Monthly Archives: November 2015

Reflecting on My Journey as a Teacher

November 14, 2015a teacher's journeyjourney as a teacher, professional learning communities, teacher resilience, teacher survivalckosnik

I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:

Write a reflection paper on your experiences in a professional program (teacher education, Teaching English as a Second Language ….). Provide a very brief description of the program. Some questions to consider are: What were the strengths/weaknesses of the program? How well did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher? What were the limitations of the program? Have your views of the program changed since graduation? How could the program have been improved? Did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher (or other position)? Do NOT respond to all of these questions. Select one or two and respond to them. In the fourth class of the course, you will work in small groups and share your paper with your fellow students.

Since all of the students in the course are teachers they have a good perspective on their program. Their assignments were so stellar I felt these would be of great value to share with other teacher educators. Over the next few weeks I will be sharing these papers. I learned much and I suspect you will too. I have changed the name of the university so that no school of education is identified.

Having a 12 year old boy launch a pair of open bladed scissors towards another student across a room full of miniature sized adults during lunch is, from what I recall, the first time I asked myself, “Is this what teaching is?” If I were to promulgate the sentiment that teaching is a “wild triangle,” (McDonald, 1992) this would certainly be the case. My first year of teaching was a fantastic social experiment on survival. As in most life-or-death situations, there is a certain level of commitment to understanding what threats are imminent, as well as sourcing any and all tools to not only ensure your survival, but also your well-being. What I have since come to valorize as a teacher survival skill since the scissor attack, is the importance of staying awake and paying attention. One danger in the teaching profession thereby limiting the fecundity of opportunities, is becoming numb and indifferent once you have acclimatized to an environment; teaching the same lessons, same subject matter, with a routine schedule. Although the scissor incident posed a physical threat to students in the class, there are other aggregate elements of a different nature that can compromise learning in the classroom. The microcosmic events of the classroom I have observed over the past 12 years, have created patterns that now lead me to direct this reflection to look at broader forces at play in my journey as a teacher. Consistent with many of the articles we have read in class, I am certain that teaching is so much more than content knowledge and I want to suggest that where teacher education might improve, is in providing tools for future educators to acquire situational awareness skills. One such skill I believe is essential to successful teaching is cultivating the ability to stay awake and pay attention; to students, teacher needs and the environment.

Part of what helps us to stay awake in many situations is intrigue. Curiosity is arguably one of the strongest motivators of learning. The disconnect that can happen in the classroom for groups of students is the lack of relevance to their immediate situation. There are students who are able to direct their attention on understanding the relationship between working hard now, to have tools for future application – a behaviour that is often praised by teachers. However, for other students, extreme behaviour like the example from the previous paragraph, are often utilized for students to remain engaged. In both examples, students are simply seeking the same answer, to the same question: “Are you paying attention?” This presents a conflict for teachers, as attention from the teacher can lead to neglect of others and can be counterproductive with the agenda of the day. However, are the two interests so misaligned? Aren’t teachers there to provide support and direct their attention towards the learner? How can motives between teacher and students be realigned?

Contextualizing students can provide a powerful answer. Our stories are where we find validation and often times an explanation for behaviour that may be incongruent with who we want to be. Providing methods to assist teacher with developing this skill is critical to achieving teacher sustainability. Teachers are constantly bouncing their attention back and forth between their immediate surroundings and where to steer a class. Giving teachers access to training and tools on validating statements like, “I see you and I hear you, this is important and we will come back to it, but right now we need to move on,” allows them to prioritize where and how to give their attention. This was not a skill that was taught or even discussed in my training as a teacher. There are in some cases, school support staff or programs to assist in managing this. The relationship between the teacher and student however is paramount to any outside support that may happen, but often the reality is that teachers are not set up for this kind of relational success. It is an exhausting process for many teachers to try and meet the needs of a class. Moreover, common characteristics of teachers lead many to continue to prioritize the needs of students over their own.

Teacher care and needs are complex and dynamic. Much like situational awareness of student needs is essential to the success and longevity of a teacher, so too is the self-awareness of teachers themselves. Many of my colleagues have communicated to me in casual conversations the struggle to connect activities of day-to-day responsibilities in the classroom with the demands and expectations that stakeholders have. This can add a layer of pressure as an additional element of accountability and responsibility is applied to a teacher’s performance. Stakeholders can include, but are not limited to administrators, parents, the public and the state. However it is rare to find a teacher, regardless of experience, who can clearly articulate what exactly it is they need to meet these expectations or to excel in their role. Often times the easy answer is increased monetary access or resources. During the most recent two years at my school, I had the privilege of being one of five staff members who participated in leading the Professional Learning Community (PLC). Our administration had elected to create a more autonomous environment regarding the professional development of the staff, thereby allowing more voices into the conversation of how the PLC should run. At the end of both years, staff participated in a survey and were asked to specify which areas their PLC days should focus on. After results were tallied, groups were free to meet within their specified area of need and generate ideas of how to accomplish meeting these needs. While some groups like technology in education and staff wellness were able to establish clear targets and strategies of achievement, more than half of the staff and over six other groups were not able to clearly state what they needed and opted for ‘department time.’ How are so many of my colleagues unable to articulate this? Have we become so repetitive and comfortable in our routines that the opportunity for something to change cause fear rather than hope? How can we expect our students to create and innovate if we are not willing to do so? I believe that self-evaluation skills have become dormant in many educators – we simply cannot expect changes if we do not know what we need in order to ask for it. Becoming aware and paying attention to what is needed to perform our jobs well becomes the catalyst for turning the opinion of stakeholders to want to work with us. It also allows for earlier intervention before the temptation of repetition and comfort deceive teachers into believing that it’s too late or too hard for change.

Learning environment is something that has eased its way into my consciousness. As a young student in Ontario I theorized that Catholic schools were “nicer, because they had more money.” Later on as a young adult and teacher, I developed an understanding that schools were not learner centered or designed to inspire, but rather a product of industrialization efficiency where the idea of factory and maximized output was prioritized over lived experience. Now, as a new graduate student at OISE, the common school building represents the powerful historical colonial legacy imprinted on much of the globe during a time where dominant cultures attempted to “civilize” indigenous populations through education. Why does environment matter?

As Beck & Kosnik (2006), explore in their book “Innovations in Teacher Education,” we learn that “space is important to community,” (p.79) and that “community is not just a frill: it is fundamental to effective learning.” (p.74). Environmental space matters. There is growing literature on the value of student learning environments. A book published in 2010 by a team of architects called, “The Third Teacher,” by O’Donnell Wicklund Pigozzi and Peterson, Bruce Mau and David W. Orr, looks at the link between school environments and how children learn, as well as practical ways to implement design changes to prepare students for life in the 21^st century. But who, if anyone, is paying attention? We are able to tear down old apartments, houses and commercial spaces and within months have brand new, modern, highly functional structures that reinvent ways people move through space, yet we accept that schools built in the 1950s are sufficient for students. As a teacher my space had a profound impact on my mental state as my physical environment was isolated and disconnected from other areas of the school, becoming a contributing factor in exploring a career change.

My journey as a teacher has incorporated many moments of realization where I was not paying attention, to which there has been a price. After my sixth year of teaching, I had a strong sense that I needed to find something beyond teaching in the classroom. Dissatisfied by my experience in the classroom, I wanted to change my environment in order to evade the numbing and sleepiness that I observed happening to colleagues and students around me. Ignoring this urgent attempt to capture my attention has led to lost opportunities and questionably a loss of time. Even though I am early in my graduate studies it has already been a wonderful change, where I am constantly required to stay sharp and focused and renew my perspectives. Many colleagues of mine who have completed graduate studies and returned to the classroom consistently attest to the richness it has brought to their practice. Equipped with better tools, these educators are prepared to identify the multiple layers necessary to remain nimble and alert in the classroom. The confidence that is gained through the courage of paying attention to your situation, gives you the faith to leap from surviving to thriving.

Teacher Education through an Ethnographic Perspective

November 13, 2015classroom teachers, education, literacy, Literacy teacher educators, Teacher education, teacher educatorsenthnography, kid watching, note taking vs notemaking, observing, teacher educationDr. Cathy Miyata

A book that helped me (Cathy) process my observations more astutely is Ethnographic Eyes : A Teachers Guide to Classroom Observation, by Carolyn Frank. This book describes how a teacher educator trains her student teachers to see the classrooms they visit through an ethnographic perspective. To accomplish this, the teacher educator used the tool described below:

I used an activity called Notetaking/Notemaing to help student teachers understand the differences between their own personal perspectives and an insider, classroom perspective. Notetaking/notemaking was presented to the student teachers as an ethnographic tool to help them observe in classrooms. The student teachers were asked to keep an observation notebook and to divide their observations into two sections: Notetaking (or descriptive fieldnotes) on one side and notemaking (interpretations of what is being observed) on the other side. We then showed them either a photograph or a video of a classroom. In this way, it was hoped that the student teachers would begin to reflect on how their own personal biases interfered with an objective account or differed from the classroom members’ perspective. (p. 9)

This tool was used by this teacher educator throughout the year. She also showed her student teachers how to use it as a means of data collection towards effective assessment. At the close of the year, one of the student teachers stated, “[e]thnography has prepared me to think in a new way: a way that makes me think critically about everything that happens in my classroom.”

Try watching part of a classroom literacy event or a video of a class just to observe, then watch using notetaking/ notemaking. You may be surprised by what comes up.

Reflections on Teacher Education Bashing and What Teacher Education Taught Me

November 12, 2015Teacher educationDavid Berliner, flawed understanding of learning, Mary Kennedy., negative views of teacher education, reflecting on teacher education, teacher bashing, using analogies in teacher educationckosnik

I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:

Reflections on Teacher Education Bashing and What Teacher Education Taught Me

David Berliner’s (2000) list of a dozen criticisms levelled against teacher education struck a real nerve in me. I was not at all surprised by the volume of grievances or by the nature of their complaints: they are all “quite familiar” as Berliner himself points out. But I realized as I scanned these critiques about “Mickey Mouse” coursework and the futility of preparing people for a job that “any reasonably smart person can do” (Berliner, 2000, p. 358) that I hadn’t absorbed these assumptions from a suspicious general public. Quite the opposite, in fact, most of the people I know who aren’t teachers tell me regularly that they could never imagine being one. “I don’t know how you do it,” they often say. Instead, these critiques sounded like the grievances of my colleagues. I heard many of them before I’d even started my initial teacher training at OISE, and most often from graduates of it or a similar program. I heard them aired by a number of my fellow teachers in training, especially those who couldn’t wait to get into the “real world” of practice. I hear them even more often now in the hallways and in the staff and work rooms of the schools where I’ve taught since I graduated six years ago. Why are many of us so quick, I wonder, to throw our pre-service education under the bus?

I am just as guilty, at times, of bashing my own teacher education. Despite promoting itself as an integrated program, my Bachelor of Education at OISE at times felt like anything but. My cohort was bound more or less by common interests—I belonged to the “Global Education” cohort in the intermediate-senior panel—but my coursework, at times, felt disjointed in both content and pedagogy. While I was practicing inquiry-based learning in my social sciences methods course, for example, I was being drilled by weekly multiple-choice tests about stages of adolescent development in my psychology course. The program had something of a collective vision, to borrow Kennedy’s (2006) terms, but there appeared to be disagreement among my professors about the way to enact that vision. My practica felt even more disconnected, as though my placements had been last resorts (they were) instead of intentionally selected to meet my needs as a teacher candidate and the program’s own aims. By the end of the first week of my first practice teaching placement, my associate teacher, who was often mapping out football plays in the back of the room while “observing” my lessons, had taken to leaving shortly after the bell for a coffee run. The massive windows of that first classroom overlooked the parking lot below, and I would watch as his car pulled out of the lot and drove silently away while his twenty or so Grade 10 English students, most of them half-asleep, waited for me to do whatever it is that a teacher is meant to do.

These grievances, to be sure, weigh heavily as I reflect on my time in that program, just as the criticisms Berliner identifies carry substantial weight in conversations about what it is that teachers ought to learn and how they should learn it. However, what I find troubling about mine and others’ tendency to bash our own pre-service education is that it often rests on a flawed understanding of learning, and one that ultimately underestimates teachers’ own capacity as knowers and narrowly defines “practice” as the thing that happens between teachers and students in the classroom. If teaching does involve upwards of six distinguishable and simultaneously enacted areas of concern, as Kennedy (2006) has it, then perhaps we are asking too much of our pre-service programs. Or perhaps, since one of our profession’s hallmarks is the “abruptness with which full responsibility is assumed” (Lortie, 1975, p. 59), we are expecting too much too soon. I want to work against my own knee-jerk tendency to bash my pre-service education and do something I haven’t done as often: reflect on what it did offer me rather than what it didn’t.

First a slight detour. One of the most important lessons I learned during my undergraduate degree is that writing well involves taking risks and making mistakes. The professor who taught my fourth-year seminar in social movements explained this by way of analogy: approach writing, she told us, as though you are a potter. A potter puts a slab of clay on the potting wheel, and uses her hands to mould and remould the clay until she’s created something that satisfies her. At any time, the potter can remove the clay, roll it in her hands, and start again. A jeweller, on the other hand, who is cutting a diamond for a ring or a necklace, has only one chance to make the perfect incision or else he renders the stone worthless. Writers, she insisted, are under no such obligation: they can do as the potter does, working and reworking what they’ve written until they’re satisfied. I understood exactly what my professor was explaining—so much so that I now share this analogy regularly with my own students—but it’s only recently that I think I may have “learned” this lesson for myself. Or rather, more accurately, it’s only recently that I’ve begun learning this lesson in practice.

I share this analogy, and my “learning” of it, for two reasons. On one hand, it reminds me that learning is not a simple transaction: that we never simply or immediately “apply” what is “learned”—that learning is not about making deposits which we later cash in. I am still very much learning what I portended to have “learned” as a teacher candidate, just as I am still learning to be a potter rather than a diamond cutter. I “learned”, for example, about inquiry-based learning, about student-centred curriculum, about the importance of community and citizenship education to nurture the whole student—all the trademarks of the teacher education collective vision, really (Kennedy, 2006). But learning, for me, is not teleological—there is no fixed or obvious endpoint at which something is definitively “learned”. Standard curricula assume the opposite and posit that a clear destination is not only in sight, but that it can be reached within a bounded timeframe given the right sort of interventions. I don’t think of learning that way, and so why should I hold my pre-service training against these criteria?

The potter analogy is also instructive to me because I like to think I approach teaching in much the same way—as a process of working and reworking—and I do this because that is what I learned about teaching, in obvious and subtle ways, at OISE. My instructors here—particularly in the so-called “Mickey Mouse” methods courses—actually did what Loughran (2006) proposes: they invited us to “see into teaching” by giving us “access to the thoughts and actions that shape[d] their practice” as teacher educators (p. 5). When my social science methods instructor had us developing units of study, for example, she used an inquiry-based model that began with us musing on the purposes of social science education in the first place, and then reading the formal curriculum vis-à-vis our own images of what social science teaching and learning ought to entail. We threaded our own ways of knowing with curricular ways of knowing to develop lesson plans that resonated with and expanded our own values and experiences. Meanwhile she explained the pedagogical choices on her part—the sequencing, the purposeful arrangement of small groups, and so forth—and invited us to reflect on their efficacy for our own learning.

I wasn’t cognizant at the time of the many layers enacted in this seemingly simple task of unit planning. Or rather, although I knew my instructor had intentionally designed the experience with several layers in mind (she told us as much), it’s really only now, with a few years of being in the classroom behind me, that I’ve begun to understand how it and similar experiences prepared me for teaching in ways that I underestimated. It’s not just that my instructor “modelled” inquiry-based learning, or constructivist approaches, or whatever arm of the teacher education collective vision (Kennedy, 2006) such an exercise evokes, it’s that she positioned us, teachers-in-the-waiting, as knowers and doers. None of us had stepped into a classroom yet—we were not “practicing” in the traditional sense—but I believe, in retrospect, that we were in fact already “learning-by-doing” (Lortie, 1975). By weighing in on her decisions, by pottering with her, I feel that we were already “practicing” what teaching entails.

Kennedy (2006) is suspicious of any teacher education program that “lacks a repertoire of habits and rules of thumb” (p. 209). I could easily concur that my program left me woefully underprepared because I left with few practical ways of “doing” teaching. Sure, much of what I did “learn” was front-loaded, and perhaps necessarily so, but as Loughran (2006) suggests, it requires a different sort of energy “for students of teaching to shake themselves out of their well-established comfort zone of (perhaps passive) learning and to begin to question the taken for granted in their learning about teaching” (p. 4). I am resisting these critiques of “front-loading” and dumbed-down curricula because they posit, in the first place, that teacher education is merely preparation for practice and not a kind of practice in itself. Perhaps the greatest single strength of my pre-service education—and the rule of thumb that has sustained me in my career so far—is that it resisted this notion: it forced me to be a potter. Moulding, remoulding and shaping is what I continue to do.

References

Berliner, D.C. (2000). A personal response to those who bash teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 358-371.

Kennedy, M.M. (2006). Knowledge and vision in teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 205-211.

Lortie, D. (1975). The limits of socialization. In Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Loughran, J. (2006). Introduction: Developing a pedagogy of teacher education—What does that really mean? In Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education (1-10). New York: Routledge.

A Child Can Teach Us …

November 11, 2015learning from childrenbeing curious about life, children's resilience, happiness, learning from childrenckosnik

Testing Humour

Reflection on my Teacher Education Program in Lebanon

November 8, 2015Teacher educationbecoming a reflective practitioner, culturally relevant teacher education, Eurocentric perspective, public vs private universities, teacher education, teacher education in Lebanonckosnik

I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:

Teacher Education: A Glimpse from the Lebanese Perspective

After reading about several teacher education programs in North America I have decided to shed some light on one of Lebanon’s leading teacher education programs that of the University XXX, my Alma Matter. After graduating, I experienced first-hand that the theories we were learning at university could come alive in the classroom. I was able to rise above what Linda Darling-Hammond describes as the “apprenticeship of observation” (2006,p.35) and that the shift from the teacher-centered approach, which I was taught in at school, to the student-centered approach, that I learned about in university, was actually doable and not just a bunch of fancy theories in thick American text-books. I expended my energy building connections in the classroom as well as in the students’ brain synapses, instead of wasting that energy lecturing to a bunch of bored twelve-year-olds. The practicum was where it all came together for me. Even if it was not the major part of the program, it was the most meaningful and vital in making me the teacher that I started out as. My focus, however, will not be on my experience per se, but rather on University XXX’s teacher education program and how it is today rather than 25 years ago. This would open a window for you to look into a developing country’s perspective on the teacher education program at University XXX and show you how it aims to raise Lebanon from the ashes of its civil strife.

On the university’s website, the Department of Education describes its future graduates as those who “aspire to become agents of change in their community” and ones who “develop into reflective teachers who believe in children as critical thinkers and independent learners” . They also promise to make of them “reflective practitioners, literate in information and communication technology, and critical thinkers committed to the human and moral values of lifelong learning, integrity, innovation, civic responsibility, and leadership.” From these statements we notice that this university program focuses on the school student as well as the student-teacher and the community as a whole. Classes at the university have a lot of hands-on-experiences. Professors make sure that their students are active participants in the class instead of passive listeners to lectures. This is mainly done by having reflection groups, thinking aloud about issues encountered in the literature or in the field. Case studies are also used to dissect certain issues and find viable solutions that are practical in the classroom. However, knowing the teachable subject well is not enough if not coupled with a strong basis in pedagogical knowledge of how to teach a certain subject matter and manage a classroom and practical hands-on field experiences in actual classrooms. At university XXX a student needs around 30 courses (each is one semester, 5 months long) to graduate with a BA in Education. 7 of those are university breadth courses. 8 courses are dedicated to subject matter like Math or English or History, for example. 7 courses are core education courses such as “Educational laws, Learning and Human Development, School and the Social Order” to name a few. 1 is a seminar. Finally, 5 courses are method courses that are the bulk of the field experience. So, if we look closely, subject matter and core pedagogical courses are almost equally balanced, but field experience only makes up a quarter of the total education course load and is usually concentrated in the last year of the program. However, I think this comes late in the program and is not enough to give the prospective teachers enough hands on experience or ample confidence to manage their own class when the time comes for it.

The placement in schools is usually done with partner schools after coordination meetings between the teacher-mentor and the professor. There are also meetings with representatives of the schools to follow up on how student-teachers are performing and giving student-teachers the opportunity to correct and design exams, give mini lessons and then eventually full lessons. Student teachers must also get acquainted with all classroom practices in the hosting school. The Professor then assesses the student-teacher ‘s teaching capabilities in the school classroom only once. The teacher-mentors are paid, sign for student-teachers’ attendance at school, and send official sealed reports about the student-teachers’ performances. However, student-teachers have the right to report to the head of the practice teaching committee in case the mentor or school does not cooperate or support them. This gives both parties a sense of accountability. So, the advantages of such a program are adding professionalism to teaching, familiarizing student-teachers with teaching experience ahead of time and putting them in direct contact with students, which gives the student-teachers a chance to see in practice what they learned and to practice teaching in existing schools. However, the quality of pre-service programs depends on the quality of mentors and the follow up on student-teachers in schools. As a teacher who has mentored for that university’s students before, I don’t remember anyone from the university interviewing me to see whether I would be a good role model for the student-teacher assigned to me. Furthermore, in my opinion, for the professor to just go to the school once and grade the student-teacher is not ample for there are several variables at play in a classroom. What if the class students were tired after a long day and not responsive to the activities, or what if the student-teacher was having a bad day?

The Education department at the university is a close-knit community, especially since the department is not very large. I asked a professor there to describe the relationship between fellow colleagues in the department, and between the university and schools in the community. She said that direct colleagues meet to compare, evaluate and exchange ideas about how to ensure that students apply and use knowledge across the courses they teach. But, she says that there is a disconnection between the university and the schools. In my opinion that is due to the fact that the university is thinking about the utopian school or maybe the Eurocentric ideal school that is trying to exist in Post-colonial Lebanon. But that is not the demographic of all schools in Lebanon. For example, the University is in West Beirut and is a very expensive private university, so it caters to the elite of the community with its student-teachers graduating to teach in the most prestigious private schools. Rarely do its graduates go and teach in the public sector, so the program is not geared towards that demographic. Furthermore, Lebanon is known for being Francophone, with half of its schools teaching in French the language, the Sciences and the Math programs, with the other half of the schools teaching them in English. Only Arabic language, Social Studies (not always), and Civics are taught in Arabic. But the university does not offer French pedagogy courses for literacy, Sciences, or Math, even though its main partner school has 50% of its program in French! I wonder how effective AUB graduate teachers are when they go on to teach Math or Science in French. Wouldn’t their colleagues who did their degree in courses designed for French do a more effective job?

There are many challenges and obstacles to maintaining a high level teacher education program. It is ideal to follow up on student-teachers after they graduate to make sure that the program caters for the teachers and the community of schools; however, many politics come in the face of that. At the university they do not follow up on where their student-teachers go after graduation. They might only hear from them if they come back for recommendations. Furthermore, they can’t follow up on them without an official invitation from the schools they teach at. There must also be more rigorous conditions for students to be admitted to the university program. If they raise the standards of the student-teachers they are recruiting, then they have to worry less about maintaining quality teaching and teachers as mentioned by the Curry School study. In that regard, the university does have high standards in recruiting students. For it is still not an easy feat to get accepted into the program. A prospective student needs at least a B average to get accepted there. Furthermore, establishing a network for exchanging experiences and expertise between universities in the country is important, as well as giving more incentives for research oriented efforts in the universities to see what that demographic needs instead of getting pre-bottled programs from North America or Europe that might not always cater to the Lebanese future-teacher or schools. Furthermore, I personally think that a teacher educator who has actually taught in a school will have more to give to student-teachers for then he/she would not be preaching from an ivory tower but rather would be a fellow comrade of sorts for the student-teachers. I have a problem with the view that the “ex-school teacher” cannot un-pack the teacher educator’s role and do a good job as Dinkleman’s study, that was written about in Loughran’s book, “Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education,” states. Why can’t the ex-school teacher have “an understanding of teaching that goes beyond being a good teacher” (p.14), but the teacher educator who has never taught can? The “ex-school teacher” who is a teacher educator and the teacher educator who has never taught, both have to do their unpacking and self-study and learn how “to be able to articulate the what, how, and why of teaching and to do so through the very experiences of teaching and learning about teaching” (italics in original) (Loughran, 2006, p. 14)

In a developing country like Lebanon, its young generation is its biggest asset. Making sure they grow up learning how to become critical thinkers is the stepping stone that will make them rise from the quagmire of ignorance that is pulling them down and keeping them entrenched in a world of brainwash and civil unrest. In order to do that, qualified and enthusiastic teachers are needed. If this particular university program can fulfill its aspirations to graduate teachers who can make critical thinkers and independent learners of their students, while at the same time producing teachers who aim to change their society for the better, then it is hopeful that Lebanon will be in better hands in the future.

Works Cited

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful Teaching Education:Lessons from Exemplary Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education: Understanding Teaching and Learning about Teaching. London: Routledge.

http://www.aub.edu.lb/registrar/Documents/catalogue/undergraduate14-15/education.pdf

http://www.aub.edu.lb/fas/dep/Documents/promoting%20programs/Elementary%20TD.pdf

Treasuring Picture Books

November 6, 2015classroom teachers, education, literacy, Literacy teacher educators, Teacher education, teacher educatorschildren's literature, favourite picture books, lasting impact of illustrations, picture book tasks, power of children's literature, Remembering picture books, Sibylle von Olfers, When the Root Children Wake UpDr. Cathy Miyata

Like many literacy teacher educators, I (Cathy) sometimes tasked my student teachers with bringing in, or finding pictures of (if possible), their favourite picture book from childhood. My student teachers loved this task, and were excited when someone else brought in the same book. I often saw Mr. Muggs books; Robert Munch books (especially I Love You Forever); Amelia Badelia; Madeline, and; super hero comics! But I never saw mine.

As late as grade five, I would sneak the book home, terrified of being teased or bullied for taking it out of the library. It was a book for little children after all, but I loved it so. It was worth the risk. It was called, When the Root Children Wake Up. I have searched for a hard copy to own, but have never found one. I have discovered many newer versions (Helen Dean Fish’s, Audrey Wood’s) and as lovely as these illustrations are, they simply don’t touch me the same way.

Recently, however, I discovered my treasured version posted in the International Digital Children’s Library. ( http://www.childrenslibrary.org/ ) The author is listed as Sibylle von Olfers (1881–1916), and the text is in German. I suppose the book was originally in German. I had no idea the book was so old. The title is different than I remember, but I actually held my breath when I saw the illustrations again. Those were the pictures I held dear: so simple, so precious. I still love them.

What’s your favorite picture book form childhood?

Reflection on My Teacher Education Program

November 5, 2015assessment, classroom teachers, education, educational reform, schooling, Teacher educationbecoming a thoughtful and caring teacher, being a proactive student teacher, importance of special education courses, on-going learning, reflections on teacher educationckosnik

I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:

In June 2011, I graduated from a 2 year Teacher Education Program at the YYY University. Freshly hired by two boards, I felt both the nervous anticipation of one traversing into uncharted waters and the confidence of one for whom the world had suddenly opened. I believed I was entirely prepared. In many ways, I was as prepared as possible after two years of training; there will always be aspects of my chosen profession that can only be learned through experience (for who could ever predict all the potential dilemmas and baffling questions raised by students, colleagues, or parents over a lifetime of teaching?). As a future teacher-educator, I can reflect in retrospect on some programming changes that may have augmented the skills and knowledge I carried with me into my first year of teaching.

Designed to Meet Current Needs

I have many accolades for my two-year teacher education program. The XXX Program was well-designed, with a clear vision to produce teachers who were reflective practitioners. To accomplish this, it had a well-balanced, thoughtful curriculum which seemed to have an equal basis in academic readings, instruction in pedagogy and learning development, courses in Ontario Curriculum subject areas, and four practice teaching blocks. Professors treated student teachers with respect and showed genuine interest for our ideas and experiences. They also drew on their own examples from time in the classroom and did not seem removed from current issues in education.

Over and above our regular courses, we could attend workshops which addressed other current educational needs, such as how to teach to English Language Learners; community-building through TRIBES; and technology in-services. The program also offered the opportunity of conducting our own Master’s Research Project, without which I would not have had the confidence to consider pursuing further graduate studies.

In addition to courses in the various subject areas of the Ontario Curriculum, the XXX Program also had a phenomenal Special Education and Adaptive Instruction course that taught me concepts and strategies I use on a daily basis in my own classroom. Having talked with many colleagues who did not have any special education training in their pre-service training, I feel this was a major boon to the XXX Program. Every teacher will encounter students who learn in different ways and will need to know how to accommodate or modify as needed.

While I have no criticisms of this course, it could easily be extended to two years, to incorporate a greater understanding of the multitude of needs teachers have to support in the classroom. A longer course may also have allowed for more detailed instruction in Individual Education Plans, which all teachers will need to write and should receive training to do so (though many of my classmates and I accomplished this by taking a Special Education Part 1 Additional Qualification offered to us at the end of the program). Then as now, I was proud to be a part of a program that saw special education as an integral part of a pre-service program design. As I return to University YYY in pursuit of my doctorate, I feel discouraged to see no courses available in this important field.

Multiple Placement Opportunities

The XXX Program offered four placements to teacher candidates, which allowed me to observe and practice my burgeoning teaching skills in different settings. Perhaps naively, I hoped I would see the innovative strategies, clear assessment criteria, and classroom community-building I was reading about play out in front of me, but that was not always the case. I was very fortunate that my first Associate Teacher (AT) was exemplary. Not only was she the only AT to teach me how to do assessments, I will never forget watching her teach a lesson that did not go as expected. She turned to me and said, “ZZZ, that’s what happens when a lesson fails. It happens to everyone and it will happen to you. Sometimes, a lesson just won’t work, no matter how much you’ve prepared. Don’t take it personally; just plan it a different way tomorrow.” Of all my practicum experiences, that day had the greatest impact on me. Had she not uttered those words, I might have been afraid to plan creative lessons and to try new approaches; and any failure may have felt like a reflection on my ability. My other practice teaching blocks did not leave the same impression on me; yet I made the most of each and asked to teach up to one-hundred percent of the time, so I could try, and fail, and reflect, and try again, open to as much or as little input as my ATs were willing to give me.

Solely by chance, I was matched with one particular teacher who instilled in me such a significant lesson. While I recognize the ethical murkiness of having a mechanism for screening possible ATs, it is critical that student teachers have the chance to observe and participate in classrooms where teachers are masters of their craft. Every teacher candidate should have the opportunity to learn from an exemplary mentor (and hopefully four). Potential ATs should be screened and offered professional development in being an effective mentor (for example, debriefing with the candidate about their lesson designs and the thought process behind each pedagogical choice, of which the student teacher may be unaware). These powerful examples should show teacher candidates not only best practices but help them to envision the potential of teaching, rather than a reiteration of the rote learning they may have experienced as students going through the system. How can any new teacher feel confident to incorporate more current pedagogical concepts into their classroom without the chance to observe in practice? I consider myself lucky that I had one such placement.

An Enhanced Education

Like most things in life, the XXX Program was what one made of it. For a tenacious person like me, it met my needs beautifully. When I encountered an assignment I felt would be too similar to another, I asked the instructor if I could do it a different way (I even wrote a play exploring educational issues for a course, rather than write another reflection). When I was determined to have a placement in a classroom for children with Autism, I found the classroom and set up the placement myself, politely self-advocating with the placement coordinator. Later, I requested and received an intermediate placement, even though I was primary-junior, because one future goal was to acquire an additional qualification in that level. Throughout my time in the program, I ensured I had opportunities that were in line with my professional goals. Many of my classmates did not know they could be proactive, and went with the flow instead. They often grumbled about assignments they did not like or placements that were not what they wanted.

I wonder whether their experience would have been improved if we had had a pro-seminar course, similar to the one in the PhD program. Such a course could walk student teachers through the program itself, but it could also help students to identify their educational goals and be assertive in taking ownership for their learning; and it could shed light on the behind-the-scenes of teaching that pre-service programs do not have time to teach, such as how to manage difficult conversations with parents, principals, and colleagues. The kids are easy; for me, dealing with the politics of other adults is definitely the hardest part of teaching.

An Emphasis on Personal & Teacher Identities

Unlike other programs, the XXX Program did not gloss over the many realities of being a teacher. My classmates and I had courses where we created our resumes and practiced interview skills; we learned about educational law and the higher standard to which teachers are held (causing us all, no doubt, to secure our Facebook settings). My instructors emphasized work-life balance, and at the time, I believed I could imagine the many long hours and the sheer emotional and physical exhaustion I would later experience. Little did I know then the extent of it; two years ago I decided to adopt my dear cat Gerrie, to help me have something besides my students’ troubles to focus on when I got home! Without those words of encouragement (and reality) from my XX teacher-educators, I may have felt I was not cut out to be a teacher, on one of those difficult days (and thank goodness for Gerrie!).

For me, the XXX Program instilled in me a mindset. One of the most invaluable concepts taught was the importance of developing a teacher identity. By the end of the program, I came to envision myself as a compassionate and reflective practitioner, who believed that all students could succeed if given the chance and supports needed. As an educator today, this identity functions as my North Star, informing all my choices and interactions, to the best of my ability.

All of our courses taught the importance of community and challenged us to collaborate and share insights and strategies. My preference before the XXX Program was to work alone; today, collaboration is the key to my success with students, as I draw on the knowledge of other teachers, parents, and a multi-disciplinary team of psychologists, speech-language pathologists, and social workers, to name a few. I spend hours every week talking with my classroom partner, an incredible child and youth worker, about what worked, what failed to work, what we observed and learned about each student, and what steps to take next for each child going forward. I cannot imagine teaching any other way.

Some Concluding Thoughts

Teacher education programs provide the compass for beginning teachers. While I am satisfied with all that I learned in the XXX Program, I also recognize it is impossible to equip beginning teachers with every tool they will ever need for their journey. Teachers continually adapt to the ebb and flow as children come and go, new policies replace old, curriculum evolves, technology changes, and so on. So too, teacher education needs to reflect the current buzzwords and the shifting seas of the classroom. While teacher education programs are obliged to teach standard subjects, they also should to be flexible enough to address individual needs; teacher candidates may expect different levels of support to map out their professional goals. At present, more attention must be given to special education in teacher education, as general education teachers take on more responsibilities for exceptional students every day and often report feeling unprepared in my discussions with them. Practicum classrooms must be carefully selected to showcase best practices, in order to expose the teacher candidate to new horizons, leaving the bleak landscape of skill and drill classrooms behind them. Perhaps most importantly, teacher educators must allow students to explore and reconceptualise what it means to be a teacher and the qualities they wish to bring to this profession. Without these elements in the XXX Program, I would not have been ready to venture off into those uncharted waters in June 2011.

Your Research Summed Up with EMOJIS!?

November 3, 2015art as a form of communication, communicating ideas and research21st century communication, 21st century literacy, academic writing, communication, literacy teacher educators, mojis, pedagogy of teacher educationpoojadharamshi

Academic writing is often criticized for being unnecessarily complex and as a result inaccessible to most people. In a response to simplify academic writing, there has been a hilarious online movement to tweet your research using only emojis. I decided to try it out. Surprisingly, this task was more difficult than I expected. Below is my final result (I had to use text + emojis). Interestingly, my husband commented the emoji statement helped clarify what the heart of my research is really about. Go figure!!