Just this summer, I attended a
workshop with several other teachers from my school. It was our understanding that we would be
learning how to use a certain program within our reading instruction. Saying that we were disappointed in the
outcome of the workshop would be an understatement. The program has been in our schools and/or
system for quite some time so we were all familiar with the program, but we
wanted more ideas and suggestions for incorporating the program during our
small group instruction. Instead we were
given an EXTENSIVE background of the program and why it works. I cannot begin to tell you how many times I
heard “This is not what I thought it was going to be”.
What was the problem with the
workshop? First of all, we could all
tell from her accent, and her inability to correctly pronounce names of towns
in Alabama, that she was not from here.
There were definite cultural differences. Larson and Lockee (2014) describe culture as
“distinguished by shared language/jargon, history, traditions, and values” (pg.
60). One of the examples the presenter gave us was
a poem where we were asked to identify the people in the poem. The poem insinuated that the writer had lost
a parent, and it was up to us to decide if the parent had passed away or if they
had simply left the child—in fact, that was a large part of her discussion
prompting. Despite the Southern stereotype that we are predominately rural, we do teach in a rural county,
and many of our students have come from this type of situation where either one
or both of their parents have left or died.
As stated in the text, we typically view things using “cultural lenses”
(Larson and Lockee, 2014, pg.60), and as the South is often referred to as “the
Bible Belt”, most cultures identify Southerners as having strong core values
and moral beliefs. Several of us agreed that
this poem would not be appropriate for our students, and we would most likely
not use this example.
The next problem we had with the workshop
was that she kept splitting us up—which we HATE! I understand why presenters often split their
audience into groups. It’s the same
reason why we use this tactic with our students. We use engagement strategies in order to “involve
learners with interactive activities” (Larson and Lockee, 2014, pg. 157). For some reason this seems to be one our
least favorite things about workshops.
When we come in and find a seat, that’s where we want to stay. We do not mind presenters using strategies
such as “Think, Pair, Share” or “Reciprocal Teaching”. We like to share and discuss ideas within a
group, but not necessarily move from our seat.
I think our resistance to movement comes from the amount of stuff we
typically have with us—bulky teacher editions, supplemental books, bags, pens,
pencils, notebooks. During workshops, we
like to have our stuff spread out where we can work, and we do not like having
to move around because we either have to pack it all up and take it with us or, we have to leave it altogether for a period of time.
Watch an example of "Think, Pair, Share" in the classroom.
And last, but certainly not least, we did not receive the
information we wanted to know. Larson
and Lockee (2014) discuss analyzing content in chapter 5, and one of the
aspects of this process is to identify prerequisite knowledge and skills. Since the program was already in our schools,
we had prerequisite knowledge of the program.
The workshop was designed more for novices than for practitioners, as
the training focused on the background of the program, rather than
implementation. Although, I was able to
take away some additional strategies that I will work towards implementing in my
instruction, I would still like to have more ideas on how to implement the
program itself.
Even though we did not necessarily
like the workshop, there were some useful aspects. We were given an opportunity to share ideas
with other teachers in our county about strategies that are working in our
classrooms. We found a topic we would
like to learn more about. We were able to provide our Instructional Coaches
with additional training topics for the upcoming school year. In the end, even a “bad” workshop can have
positive outcomes.
References
Larson, M. and Lockee, B.B. (2014). Streamlined id: A practical guide to instructional design. New York: Routledge.
I can identify all too well with the kind of workshop you are talking about! It is so frustrating to think that you are going to a workshop to learn something and get there only to find out it is something totally different. That's why clear learning outcomes are so important. According to Larson and Lockee (2014) "clear outcomes not only benefit the designer, but they also support the efforts of the learners and any instructors or facilitators" (p. 116). I also teach in a rural area, so I can agree with that as well, and I hate being split up too! I do think part of it as adults is having to move all of our materials, etc. I think it was fantastic you were able to find some positives in a "bad" experience.
ReplyDelete