from NCR schools, all fabulous teachers I’m sure, doing amazing stuff with students.

The venue, social do, collegial conversations and food were all first class. But I still feel flat, as if I wanted more.

The distinct lack of authentic and meaningful cross delegate connectivity, even in face to face seminars, let alone any back channel amplification of our learning was probably what disappointed me the most.

The cliques of schools and colleagues who siloed without expanding their professional learning horizons was an opportunity lost. The convenors could expedite these connections, even if it is contrived.

The chance to experience and learn from others is what excites me about conferences, not the “hired gun” keynoters or experts dished up the front. As gifted as they may be, their impact is fleeting, my 500 colleagues are here to stay and do their great stuff in regional classrooms from every Monday.

It is these people who will help me become a better teacher, not some handout or website or fantriffic kit or book for sale at key note prices. PLN growth, developing real human connections and expanding our authentic local and global networks should be seen as critical learning at such f2f conferences.

A simple 20 minute formalised meet and greet was needed. Sure it is contrived but to connect face to face with fellow emailers, twitterers,bloggers or users of web2.0 or like minded curriculum collaborators or subject specialists or uses of IWB’s or connected classrooms would have established many diverse future conversations and added to our PLN’s substantially.

If I’d stated my professional interests on the conference enrollment, connection lists could be publically viewed over coffee as a 30 minute ice breaker. I would have immediately made connections with those with similiar educational goals allowing us the time to discuss ideas during the conference. Sure I eventually spoke to others and found some likemindedness, but I’m still thinking I missed more opportunities than I found.

It would be so easy to ensure NOT one possible face to face connection was missed by posting like mindedness on a pre conference wiki. This resembles the back wards planning, one of the QTL dimensions covered.

Face to face like mindedness would be established from the conference start; email, blog, connected classroom or twitter contacts could then be shared and deeper professional networks established for future reference. It would also be less embarrassing than me walking around with a sign saying ‘I Twitter, Do you?” a la the chauffeur airport greeters.

Of course I still inefficiently sought out people I know have regional responsibilities aligned with my interests.

A senior regional director, responding to individual connection requests, acted as maitre d’ at most morning teas, introducing like minded people. It was not a good look as he sprinted from each individual introduction to the next, highly wasteful of his talents and yet it would be so easy to improve and overcome.

Don’t get me wrong, I really appreciated the connection help and received answers to now follow up on, but witnessing senior leaders being used as the proverbial blue arsed fly was not a great use of human capital. This old school networking should by now have changed. A lost opportunity.

My colleagues could also have been introduced to fabulous English, Science and LOTE teachers in our regional schools who have similar professional interests to them. Their PLN would have grown substantially. This would take 15 minutes on day one to do. Another lost opportunity.

Instead we got the traditional sardine tin approach. 500 sit down, listen to lectures compliantly, turn off phones and watch the range of key note performances from engaging, adept and amusing to boring, boastful and almost belligerant.

The excellent fonts at the front, demonstrating their own mastery of QTL, even provided mild break outs for a “2 minute speed chat” or a kinesthetic “stand up sit down” game, if we were lucky. The best of the best gifted presenters who know their stuff are still great, but it’s now NOT enough. I wanted more bang for our DET learning buck and connected learning should be delivering it by now.

Unfortunatley I saw few laptops in use, phones were verboten, switched off and disconnected so twittering was minimal at best and not mentioned, let alone encouraged. The one lonely lady capturing video, I assume to podcast later, looked mighty lost most of the time and was not the example of core powerful learning visuals should be.

The 21st Century reality, when all seminars, all keynoters, all tutorials are captured and live streamed should by now be used at Regional level of NSW DET. They should set and show the connected learning agenda for others to follow.

All participants should be encouraged to connect via the new tools of learning and back channel chat should be encouraged, not forbidden. The quality of the content should be utilised by a far larger audience than the 500 physically present.

21st century learning opportunities, such as this QTL conference, should explicity demonstrate connected learning at Regional level. The 500 teachers present should have been shown our regional priority of connected learning, in action.

This slideshare shows us the power of humans, especially slide 45.

Technology is NOT, or should not be, the principle focus of connected learning futures. In places that deeply understand the changes facing networked learning, technology does not habitate the same pedastal DET NSW elevates it to. To place connected learning under a regional ICT umbrella, does the power of future human networks a grave disservice.

Connected learning should equal integrated mandatory learning. It is not an ICT appendix that learners, leaders and others then chop out if they feel a pain or they do not engage in it themselves. Of course if the current ICT appendix turns septic and explodes in our system due to ignorance, we will all face a far more major problem.

Imagine the ripple effect that would have back in their schools?

Participative use of modern tools should be integrated at all learning levels, starting with lead learning at conferences such as these. Imagine these 500 teachers, wirelessly connected, twittering, and networking in real time with each other and their remote colleagues. Some say disruptive, I say powerful collaboration.

All 500 report back in real time on what they are being shown and taught by their own lead learners on exactly what a 21st Century networked teacher is. Don’t dare say it’s an ICT/technology responsibility for that defeats any understanding of what the future of connected learning holds.

Maybe next year our key Quality Teaching and Learning conference will be substantially different. I hope so for it is always good, it just needs to lead by example. Shanghai08 and BECTA may be two such conferences we can learn from and model on.

Hope to see you at Coffs Harbour for Regional QTL in 2010. These 25 tools might be a common language we share by then.

When is too much enough? Our place has a strong support network for kids, as most places of learning do. My query is when are too many layers, too much?

I believe we need to consolidate, align and improve the programs that have been delivering considerable benefits over the past few years.

We have refined some of these again this year and need to embedd daily practices more deeply to see if the expected improvements result. The list is extensive and reflects why we have a strong team.

• Student reflective diaries – things to do at home, daily goal setting, reflections on learning.
• Year7 teaming – cross curricula fortnightly meetings of 5 core teacher
• GATs – glympics, W.O.W, mock trial, embedded recogntion,
• Anti Bullying
• Three C’s – care, commitment, co-operation.
• College core values
• SERFF/ROAR programs – age appropriate activities, risk taking, brain food, organisation, ice breakers
• SMS – student merit scheme
• Students Take Charge – STC leadership
• a host of well directed student programs, rock n water, Shine, peer support, combined ministries 
• Bowen Therapy – physical well being relaxation
• Real Game/Be Real – careers planning
• OH&S shoes and uniform policies
• various layers of student ”monitoring”.

A personal responsibilty program has been added this year. I may have missed the announced research links but the program appears to be based on Merglers QUT 2006 PHd thesis, please correct me someone if that is wrong. Looks to be an interesting theory, I wonder how we will apply it effectively in the crowded day all our learners have?

In isolation, for a school without what we already have, I can easily comprehend why such a program could be needed. I know we already engage students with conscious reflection through our learning diaries, and so maybe this program just extends what we do further. The benefits of the applied research seem to stack up.

But despite the brief school development and training, I am still struggling to see where it fits into, NOT on top of, what we already do? Maybe it’s just me, but water cooler chat says otherwise.

Unfortunatley I sense considerable risk in not having the requisite support or deep understanding of how it integrates into our existing day to day functioning.

What level are staff expected to be functioning at, let alone the kids, if we potentially have a surplus of products, programs, posters, paper sheets that we are expected to give 100% commitment to each lesson of everyday?

Dilution is powerful science, you end up with an unsavoury product, lacking essence. Let alone the confusion. 

Sometime the addage of “doing a few things well” gets lost by striving to offer panaceas for all societal ills. I want to support anything that offers something substantially above what we currently do. I hope it does not reek slightly of applied theory = box ticking meritocracy. Runs on the improvement board take time, not the greasy pole Peter Principle.

Requests for a simple visual flow chart, aimed at an audience of learners including children, to explicitly show the links between all we do, is coming, we trust. This will help considerably in embedding exactly where this new program can best help us learn. I want it to work, well, not be another layer that may dilute past success.

1. be kept up to date
2. save time whilst looking for quality resources
3. learn from a whole world of educators, literally
4. have fun
5. be challenged in your thoughts
6. ask for help, guidance or suggestions
7. vent, rant and argue (140 limit! yee ha)
8. have interesting links delivered to you
9. break free from the educational echo chamber AND
10. find out how others teach and learn

then twitter is the application for you.

After a tentative tweeting start, I am now seeing the enormous quality and professional value of twitter.

Thanks tweetees, you know who you are, so does everyone else now!

credit: Robin Hutton

Thinking aloud about Professional development today and was wondering do we ever really get enough?

Why do I ask?

Well our employer, DET NSW, recently increased School Development Days from 3 to 5 days pa, always good to have more time to reflect, think & plan without the daily hustle and bustle.

I was interested to see this nationwide comparison across our 8 education departments, the range of PD offered had never occured to me before.

The range is 4 (Victoria) to 8 days (Tasmania) which is a 100% difference, (please correct my maths if thats wrong)

How vital do you think having 100% more time is? Does it matter? What is/could be achieved if your school PD was increased? at what cost or trade off?

These questions then got me thinking about our new 12 to 14 hours of extra school PD;

• Do you have school autonomy on PD content or are regional & systemic priorities set?
• Is PD conducted at a time of the year when the best outcomes can be achieved?
• How do larger organisations, who cant do ‘together days’ move staff forward?
• What is the style of PD delivery on offer on your days?
• Do you have personal internal choices that interest you?
• How is PD delivered to you?
• Who runs it? locals or visitors?
• Does the keynoter, if you have one, provide a lasting improvement outcome?

I am not favouring one over the other, I am just curious to learn more about PD in your place.

Should flexible/blended learning on days like these be encouraged more? Should staff take charge and ID there own needs? Could they?

I guess far more importantly how satisfied are you with current PD and how could it be improved if needed? 

Hope to hear your views.