Made me smile
Tag Archives: teacher education
Giving Voice to All Students: Jigsaw
In an earlier posting I (Clive) 
advocated giving students a lot of “air time” in class, and outlined several techniques for ensuring that all students are heard. I’ve just (re)discovered a further technique – “Jigsaw” – and am using it in my summer courses. I can’t believe I took so long to see its potential! 
In Jigsaw the readings for a class are assigned beforehand to different students, and when they go into small groups each has to speak to “their” reading. This reduces the reading load and gives each student a chance to speak to their item. It also decreases the likelihood of one student dominating the small group. Moreover, it takes some pressure off the teacher to expound all the readings themselves.
I used to employ Jigsaw but stopped because it seemed as if I was forcing students to read the articles; also it seemed to require having the same groups for every class, a practice I’ve moved away from.
What I do now is give every student a permanent Jigsaw number – either 1 or 2 – and assign just 2 articles for small group discussion. This means I can form new groups each class. Another advantage is that with more than one student speaking to an article, the pressure on individual students is reduced and the discussion becomes more collaborative.
As with any group work, of course, the topic has to be interesting to the students so they approach the discussion with enthusiasm rather than just going through the motions. So far, it seems to working!
Back to Values Education
W
e recently had postings from Shelley on fostering student “well-being” through “mindfulness” and Yiola on “mental health” education. Both these topics are increasingly prominent today. In Ontario character education has been stressed for several years, and currently mental health education is an MOE emphasis.
I (Clive) did my PhD in moral philosophy and researched, wrote, and 
taught in values or “way of life” education for a couple of decades. I even developed grades 1-12 learning materials in the area. But finding that teachers had very little time for separate values instruction, I broadened my work to teaching and teacher education in general – and haven’t regretted the shift.
However, it’s becoming increasingly apparent to me that teaching well requires a sound set of values and approach to life, society, and the world. Educational issues are ultimately life issues, and we can’t resolve one without the other.
Fortunately, the scope for addressing life issues in subject teaching is enormous. In literacy/literature, for example, a large proportion of the discussion and project work could be on values related matters. What is needed is for teachers and teacher educators to take up this area in a systematic way in the context of promoting subject learning, which is our main occupational mandate.
This in turn requires a much deeper understanding of the nature and importance of values, and the need to have an articulated approach to life. We’ve been used to leaving values up to philosophy and religion, or to saying (especially since the 60s) that it’s just a personal thing. But the task is extensive, fundamental, and something we must all engage in – together. Each person will have their own way of life but there are important general elements, and teachers and students should work together on both.
Maya Angelou’s Influence on Hip-Hop
Each year, Clare and I (Lydia) invite student teachers in the P/J and J/I literacy methods courses to explore the rich pedagogical possibilities available when poetry is included as an integral part of a literacy program. We consciously include the work of a variety of poets in an effort to provide student teachers with multiple entry points into the teaching of poetry. The recent passing of celebrated poet Maya Angelou brought to light once again the dynamic and influential nature of poetry. Angelou’s powerful poetry inspired a generation of Hip Hop artists who appreciated the beauty and complexity of her work. Upon hearing the news of her death, rapper-producer Q-Tip acknowledged the deep impact Angelou’s poetry had on him. In a twitter post he recalled trying to copy her voice during his early days with A Tribe Called Quest. He noted, “I tried to copy Maya’s fluid voice early on but failed miserably. But because of her I found my own… RIP Maya Angelou and thank u.”
Maya Angelou’s Legacy in Hip-Hop: www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/05/28/maya_angelou_s_legacy_in_hip_hop_poet_leaves_behind_a_history_of_appearances.html
Reflections on Collaborative Lesson Study
When in Japan last week, I (Clive) was able to gather some opinions on “Japanese lesson study,” which to a degree is being advocated in other countries as well as Japan. Briefly, it involves a teacher preparing a lesson, perhaps with help from others, teaching the lesson with colleagues looking on, and subsequently getting feedback from those present (other than the students) on the lesson and its delivery.
During a visit to an elementary school, the principal told me that those doing the teaching don’t enjoy the experience, though he is inclined to think that on balance it is useful. At a teacher education institution I learned that student teachers have to engage in lesson study as a key element in their final practicum. A teacher educator commented that the student who is “on show” typically feels under extreme pressure, is unable to sleep the night before, has to keep entirely to a script submitted beforehand, and is subjected to strong criticism afterwards by fellow student teachers, notably for diverging from the script. She clearly wasn’t keen on the process, at least as implemented in pre-service programs she is familiar with.
It seems to me that collaborative lesson development has to be handled very carefully, in Japan or anywhere else. Discussing with colleagues what and how to teach has enormous potential benefits, and many teachers in our longitudinal study are in favor of it. However, a friendly, collegial atmosphere must be established; it should be made clear that each teacher is in the end responsible for their practice; appropriate departure from what is planned should be applauded rather than condemned; and there should be no expectation that all teachers will teach the same things in the same way. This is in keeping with important general ideals of teaching such as constructivism, flexibility, individualization, and teacher professionalism.
Love that Dog: A touching book and useful pedagogical resource
In both my experience teaching pre-service literacy courses and my current research with student teachers I (Lydia) have witnessed the sense of anxiety and discomfort many student teachers voice when they are faced with the prospect of teaching poetry during their practice teaching placements. Often, their associate teachers are themselves not comfortable with poetry and therefore, they have difficulty scaffolding the teaching of poetry or providing supportive resources for student teachers. This awareness has motivated Clare and I to delve into poetry within the first few weeks of the P/J and J/I literacy courses, in an effort to ease some of the initial anxiety student teachers experience in anticipation of teaching poetry. We attempt to provide multiple entry points into the teaching of poetry by presenting student teachers with various forms of poetry, and by highlighting the creative expression and emotive potential offered by this medium. We also provide them with a number of resources and pedagogical strategies they can utilize during their practice teaching placement. I recently picked up a copy of the book Love that Dog by Sharon Creech, which I hope to use in the literacy methods courses this year because the insight provided into how students might feel about reading and writing poetry is useful for both teachers and students. Throughout the book, the main character a young boy named Jack journals back and forth with his teacher Ms. Stretchberry, cleverly expressing his initial resist and eventual connection to poetry. Jack initially pronounces, “I don’t want to because boys don’t write poetry. Girls do”; however, through his ongoing dialogue with his teacher Jack experiments with word choice, sounds, and rhythm as he is engages with various poetic formats. My favorite entry in the book is “November 22.” Hopefully the student teachers in the literacy courses this year will enjoy this touching book as much as I did.
Our Symposium: A Model for Teacher Educator and Policy Development
Our Symposium was amazing. For those who have read the blog posts
about it, I (Clare) am sure you got the sense that it was very interesting and productive. One of the words I would use to describe it is dynamic. There was such enthusiasm to discuss and grapple with the issues that we moved so beyond where we started (how to integrate digital technology into teacher education). Given that most people did not know each other, came from different countries, and had different areas of specialization (digital technology, teacher educators, teachers, policy) these differences did not divide us but they somehow brought us together to form a community. Not wanting to sound sentimental or superficial, I feel that something “magical” happened at the Symposium. The barriers melted away instantly and learning happened. Jean Murray’s “speed dating” opening activity immediately got us talking to each other. The laughter as we discovered interesting facts each other (e.g., John was fired as a gravedigger) raised the noise level to a crescendo. From there the Symposium developed into a committed group of educators focused on learning.
The two-day event was not like anything I have never experienced in my life – there was no posturing, there was careful listening, comments were relevant, questions were thoughtfully phrased, and there was commitment to something larger than individual research agendas. The interactions were respectful and genuine. I had assumed we would learn much about each other’s research and national contexts, I did not think that we would become a little community of teacher educators looking at the larger questions of education within a changing world. The level of enthusiasm was still sky high at the end of two intense days. There was no rush to leave or end the discussion.
So often in academia, department meetings are monopolized by issues such as timetabling. Conferences presentations are often more monologues that discussion. We need time to talk about the issues. The structure of the Symposium worked well – mini presentations by each person and time for large and small group discussion. This Connection Grant was not extravagant – we did it on a shoe-string budget. A number of universities contributed small amounts and we stretched our dollars. Given the money spent on university and government-based initiatives there is money for these kinds of events. Governments and universities need to spend their money thoughtfully and carefully – I would say, let’s use our Symposium as a 
model of professional development for teacher educators and for policy development – bring the researchers together, devise a format for sharing and discussion, and let them proceed. I suspect the guidelines for education that they develop will be sensible and feasible.
Securing the grant and organizing the logistics were demanding. Our challenge now is to build on what we built and experienced. It is not just that I have much to learn from the amazing colleagues at the Symposium, but I also know that we are much stronger as a group. Teacher education is under siege. Individuals cannot resolve the challenges we face in teacher education but as a group perhaps we can do “something.” There has never been greater need to work together. I feel gratified — all of the work was so worth it. Thank you to the 16 participants who made this unique experience one I will never forget. I am eager to continue our collaborations. This website and blog will provide updates on our continued work together.
Symposium: Day One Reflections
The first day of our Symposium was a smashing success! The large group discussion of “where we are” revealed the extreme pressure on teachers and teacher educators. We heard about the fast and furious rate of reform in some countries – non-stop initiatives coming from the government. These are so prolific that there are often contradictory messages (e.g., be inquiry-based but focus on skills development). The mini presentations addressed a range of issues: what happens when standards are implemented; student teacher expectations for courses versus the teacher 
educators’ goals; problems of teacher retention; the vast number of pathways into teaching creates confusion; and teacher educators having different emphases in their courses even when there is a common syllabus. A problem that arose is lack of control over the implementation of standardization. It can take a very different form from the envisaged use of the standards. The place of digital technology in literacy/English education still eludes and needs much more discussion of what to do and how to do it so that technology is used to support learning.
The discussion was rich and far-ranging. A number of participants commented that we rarely have an opportunity to discuss “big issues” in education and teacher education.
Today promises to be another day full of lively discussion.
Sharing Our Research
Today the research group will be presenting work from the project Literacy Teacher Educators: Their Backgrounds, Visions and Practices, at the Ministry of Education/Faculties of Education Forum – Research Practice: Nurturing relationships for teaching, learning and well-being. It will be an interesting and exciting day.
“What, exactly, is an Anchor Chart?”
I (Cathy) remember one of my student teachers asking me this at the beginning of the school year. So we made them in our university class: plastered the walls with chart paper summaries, reminders and tips about many different literacy events and grammars. I suspected my student teachers thought they may be mildly useful. But that attitude changed when they got into their first practicum. The student teachers not only saw their mentor teachers using them, they began to see how their students consistently accessed them. They reported to me after their practicum that anchor charts were practical. Their students used the charts to help them remember things and using them (instead of constantly asking the teacher for the answer) helped the students gain independence as learners.
During the second practicum, much to my delight, the anchor charts started to become somewhat of an art form. Justine, especially, excelled at them. “My anchor charts never looked like this!” her mentor teacher declared. I am not sure how much the students appreciated the visual dynamics, but they certainly used them. I watched them look things up on the walls that surrounded them. Useful? Yes! Visually exciting? Absolutely! How useful and interesting can you make yours?
Literacy Teaching and Teacher Education 