Reflective Entry 8 - Reflecting on the Journey
(Osterman and Kottkamp, 2015, p.70)
Problem Identification
Schon’s (1983) idea that professional knowledge is grounded in professional experience (cited in Osterman and Kottkamp, 2015) has never been truer for me during this mindlab course. I started the course last year with a desire to become more confident using technology in a meaningful way. This was driven largely by the new Technology curriculum and the impact it would have on me as an educator. Using Osterman and Kottkamp’s 2015) model above the problem that started this was I was not absolutely sure that the use of technology in my classroom was meaningful to the students.
Observation and Analysis
Watching how I engaged in the mindlab process was interesting to me. There were some sessions that I thoroughly enjoyed and motivated me, such as the lesson on robotics - in particular, the Edisons. This was something that resonated with me as I could see a meaningful way that I could implement these in my year 3 class and directly related to the problem I have identified. Another aspect was the collaborative forums, attending classes, mewe and connecting with other like-minded people. The other interesting part of this was the sessions that held no interest whatsoever for me. I choose not to engage in these - they were not meaningful and this largely drove my inquiry. I could see from my own behaviours how this translated to the children in my classroom. Due to my own experiences, I also realised that sometimes information overload could have an impact on agency and made me determined not to overload my students with too much choice and too many options.
Abstract reconceptualization
Throughout this course we were presented with a vast collection of learning theories, some I was familiar with and others that were new. The ones I knew, I had used in the past to develop my teaching pedagogy and was quite comfortable with, and I admit were the ones I largely drew on. What I did realise though was my actions in the class were sometimes a contradiction of theories in actions and theories on action (Schon, 1983, cited in Osterman and Kottkamp, 2015). When I stopped and considered why, I realised that it wasn’t necessarily because I didn’t want these to align, it was more that I was allowing constraints such as time, school requirements and initiatives to dictate my actions, therefore I came to the conclusion that in order to make these two theories align I had to eliminate or at least reduce the barriers. This was then able to be translated into the action plan to move forward. An example of this in my action plan - realising that students who would benefit from making choices about their own learning, needed the big picture before they could make the choices. Previously I hadn’t shared this with them and assumed that they were not capable of making good learning choices due to their age and perceptions. How wrong I was.
Active Experimentation
This reconceptualization led to the most significant change in my practice. The children were given the big picture of their learning needs in writing and together we made this accessible to them. We co-constructed what this looked like, we created a visual pathway for them to refer to and then they were able to make choices. They felt empowered and like their opinions mattered. They participated with enthusiasm and commitment! Throughout the course, I had been involved in my own learning experience and was able to take my behaviour and attitudes and examine them. It gave me insights that I had not considered before and I was able to view the attitudes and behaviours of 8-year olds with a different lens. The Code of Standards (2017) has a value of WHAKAMANA: and this really made me question whether what I was doing was, in fact, the best that I could do. I’ve made some changes now to ensure I truly am empowering all learners to reach their highest potential through my leadership and teaching. Learning with my students, rather than doing to them is so much more empowering - both for them and for me. I’ve enjoyed working with this little group of children and watching the changes in their approach towards learning. It’s not perfect and nor was the inquiry, however the small changes that I now see in my students is enough to make me persevere and keep finding ways to give them the best possible opportunities through my own actions. I’m continuing to make trial ways of promoting agency and collaboration with the students, but now I am listening to them first to make the changes as authentic, responsive and meaningful as possible.
References:
Ministry of Education (2017). Our code, our standards. Retrieved from https://educationcouncil.org.nz/content/our-code-our-standards
Osterman, K. F., & Kottkamp, R. B. (2015). Reflective practice for educators: professional development to improve student learning.(2nd ed.) New York: Skyhorse Publishing.
Schon’s (1983) idea that professional knowledge is grounded in professional experience (cited in Osterman and Kottkamp, 2015) has never been truer for me during this mindlab course. I started the course last year with a desire to become more confident using technology in a meaningful way. This was driven largely by the new Technology curriculum and the impact it would have on me as an educator. Using Osterman and Kottkamp’s 2015) model above the problem that started this was I was not absolutely sure that the use of technology in my classroom was meaningful to the students.
Observation and Analysis
Watching how I engaged in the mindlab process was interesting to me. There were some sessions that I thoroughly enjoyed and motivated me, such as the lesson on robotics - in particular, the Edisons. This was something that resonated with me as I could see a meaningful way that I could implement these in my year 3 class and directly related to the problem I have identified. Another aspect was the collaborative forums, attending classes, mewe and connecting with other like-minded people. The other interesting part of this was the sessions that held no interest whatsoever for me. I choose not to engage in these - they were not meaningful and this largely drove my inquiry. I could see from my own behaviours how this translated to the children in my classroom. Due to my own experiences, I also realised that sometimes information overload could have an impact on agency and made me determined not to overload my students with too much choice and too many options.
Abstract reconceptualization
Throughout this course we were presented with a vast collection of learning theories, some I was familiar with and others that were new. The ones I knew, I had used in the past to develop my teaching pedagogy and was quite comfortable with, and I admit were the ones I largely drew on. What I did realise though was my actions in the class were sometimes a contradiction of theories in actions and theories on action (Schon, 1983, cited in Osterman and Kottkamp, 2015). When I stopped and considered why, I realised that it wasn’t necessarily because I didn’t want these to align, it was more that I was allowing constraints such as time, school requirements and initiatives to dictate my actions, therefore I came to the conclusion that in order to make these two theories align I had to eliminate or at least reduce the barriers. This was then able to be translated into the action plan to move forward. An example of this in my action plan - realising that students who would benefit from making choices about their own learning, needed the big picture before they could make the choices. Previously I hadn’t shared this with them and assumed that they were not capable of making good learning choices due to their age and perceptions. How wrong I was.
Active Experimentation
This reconceptualization led to the most significant change in my practice. The children were given the big picture of their learning needs in writing and together we made this accessible to them. We co-constructed what this looked like, we created a visual pathway for them to refer to and then they were able to make choices. They felt empowered and like their opinions mattered. They participated with enthusiasm and commitment! Throughout the course, I had been involved in my own learning experience and was able to take my behaviour and attitudes and examine them. It gave me insights that I had not considered before and I was able to view the attitudes and behaviours of 8-year olds with a different lens. The Code of Standards (2017) has a value of WHAKAMANA: and this really made me question whether what I was doing was, in fact, the best that I could do. I’ve made some changes now to ensure I truly am empowering all learners to reach their highest potential through my leadership and teaching. Learning with my students, rather than doing to them is so much more empowering - both for them and for me. I’ve enjoyed working with this little group of children and watching the changes in their approach towards learning. It’s not perfect and nor was the inquiry, however the small changes that I now see in my students is enough to make me persevere and keep finding ways to give them the best possible opportunities through my own actions. I’m continuing to make trial ways of promoting agency and collaboration with the students, but now I am listening to them first to make the changes as authentic, responsive and meaningful as possible.
References:
Ministry of Education (2017). Our code, our standards. Retrieved from https://educationcouncil.org.nz/content/our-code-our-standards
Osterman, K. F., & Kottkamp, R. B. (2015). Reflective practice for educators: professional development to improve student learning.(2nd ed.) New York: Skyhorse Publishing.
Comments
Post a Comment