Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Chapter 12 TPCK in in-service education Assisting experienced teacher’s “planned improvisations” Judith B. Harris

Okay, oops! I guess before I wrote my reflection on Chapter 11 I should have looked ahead to Chapter 12’s title. I wrote that I hoped that current educators and students weren’t forgotten and here we have this chapter.

In Chapter 12 the author points out the discrepancy between leaders’ vision and practioners’ actions. This is a reoccurring theme that can be found in many technology related journals. A recent article that I read in Edutopia stated that we have only been “dabbling” with technology in our schools. We really have only made a small change to do “old things in new ways.” Educators still show resistance to new technologies. Technology integration efforts are difficult to sustain, which I think is true in MSAD9. Additionally, many school systems put up resistance by blocking email access, Wikipedia, cell phones, unfiltered Internet access and more. These are issues that the author of this chapter agrees with and offers suggestions for changes in professional development.

Judith Harris reintroduces the “wicked problem” of TPCK. Not only is TPCK interdependent with the other variables previously introduced and explored throughout the book but is influenced by other factors such as culture, socioeconomic status, and organizational structure. All of these factors have to be weighed and considered as teachers plan their units of study and teaching strategies. Definitely a “wicked problem!” The additional problem of lack of time for planning and learning was also discussed. This is certainly our reality.

The author recognizes that experienced teachers need a different type of professional development than novices. She proposes that professional development be developed around activity types (structures) within and across curriculum-based disciplines. I was especially interested to see that one of her examples was Japanese Lesson Study. Before I changed position I had read about and gone to a workshop on this collaborative professional development model. The PLC work many of districts are now supporting is somewhat similar but I feel falls short of this model. Maybe it is a step in that direction. I think focusing on activity types in these collaborative groups could help teachers support one another in recognizing, discussing, and selecting TPCK activity types that would transform their instruction.

I really thought the break down of Social Studies into “knowledge-building” and “knowledge expression” activities was an interesting way to think about instructional design. Modifying this model to another curricular area and for multiple grade levels would be helpful but challenging.

The chapter ends with an equation that defines an experienced teachers’ willingness to integrate technology: utility= value/effort. The problem comes in identifying the utility. The quote on the top of page 268 sums up the problems that interfere with teachers identifying the utility of technology integration. If, as teachers, we have a tendency to hold onto the comfortable old practices we are familiar with and if we tend to change by resurfacing our practices with new approaches then deep change will surely be slow and difficult. We are, however, not alone in this. Administration often asks for us to implement changes that are not supported with focus, time, professional development or monies. Deep change needs continuous support. We can’t just plug new in for old and continue on our way. As the author states, The development of pedagogical approaches,...is an additive, recursive, and expansive process.”

No comments:

Post a Comment