Last ULearn thought
Met up, purely by accident, with someone who always get’s me thinking. I’m thinking now, and it kinda made me sad.
It total surprised me that they had put their hand up for attending ULearn08. Gosh, i thought, this is the stuff of ‘one small step for man, one giant leap for….”. I was excited to think of the opportunities in session for thoughtful consideration of the mirad of technological possibilites for classroom use.
I caught up with this person and I asked how the conference had been for them. The answer went something like this:
” Well, I managed to avoid all the technology stuff. I went to a few things on leadership. I took away some interesting stuff.”
I nodded politely, as you do in situations like that. But I thought, much later, how sad. What a wasted opportunity?
Knowing the person that you are referring to, and thinking about what that person has discussed with me about what they have learnt and/or shared with others I am sad also. Because this comment you have taken doesn’t accurately reflect this person or what the value of the conference was for them. I have had many conversations about the value of what was learnt or discussed at Ulearn08, including allowing the people that do have the knowledge to run with it and implement it in the classroom. This person may not have the complete picture of what technology can do in the classroom yet, but is always willing to learn and discuss new ideas as long as the focus is always on student learning. I see this in contrast with other people perhaps that talk the talk but don’t have the knowledge or the willingness to learn about the wide range of ways that technology can be used in the classroom.
TF- Thanks for putting me right on the views and position of person in question. I will bow to more current and therefore accurate assessment. It fills my heart with hope as I read your comments. I suppose, being more senior in a school you have to address each issue in light of the bigger picture. It is that, perhaps, that I have failed to acknowledge.
As you are perhaps aware, it was my wish upon wish that the focus of technology in school was to be utilised to empower students for the 21st century workplace. What is involoved in that curriculum is very difficult to define as we are constantly reminded that the workplace of the next generation is even more difficult to define.
I am of the opinion that if we are to be teachers for today then we should also be students of today, with a willingness to adopt and adapt our style and content to meet the needs of our students.
It saddens me to think that there are teachers out there who perhaps are not making the most of each opportunity for discussion on this topic.
We have a perfect opportunity for discussion and dialogue over the next 12 months as we move toward the adoption of the new curriculum in New Zealand, each of us should grasp it with both hands.
I’ve noticed the same apprehension among some of my fellow teachers in the states. I think a big part of the success of these new technologies is the training of the teachers to use them to engage students effectively. We just received several Promethean boards and I’m having a blast getting acquainted with their applications. I hear they are planning a new free software package so the future looks bright.
Greetings, Dragon.
I wish to concur with TF’s response to your original offering in this thread. Tucked within your offering were words that none too thinly conveyed a sense of professional criticism. Whilst I enjoy some of your writings, I think your comments in this instance to be unwarranted. I note your partial retraction. Sadly, I do not note an apology.
It is incumbent upon any of us to use forums such as this in as wise and constructive a manner as possible. I acknowledge that generally you do this. However, there is a growing awareness amongst educators that we must educate strongly on careful use of language in this very public arena. We do not know who reads, and we cannot control the multitude of responses that can be conveyed to different minds by the same set of words. It is as well to reflect on the danger that sometimes the person who sees most wisdom in the written word is the writer. Great care must be exercised when writing about real people – identifiable, traceable people. Already, in this instance, that identification has been made; already there is hurt.
I need not defend this person, and have not been asked to do so. I shall make a short comment though.
I shall call this person GEE (an acronym for Genuinely Experienced Educator).
I attended a particularly well presented summary of reflections and learnings from ULearn in which this GEE (offered a number of vital, well thought through points to the school staff. In particular, the GEE’s offerings on Tony Ryan and the curriculum focus on thinking were concise, accurate (I attended the same session), accessible, relevant and likely to stimulate further thinking on the topic. The presentation was done electronically: simply, but very well, displaying a confidence with the medium. Clearly there was value being returned to the school for our investment in a ULearn experience.
To return to your original comment then, the “wasted opportunity” was not that the GEE went to ULearn or that GEE chose non-technology areas to focus on. Hundreds of others did so as well, for most workshops were full and many did NOT have a focus just on “technology stuff”. I attended many such workshops. No, it is more that the “wasted opportunity” is time was not spent with GEE in genuinely exploring the valuable insights gained, insights that would have been willingly shared. Dare I suggest that your conference time might have been richer for it.
Thank you.
Thanks for your thoughtful insights RussellRP. You’re quite right. You have a habit of being so, which is why I value your opinion so highly. There are many things that I should of, would of, could of done to enrich my own conference experience. That being one of them.