Mindset list for new teachers

This week has included some serious house-cleaning around the department, including in my office. I threw out a bunch of old books and pamphlets, some print telephone directories, and a couple piles of composting desk-litter than I realize I will never get around to reading.

I also tossed two other old desk companions that I just never use anymore - my file of business cards and a print dictionary. Both replaced, of course, by their online cousins.

A while back I developed a "mindset list" for librarians entering the profession - suggesting some ways their jobs are different from even a few years ago. So how about one for teachers? (At least the ones in many districts.)

Teachers entering the profession in 2010

1. Have never gotten a buzz sniffing fresh mimeograph copies.
2. Have never used a paper gradebook (and have always needed passwords).
3. Have only received their school bulletin via school e-mail and have always had a school website.
4. Parents and students have always been able to Google them.
5. There has always been a Rate Your Teacher website.
6. Have always used white boards and LCD projectors, not chalk boards, overhead projectors or TVs.
7. Have always had a telephone and voice mail in their classrooms.
8. Have always been asked to be more concerned about test scores than about learning.
9. Have never "taught" students how to use a print dictionary, encyclopedia or atlas.
10. Have been portrayed by politicians and the press more as villains than as heroes.

What would you add to the list?

I look at this list and ask myself if I would choose education as a career today. The tools are fun; the kids are better than ever; education is doing a better job for more kids than ever in history; the satisfaction of teaching is still rich. But do the politics overshadow the joy? I'm really not sure if I'd steer kids toward or away from the field today if asked.

Oh, via Tim Stahmer's Assorted Stuff blog, is this great opinion letter by Michele Kerr - The Right Way to Assess Teachers' Performance.

Putting the fun in dys-fun-ctional

Can a group that doesn't have a function be dysfunctional? - the Blue Skunk

I noticed this year that the number of meetings I've been required to attend has gone down and the meetings themselves have grown shorter. The "informational" role meetings have played is being replaced by e-mail and a great deal of collaborative work is now done online. State-wide meetings are mostly held via computer, telephone or video teleconference.

A couple of groups of which I am a member seem to be struggling to find a purpose for continuing. One continues to meet primarly for the social value, I believe; the other simply from tradition. For some reason, a tremendous amount of attention has been paid in our district to groups developing "norms." A lovely buzz word - "norms." I had always considered group norms to be behaviors that developed spontaneously over time. But I guess "norms" sounds nicer than "rules," even if rules are what are actually being created.

Ironically, the less important a group's reason for being, the more stress placed on the group's process.  I don't care how many "norms" are created, unless there is a purpose for the group, its meetings are time-burners during which everyone just secretly checks their smartphones anyway.

A committee, group, task force, whatever. can have value if it provides a means for:

• serious input into planning and problem-solving efforts - real give and take
• the exchange information and points-of-view that easily get lost in translation via electronic communications - especially that which is highly value-laden
• reporting that is taken more seriously due the public nature of the reporting venue (shame-avoidance is great motivator, and thus a good reason for meetings)
• training that is complex, essential and time-critical

One important reason meetings are still held is that some members of any group would just "never get the memo" if all communication was done electronically. At a meeting one there is at least the illusion of having all members' eyes and ears. If those members attend. And they are not checking their smartphones.

So, what meetings do you attend that still have value - and why?

Close the library? Guest post by R. Cicchetti

I was just delighted to get this wonderful guest post from Robin Cicchetti from the Concord-Carlisle Regional High School Learning Commons in Concord, Massachusetts. With all the challenges library profession faces, with all the stereotypes we encounter, with all the job loses we hear about, reading about a hard won "win" like Robin's should cheer us all.

I think my new motto is: Libraries aren't going away; old school libraries are going away.

As we wind up the academic year, I've been thinking about our transition from a traditional school library to a learning commons. It became official this year, and judging by our traffic and circulation numbers, it’s been a big success.

The kind of work that students are now engaged in looks different than it did even just five years ago. Our instruction reflects this and has evolved, with lessons that now include topics such as source evaluation, advanced search skills, web-based information platforms, and fair use media. Our website has turned into a 24/7 support portal featuring tutorials and rich resources for students working out of school hours.

The things that are working:

 * rewarding collaborations with teachers for extended research activities and multi-media projects (instructional class use went up 74% over the past year!)

 * media production - through the roof

 * new informational web tools for :

      o location

      o evaluation

      o synthesis

      o presentation

  * new formats

      o eBooks

      o CD / MP3 audio books

      o web-based sources for free digital content

      o graphic novels of classics and for curriculum related topics

The things that are not working:

* lines of students waiting to get in because we are often beyond seating capacity

* requests for extended hours which we struggle to staff

* learning commons staff stretched t-h-i-n by our increased student and class use

And one thing that surprised me:

* a few teachers who prefer the traditional library model of silent, individual study

I was genuinely taken aback when someone expressed to me that there were a few faculty members who weren't pleased with the new learning commons model. Where I see engagement, creativity, differentiation, diversity, collaboration, and relevance, they see noisy students. Where I see new sources of information with text-to-speech, translation options, and ways to manipulate and understand digital content, they see students using computers instead of reading books. Where I see innovation, they see distraction. [Bold is mine - Doug]

Books are wonderful, but they aren't necessarily accessible by all learners. Common decency, and the US  Federal Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 Universal Design Law, demand accessible alternatives. While handing out a xeroxed reading packet may be a comfortable tradition, it does not allow access for all students nor does it allow them to learn the skills of navigating links to original sources, annotating for web-based collaboration, or seeking alternative perspectives. These are critical thinking skills, and it is our job is to advocate for students who are otherwise locked alone in an analog world.

During moments of self-doubt, when I wonder if perhaps we've gone too far, I look around at other programs in our state where a number of traditional libraries have been closed due to budget cuts. At the same time, many other districts, including some in highly cash-strapped towns, are protecting their learning commons. Why?

Perhaps it’s because the learning commons has taken the lead in educating not only students, but also faculties, in new informational technologies. Perhaps its because the learning commons has become a leader for incorporating special tools for students with learning disabilities. Perhaps it’s because the learning commons has become essential to the educational mission of the school.  

As I have been thinking about these things, an interesting blog post appeared in my RSS feed. In YALSA Blog: Save Libraries? Linda Braun posted her recent discussion with  YALSA Blog manager MK Eagle. They talked about the Save Libraries Campaign, advocacy, and the quandary of what to do about bad libraries. They gave voice to the unspeakable. Do all libraries deserve to be saved? What is our obligation to advocate for poor programs?

This to me highlights the perception gap between a "traditional" library and a modern learning commons. Here we have professionals in the field of librarianship talking about the difficulty of supporting library programs that fail to maintain their relevance to modern educational needs, and yet I know there are a few people in my own building who long for the days of books, hard-copy periodicals, and silent individual study.

For the next academic year, I will continue to try to improve communication with the remaining holdouts in our building. I will continue to build collaborative bridges with these colleagues who question technology and the new terrain of information literacy.

Nevertheless, I know that no matter how hard I try, I will not be able to convince everyone. I sometimes feel like a missionary who finds a few souls that do not wish to be saved. So they won’t be.

Nor will traditional school libraries. They will continue to close.

Robin Cicchetti
Concord-Carlisle Regional High School Learning Commons
Concord, MA 01742
robcicchetti@gmail.com
http://concordcarlislelibrary.blogspot.com/

Photo credit: R. Cicchetti, CCHS Learning Commons