Webinars:
I have to say that I agree with what I've been seeing in my cohort's posts - the chat feature in the webinar platform often led down unrelated or irrelevant pathways instead of deeper discussion of the issues the webinars were addressing. Also, thank goodness for teammates who can watch the chat box while you're presenting - never have I had it driven home so clearly that I am abysmal at multitasking. I have to say that the webinar was actually a pretty cool experience, but with an amount of time that short, you've really got to think about what you want to get across and make sure all of your underlying notions are expressed, which I failed at, but I've learned my lesson for next time. The webinars I watched were really informative and interesting, but I doubt I did them justice in my interactions - I have been running on empty lately. Anyhow, good job everybody!
Professional Development Readings:
I found the ideas expressed in the readings this week to be engaging and interesting. (Though the comments in Blowers & Reed about how useful it was to learn to clean a mouse took me by surprise.) The principle, however, is timeless, even if the subject matter isn't. The idea of more self-motivated professional development really appeals to me, especially the notion of tailoring your program to your specific strengths and weaknesses. I have to say, I like that idea much more than the more traditional one-size-fits-all "Who Moved My Cheese?" style PD sessions. The Fusion program described by Semadeni definitely seems more empowering and useful than traditional PD efforts, and its usefulness in community-building would undoubtedly improve a teacher's chances of improvement and increase the dialogue among education professionals.
I agree that one-size-fits all professional development is not useful in creating authentic learning experiences for professionals. I will be interested to see how libraries differentiate assessment in relation to how I saw it in the education setting.
ReplyDeleteIt occurs to me that the reason that a one-size-fits-all approach to PD exists is because it is approved by administrators and can be checked off by participants. There is so much to PD that cannot be signed off on a form. If I have a book club with a friend this summer on Atlas of New Librarianship (which I'm totally planning on doing, by the way. Let me know if you want in) that's probably more and better PD than attending a random workshop. The difference is that I can't write "read an important book to the profession" on my evaluation form. I can, however, write "attended mediocre workshop and I have the the enrollment forms to prove it."
ReplyDeleteThe challenge is that it's hard to "make" people do PD, so we end up with these one-size-fits-all approaches. Finding a way to create something that ends up being self-motivating and yet still is required is the challenge, and I think that's what the Blowers and Reed piece goes a long way toward addressing.
DeleteI totally agree with you both. Creating a productive, collaborative atmosphere within which more in-depth, individualized professional advancement can happen is a puzzle that requires an abundance of thought and dedication on the part of participants and administrators, and the one-size-fits-all approach is a simple(ish) solution to a complex problem.
Delete