This 'this' was teachers sharing their action research from the year at one suburban Detroit high school (Grosse Pointe North), teachers developing and running PD for one another: teachers teaching teachers. And the thing is, we gave the 'this' a try. Every teacher in the building, and counselors and support staff, ran professional development this morning. And their peers attended. What did it look like? It looked like listening, wondering, conversation, risk-taking, laughter. It looked like a professional learning family.
It was also, however, different. We didn't bring in a keynote, or hire out consultants. We didn't go as a group to a conference. We actually created an internal mini-conference at the cost of donut holes, coffee and other snacks. We planned essentially for a year and every single attendee also was a presenter.
People have been asking, 'how did it go?' That's a bit tougher to discern than what it looked like. That's a request for a tangible result, a survey, some data. If we have a standard of achieving the correct answer and clearly indicating improved student results over the last year, I can't say. I know the classrooms will be better for it, but give me a little time to develop the assessment please! The thing is, those are old standards and we're trying to solve new problems using innovative solutions. New problems demand new assessments and ultimately new standards. The 'this' is new PD, teachers not as codifiers and transmitters of the sacred code but as creators, innovators, researchers and developers. Think about that--the teacher of today is not the one who knows the golden answer; it is the one who knows how to ask the perfect question.
I have a knew standard of rubrics I would like to introduce, though, that give some great data about today, rubrics focusing on: questioning; sharing; creativity; risk-taking; communication. If you have a chance, check out Intel's teacher tools: https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/ They're one example of the rethinking standards going on today. For instance, here's a selection from a creativity rubric:
I can explain why my project is high quality by using the language of the field to compare its features and components to exemplary products.
This one is crazier:
By immersing myself in the field in which I am creating, I have developed my own sense of what quality is in my work, and I trust it, even when others may not appreciate it.
What? Seriously? That's just short of school-room anarchy--students determining their own sense of quality, despite the possibility others may not appreciate it? When I calm down a little, and re-read the standard carefully, there's a balance of content knowledge (immersion in the field) and critical thinking (develop a sense . . . despite the opinions of others). And that seems right. Actually it seems timeless; it seems like what we've always been trying to do in education.
Haven't we always wanted to develop literate individuals with the ability to think freely, deeply? Today was the latest evolution of the movement. So, having a little time to think it over, 'this' was good. It was a very good day. On rubrics demanding creation, original thought, questioning, communication and application it was an A+. Also, like any good conference I've ever attended, as an attendee I feel challenged, excited, hopeful and joyful.
But because we also made this conference together, I feel something more than I've ever felt before from a conference. I feel like I remembered something: learning is free and sets us free. It brings and gives joy. It is always wonderful and best when shared with family.
Well done North, and thank you for a good day.
