Principle two is about looking for when a conversation is about to go into “silence or violence”. In the middle of the whirlwind, this is easy to do. Teachers are trying new things and still have numerous pressures around them. This work cannot seem like, “one more thing”. When it gets overwhelming, I have to be cognizant of a shift in the tone of the conversation by either of us. Over time, as we run out of “early adopters”, being aware of the tone of the conversation will be important for everyone. If we hope to move the middle, then we have to keep working together and communicating with everyone on campus.
Keeping the conversations safe is principle three. To keep it safe, I must make sure that we are working toward a mutual purpose. If they are simply wanting to put in a fun coding activity, then we are not on the same page and our work together will likely not go well. Keeping this mutual purpose in the forefront will be instrumental in keeping our conversations and work safe. This safety will become even more important as more and more of the staff start to implement these projects. When one member of an instructional team has a great experience and wants to share it with the rest of their team, not having that safe room for conversation will stop the progress in its tracks and snuff out the fire before it has a chance to take hold. Working with “my story” is the heart of the fourth principle. I cannot get caught up in making assumptions about the teachers or the students. As we work together, I have to keep communicating with the teachers to help them not get caught up in the stories as well. Most likely, the stories that will be circulating will be about time and tests. I cannot do this work all alone. As we progress, the other teachers will have to help spread the “message.” It is important for them to also be aware of their story. The fifth principle says to “STATE My Path.” It is about being open to other’s views and being confident in my views. From there, I need to encourage them to try it out. This is a point that I see could be troubling down the road. As teachers implement computational thinking projects, they have to be confident in the results they have achieved. If not, then others won’t attempt to take it on. They won’t see the value in it. For me, this is a part where the scoreboard comes in. I can’t hope they see the value. I have to make it clear for them to see and then be able to pass on that vision to others. The sixth principle requires me to be open to other’s views and not creating disagreement. A big piece of this is helping find the right places to implement computational thinking projects. I can’t go in with a blanket statement such as, “it’ll work anywhere.” This won’t lead to harmony. It actually discounts the other teacher. In addition, it doesn’t make it possible for them to help anyone else implement it. I have a lot of familiarity with this kind of work, they don’t. Helping to look for the right implementations together will better ensure that these teachers will be equipped to help someone else later. Finally, the last principle is about moving to action. I cannot just swoop in, help one teacher and then let it go. As the new teachers take on the mantle, I have to be there to encourage and listen to their struggles. As I tell my students over and over. If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. This is a long journey. It won’t be successful if I don’t work to create the culture where each person spreads the concept of assessing computational thinking to someone new and then follows up. References Patterson, K., Grenny, J., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2012). Crucial conversations: Tools for talking when stakes are high. New York: McGraw-Hill.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
About 5304This is my fifth course in the Lamar University Digital Leading and Learning program. I am now working on how to create the change in my school to facilitate the successful completion and longevity of my project. ArchivesCategories
All
|