As Trevor and I near the finish line on our self-guided professional development resource, we felt it was necessary to take a step back and examine it from a few different perspectives before we were ready to share it with our division. It was almost like taking a trip down memory lane as many of the perspectives we utilized were taught in past units from this course. Below we've examined our project in the following ways:
|
As I continued my research on VR implementation in classrooms, I was surprised to find out that one school in our great city has actually been implementing the use of VR since 2014. At Miller Comprehensive High School, Welding Instructor Blair Bachelu utilizes a virtual welding machine in his class that allows students to gain valuable welding training and experience before physically using the tool. In the article “Get Real”, it highlights the notion that the use of virtual reality has provided more students with opportunities to get hands-on experience than in a traditional classroom. As Bachelu explains, "In a class of 20 students operating out of six welding booths, it might take several days to get around to each one". This means that instead of having to wait days to get meaningful experience, the use of VR creates far more opportunities for students to gain the necessary skills for this course, than was previously conceived. In addition to the added opportunities, Bachelu also describes the benefits of practicing in a virtual environment rather than with real tools and equipment, “It allows students to develop proper welding techniques in a controlled environment before having to deploy those skills in real life. They can 'crash the plane' so to speak, until they get it right”. While the $50,000 price tag of the equipment may not be practical for all schools, it’s hard to argue against the positive experiences as well as the skills the students are acquiring as a result of this form of technology. |
In the end, VR in it's current iteration is far more accessible and practical than it was a few years ago. The low cost of simplistic VR, such as the Google Cardboard, in combination with a plethora of free resources, make this type of technology easier than ever to introduce into classrooms. Couple this with the obvious benefits of providing students with in-class experiential learning, and it's not hard to see why school divisions like the Nova Scotia Education Department are willing to open their doors (and wallets) to this new technology.
Part One: The Interview
I’m excited to say that in the three weeks since my last update, Trevor and I have made some great progress in our Major Project. As mentioned in my previous post, we planned to create a self-guided professional development resource that new Connected Educators could utilize to ease their transition into the project. While we definitely had our own ideas about how we wanted to actualize with our vision for this resource, we thought it would also be a good idea to get some insight from the very people who are in charge of the implementation and administration of the Connected Educator Project. After contacting the Education Technology Department, Jennifer Stewart-Mitchell, who is the Technology Design & Training Coordinator, agreed to meet with us to discuss the current state of the project as well as our idea for a professional development resource. We felt that Jennifer was the perfect person to meet with as she is not only in charge of the project now, but has been involved with the it from the very beginning three years ago.
In talking with Jennifer, she confirmed what Trevor and I had assumed when we first proposed our idea- the growth of the project has created a gap in the professional development that the division is able to supply for new participants. She recalled that in the early rounds of the project, new participants were provided with multiple opportunities for training and professional development due to the fact there were less than 30 people involved in the project. However, with the number of participants for next year expected to increase to around 150, Jennifer indicated that the division would be unable to continue with the same professional development model that had been utilized for the previous three years. As a result, the Education Technology department had created a visionary committee comprised of members from each round of the Connected Educator Project to discuss the future vision for the project. When Trevor and I had asked her about our project idea, she was very receptive to it as she explained that this was something the committee had been discussing in their last meeting and were brainstorming ways to combat this issue for next year.
In our meeting, Jennifer also shared the data from a Mentimeter survey that was sent out to all current Connected Educators about the project. The survey consisted of three key questions that committee had come up with as a way to gather important feedback from all parties involved.
These questions were:
When exploring the data, it was exciting to see so many great ideas from other Connected Educators, but in particular, there were a few answers like the one below that really reinforced our own understanding of the importance of our project.
In talking with Jennifer, she confirmed what Trevor and I had assumed when we first proposed our idea- the growth of the project has created a gap in the professional development that the division is able to supply for new participants. She recalled that in the early rounds of the project, new participants were provided with multiple opportunities for training and professional development due to the fact there were less than 30 people involved in the project. However, with the number of participants for next year expected to increase to around 150, Jennifer indicated that the division would be unable to continue with the same professional development model that had been utilized for the previous three years. As a result, the Education Technology department had created a visionary committee comprised of members from each round of the Connected Educator Project to discuss the future vision for the project. When Trevor and I had asked her about our project idea, she was very receptive to it as she explained that this was something the committee had been discussing in their last meeting and were brainstorming ways to combat this issue for next year.
In our meeting, Jennifer also shared the data from a Mentimeter survey that was sent out to all current Connected Educators about the project. The survey consisted of three key questions that committee had come up with as a way to gather important feedback from all parties involved.
These questions were:
- What is your vision for the future of the Connected Educator Project?
- What should continue?
- What needs to be enriched?
When exploring the data, it was exciting to see so many great ideas from other Connected Educators, but in particular, there were a few answers like the one below that really reinforced our own understanding of the importance of our project.
After both the interview with Jennifer Stewart-Mitchell as well as investigating the data from the Connected Educator Survey, it was clear that we were definitely on the right path with the direction we chose for our major project.
Part Two: The Creation of the Resource
Initially Trevor and I had kicked around a few different ideas for what platform we felt would best suit our professional development resource. Eventually we landed on the idea of a Weebly website as we felt it would not only provide easy access for participants, but the drop down menu function would keep all our resources organized and sorted by category. While the website isn't live yet, here's a sneak peak of the design that we've been working on:
In addition to the creation of the website, we also took some time to decide on the key resources that would benefit new Connected Educators the most when they begin the project. After carefully examining each category, we decided that the tools and resources that we wanted our professional development project to include would be:
Implementation:
Are there any other resources or tools that you would recommend we include in the five categories listed above? Trevor and I would love your feedback!
Implementation:
- A guide of setting up Office 365 (both for a teacher and students).
- Setting up and effectively utilizing a Onenote Class Notebook.
- Procedures and best practice for students when transitioning to a 1:1 environment.
- Tutorials and explanations for various tools that provide ease of access for students.
- A tutorial on setting up a teacher website on Scholantis.
- An explanation and tutorial for: Go Formative, Socrative, Kahoot, Quizizz and Plickers.
- A detailed explanation and tutorial for utilizing Seesaw for digital portfolios with K-6 students.
- A detailed explanation and tutorial for utilizing My Blueprint with 7-8 students.
- A tutorial, explanation and student artifacts for Adobe Spark, Piktochart, Kidblog and Flipgrid.
- Detailed explanations and analysis' for ways to connect classrooms including: Genius Hour, Digital Book Clubs, Mystery Skype, Skype for Business Chats and Twitter Chats.
Are there any other resources or tools that you would recommend we include in the five categories listed above? Trevor and I would love your feedback!
This week’s readings provided me with the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding into how the provincial government views the issues our students are facing regarding the use of technology. While I found all three readings interesting, I was particularly engaged in the second document titled “Government of Saskatchewan: Digital Citizenship in Saskatchewan Schools”. Not only was this document written by two outstanding educators from our very own University of Regina, but it was also done so in consultation with many representatives from school divisions across the province. Maybe it’s just a personal bias, but I found it far more relevant for me as an educator than many of the documents our province has created for education - largely due to the fact that members of my profession were the ones who had a hand in creating it.
The first notion in this document that jumped out to me was the explanation of “One Life” versus the “Two Lives” approach to technology within our schools. Essentially the “Two Lives” approach views the student’s school lives and personal lives as separate entities that should not become intertwined within the classroom, especially in regards to technology. This is explained well within the document when it states:
“studying issues related to the personal, social and environmental effects of technological lifestyle have no place in school…[leaving] our children to fend for themselves as they come to grips with issues of digital citizenship, cyber safety and the responsible use of technology”
As I’m sure any educator would understand, this approach is definitely not something that is practical or responsible for us to utilize when working with our students. A major flaw in this approach is the fact that it assumes that educators would be so naïve to believe that issues facing students outside of our walls, wouldn’t find ways to manifest within our own classrooms. From my own experience, a lot of the issues that I’ve had to deal with over the years in regards to the inappropriate and irresponsible use of technology, were issues that took place at home, outside of school hours. This is also a viewpoint that is shared by the Regina Catholic School Division, as they explain on their digital citizenship page:
“For young people, [cyberbullying and marginalization] start outside of school, yet inevitably infiltrate classrooms and hallways leaving teachers, counsellors and administrators to solve new 21st century problems.”(Regina Catholic Schools –Samaritans on the Digital Road. 2017)
Thankfully, the “Two Life” approach is not one that many schools (if any) are using within their buildings, as they instead are opting for the “One Life” approach. As you can probably guess, this approach is the complete opposite to the one previously mentioned as it outlines the importance of educating and guiding our students at school as they journey into the digital frontier outside our walls. Not only is this approach instrumental in creating digitally responsible citizens, but it is something that is relatively easy to incorporate into other curricular areas. Currently in my division, these digital concepts are intertwined within our Religion curriculum and tiered for the various grade levels. On our Education Technology web page, teachers have access to various units that teach digital citizenship from a faith-based perspective. In addition to the faith-based digital citizenship resources, we also have an entire PAA Faith-based Digital Citizenship Blended Course that Grade 7 & 8 teachers have access to. This course is unique as it is a combination of online and face-to-face learning within classrooms, and also aligns with the Religion, PAA, and Ministry Continuum outcomes.
The first notion in this document that jumped out to me was the explanation of “One Life” versus the “Two Lives” approach to technology within our schools. Essentially the “Two Lives” approach views the student’s school lives and personal lives as separate entities that should not become intertwined within the classroom, especially in regards to technology. This is explained well within the document when it states:
“studying issues related to the personal, social and environmental effects of technological lifestyle have no place in school…[leaving] our children to fend for themselves as they come to grips with issues of digital citizenship, cyber safety and the responsible use of technology”
As I’m sure any educator would understand, this approach is definitely not something that is practical or responsible for us to utilize when working with our students. A major flaw in this approach is the fact that it assumes that educators would be so naïve to believe that issues facing students outside of our walls, wouldn’t find ways to manifest within our own classrooms. From my own experience, a lot of the issues that I’ve had to deal with over the years in regards to the inappropriate and irresponsible use of technology, were issues that took place at home, outside of school hours. This is also a viewpoint that is shared by the Regina Catholic School Division, as they explain on their digital citizenship page:
“For young people, [cyberbullying and marginalization] start outside of school, yet inevitably infiltrate classrooms and hallways leaving teachers, counsellors and administrators to solve new 21st century problems.”(Regina Catholic Schools –Samaritans on the Digital Road. 2017)
Thankfully, the “Two Life” approach is not one that many schools (if any) are using within their buildings, as they instead are opting for the “One Life” approach. As you can probably guess, this approach is the complete opposite to the one previously mentioned as it outlines the importance of educating and guiding our students at school as they journey into the digital frontier outside our walls. Not only is this approach instrumental in creating digitally responsible citizens, but it is something that is relatively easy to incorporate into other curricular areas. Currently in my division, these digital concepts are intertwined within our Religion curriculum and tiered for the various grade levels. On our Education Technology web page, teachers have access to various units that teach digital citizenship from a faith-based perspective. In addition to the faith-based digital citizenship resources, we also have an entire PAA Faith-based Digital Citizenship Blended Course that Grade 7 & 8 teachers have access to. This course is unique as it is a combination of online and face-to-face learning within classrooms, and also aligns with the Religion, PAA, and Ministry Continuum outcomes.
While the previous content of this post revolved around a concept that I wholeheartedly agreed with, there was also something in our readings that left me questioning its authenticity. When reading the Government of Saskatchewan: Technology in Education Framework Document, something that caught my attention was Outcome TL (DF)1: Saskatchewan’s educational system promotes the development and deepening of student and educator digital fluency. This outcome was of particular interest to me as it largely deals with how the government wants educators to increase the use of technology within their own pedagogy. When looking at this from the outside, it’s something that makes complete sense and is definitely something that I believe most educators would agree with. The issue that I have with this declaration is that in order to have educators using technology within their classrooms, they need to have access to technology. Unfortunately for school divisions across the province, providing teachers and students with technology costs money, and as of late, there seems to be a lot less of this going around the education sector. If the government really wants to see this outcome met for all students in our province, they need to stop slashing funding to education and instead provide school divisions with the means to bring this vision to life.
Last month when we were first introduced to our Major Project, it didn’t take me long to decide on a topic. As I mentioned in my previous post, I’ve been a participant of the Connected Educator Project for the past three years, which has had a great impact on my development as a teacher. When discussing this with Trevor Kerr (who also happens to be a colleague at St. Kateri), we both saw an opportunity within the current framework of the Connected Educator Project to create a resource that could help to make an already amazing project, even better. As a result, due to our shared interest and passion as Connected Educators, we have decided to work as a team for our Major Project.
The Inspiration for our Project
Since our last unit included an interview by Bart Cote, who discussed the Connected Educator Project, I won’t go into great detail about the project, but rather provide a brief history that served as the inspiration for our major project.
Over the past three years, the number of participants involved has significantly increased on yearly basis. In the beginning, the Connected Educator Project consisted of 28 educators who possessed a strong relationship with technology, and were from diverse teaching background that reflected all grade levels. In its second year, that number increased to 66 participants, with the majority still quite comfortable with technology. However, in the present year, the number grew to a staggering 130 participants, which created more diversity with regards to the overall experience and relationships with technology. With this trend in mind, it’s obvious that these numbers show no signs of slowing down anytime in the near future. This growth signals an increasing amount of educators who are becoming more comfortable incorporating technology into their own pedagogy, which is a strength for the division. However, when comparing the number of participants in the project to small size of the Education Technology Department, it became clear that there are going to be potential roadblocks, specifically in relation to training and professional development that could arise for new Connected Ed’s in the future.
In the earlier rounds of this project, new participants were provided with multiple opportunities for training and professional development to help ease their transition into becoming a Connected Educator. These full day PD opportunities provided training and opportunities for meaningful growth and collaboration with fellow Connected Educators. Unfortunately, face-to-face PD has been significantly decreased for recent participants due to ministry budget cuts and the sheer number of people in the project. In the present year, the division is only able to provide two half-day sessions throughout the year for participants who are new to the project. While this is an unfortunate situation, both Trevor and I saw an opportunity to create a resource that would help bridge the PD gap and help ease new participants into the project.
Over the past three years, the number of participants involved has significantly increased on yearly basis. In the beginning, the Connected Educator Project consisted of 28 educators who possessed a strong relationship with technology, and were from diverse teaching background that reflected all grade levels. In its second year, that number increased to 66 participants, with the majority still quite comfortable with technology. However, in the present year, the number grew to a staggering 130 participants, which created more diversity with regards to the overall experience and relationships with technology. With this trend in mind, it’s obvious that these numbers show no signs of slowing down anytime in the near future. This growth signals an increasing amount of educators who are becoming more comfortable incorporating technology into their own pedagogy, which is a strength for the division. However, when comparing the number of participants in the project to small size of the Education Technology Department, it became clear that there are going to be potential roadblocks, specifically in relation to training and professional development that could arise for new Connected Ed’s in the future.
In the earlier rounds of this project, new participants were provided with multiple opportunities for training and professional development to help ease their transition into becoming a Connected Educator. These full day PD opportunities provided training and opportunities for meaningful growth and collaboration with fellow Connected Educators. Unfortunately, face-to-face PD has been significantly decreased for recent participants due to ministry budget cuts and the sheer number of people in the project. In the present year, the division is only able to provide two half-day sessions throughout the year for participants who are new to the project. While this is an unfortunate situation, both Trevor and I saw an opportunity to create a resource that would help bridge the PD gap and help ease new participants into the project.
What is our Project?
As mentioned above, professional development and training for new connected educators has been dramatically reduced since the beginning of this project. With this in mind, Trevor Kerr and I have decided to develop a self-guided professional development resource that can be utilized by new participants of the Connected Educator Project, as well as other teachers in the division. While anyone would have access to this resource, the primary focus would revolve around the Grade 6-8 level, as this is area in which we have the most experience. This resource, or “Connected Educator 101” as we have tentatively titled it, would be broken down into five important areas to aid in the integration of these devices within a classroom setting. These areas of focus would be:
- Implementation/Set-up of the Devices,
- Assessment Tools (Formative and Summative),
- Digital Portfolio’s,
- Showcase of Student Learning
- Classroom Collaboration.
Each of these areas would include detailed explanations and instructions (both written and recorded) for the set-up and utilization of these tools. Sections detailing technological tools would also contain student work samples to give connected educators a deeper understanding of the application for each tool. The format that we’ve decided to utilize in order to deliver this content would be the creation of our own web page.
The Benefits of our Project
Due to the decrease in professional development, new participants are coming into the project with less training and limited opportunities for growth compared to previous years. In addition, with the expansion of the project, many of the new connected educators are still at the developing stage in regards to their relationship with technology. This inexperience, coupled with the expectations of the project, could create a lot of unnecessary stress for teachers at a very busy time of the year. To make matters worse, there is currently little to no resources that have been created to bridge the professional development gap left by these budget cuts. The combination of all of these aspects were the motivation behind creating an easily accessible, self-guided professional development program to help ease teachers who are new to the Connected Educator Project, as well as those who are beginning to dip their toes in the technological waters.
I found this week’s content particularly engaging, as I was able to draw on personal connections between the technological innovation within Sun West School Division as well as Regina Catholic Schools. While each division has a different approach to educational technology, it was easy to find many similarities in the positive outcomes that each initiative provides (which we will get into later). However, one underlying theme that was evident in both divisions was the focus on engagement for all parties involved, as well as the amount of trust given to teachers and students in order to make these projects successful. With this in mind, let’s take some time to examine each division’s initiatives a little deeper:
Regina Catholic Schools:
In Bart Cote’s interview, he talks at length about the Connected Educator Project within the Regina Catholic School Division. This is a project that I am very familiar with as I have been a participant since its inception three years ago. As Bart explained, this project allows teachers to create a 1:1 environment within their classrooms, which is something that has truly empowered me as an educator. This means that from the first day of school until the last, each student in my room has access to, and is responsible for their own division supplied device. Overall, this project has not only revolutionized the way my students learn, but also the ways in which they are able to demonstrate it. Each day students utilize a variety of tools meet their individual learning needs and are no longer hampered by limited access to technology within the building.
From a leadership perspective, the Connected Educator Project has been very successful due in large part to the Democratic/Participative approach that the Education Technology department has taken. Instead of viewing this as just “another way to deploy technology into schools”, the leaders understand that the teachers in the classroom, and not the technology, are the integral component to the overall success of the project. This sentiment was often echoed by our leaders in meetings, as we are consistently reminded that this project is about "more than just the devices”. In many of the PD sessions Connected Educators attend, we are provided with information that the leaders feel may feel benefit us, and we are able to take what we need and find ways to implement it uniquely within our classrooms. This might include different technological tools or apps, examining the ISTE Standards, the SAMR model, 21st Century Learning, other PD opportunities etc. Rather than instruct us on how they want us to utilize the technology, we are empowered to find our own ways to meaningfully incorporate it within our own pedagogy.
Regina Catholic Schools:
In Bart Cote’s interview, he talks at length about the Connected Educator Project within the Regina Catholic School Division. This is a project that I am very familiar with as I have been a participant since its inception three years ago. As Bart explained, this project allows teachers to create a 1:1 environment within their classrooms, which is something that has truly empowered me as an educator. This means that from the first day of school until the last, each student in my room has access to, and is responsible for their own division supplied device. Overall, this project has not only revolutionized the way my students learn, but also the ways in which they are able to demonstrate it. Each day students utilize a variety of tools meet their individual learning needs and are no longer hampered by limited access to technology within the building.
From a leadership perspective, the Connected Educator Project has been very successful due in large part to the Democratic/Participative approach that the Education Technology department has taken. Instead of viewing this as just “another way to deploy technology into schools”, the leaders understand that the teachers in the classroom, and not the technology, are the integral component to the overall success of the project. This sentiment was often echoed by our leaders in meetings, as we are consistently reminded that this project is about "more than just the devices”. In many of the PD sessions Connected Educators attend, we are provided with information that the leaders feel may feel benefit us, and we are able to take what we need and find ways to implement it uniquely within our classrooms. This might include different technological tools or apps, examining the ISTE Standards, the SAMR model, 21st Century Learning, other PD opportunities etc. Rather than instruct us on how they want us to utilize the technology, we are empowered to find our own ways to meaningfully incorporate it within our own pedagogy.
Another aspect of the Connected Educator Project that I believe reflects the Democratic/Participative style is evidenced through the many leadership opportunities available for participants within the project. As Bart mentioned, once a Connected Educator has completed their first year within the project, they become a mentor to one or two new applicants the following year. This mentorship program demonstrates the trust the department has in its educators as it delegates leadership to these individuals to help new Connected Educators adjust to the program and help make their transition as smooth as possible. There are also various opportunities for Connected Educators to voice their opinions on the project as each year, participants are encouraged to provide honest feedback with the department to help improve the project each year. In addition to these surveys, there are also “Visionary Leadership” positions that participants can apply for, which provide them with more leadership responsibility within the project and the ability to work with a committee to shape the future of the project moving forward. When looking at this project, it’s not hard to see Democratic/Participative Theory in action as these opportunities align perfectly with the definition as explained in the article from Unit Two, “They encourage creativity, and team members are often highly engaged in projects and decisions. Democratic leaders make the final decisions, but include team members in the decision-making process”
Sun West School Division
As Guy Tetrault explained in his interview, the Sun West School Division is currently employing a “Personalized Electrically Blended Learning” (PeBL) program for technological integration within their division. This innovative approach is far different from the traditional model that we’ve witnessed in schools for centuries. Instead of classroom instruction that relies solely on in-person interaction between educators and students, the “PeBL” model is a blended approach that combines personalized learning (facilitated through the use of technology) with face-to-face instruction. Like the Connected Educator Project, this model is also based on the notion of establishing leadership in others, but also recognizes that the trust between teacher and student is paramount. This idea is summarized perfectly by Sun West as they explain on their website that the “PeBL” initiative is a “learner-centred process that supports the gradual and deliberate transfer of responsibility between educator and student”.
The “PeBL” model is something that I spent some more time exploring in depth this week as “Blended Learning” is an approach that I’ve been researching and implementing over the past few years within my own classroom. In 2014 I started out my Blended Learning journey by transforming the way that I typically taught Math by "Flipping my Classroom". Essentially this means that I no longer teach the content at the front of the room, and instead my students learn online through the use of educational videos prepared by me that are housed on our Flipped Math Website. These videos, which are prerecorded, typically range anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes and are generally viewed at home. Then, the following day, what used to be viewed as “homework” is instead accomplished at school during class time with me. The major benefits of this approach is it allows for more personalized interactions with students during class time (instead of lecturing at the front of the room) and it provides students with the opportunity to work at their own pace through the content.
Another aspect of the Connected Educator Project that I believe reflects the Democratic/Participative style is evidenced through the many leadership opportunities available for participants within the project. As Bart mentioned, once a Connected Educator has completed their first year within the project, they become a mentor to one or two new applicants the following year. This mentorship program demonstrates the trust the department has in its educators as it delegates leadership to these individuals to help new Connected Educators adjust to the program and help make their transition as smooth as possible. There are also various opportunities for Connected Educators to voice their opinions on the project as each year, participants are encouraged to provide honest feedback with the department to help improve the project each year. In addition to these surveys, there are also “Visionary Leadership” positions that participants can apply for, which provide them with more leadership responsibility within the project and the ability to work with a committee to shape the future of the project moving forward. When looking at this project, it’s not hard to see Democratic/Participative Theory in action as these opportunities align perfectly with the definition as explained in the article from Unit Two, “They encourage creativity, and team members are often highly engaged in projects and decisions. Democratic leaders make the final decisions, but include team members in the decision-making process”
Sun West School Division
As Guy Tetrault explained in his interview, the Sun West School Division is currently employing a “Personalized Electrically Blended Learning” (PeBL) program for technological integration within their division. This innovative approach is far different from the traditional model that we’ve witnessed in schools for centuries. Instead of classroom instruction that relies solely on in-person interaction between educators and students, the “PeBL” model is a blended approach that combines personalized learning (facilitated through the use of technology) with face-to-face instruction. Like the Connected Educator Project, this model is also based on the notion of establishing leadership in others, but also recognizes that the trust between teacher and student is paramount. This idea is summarized perfectly by Sun West as they explain on their website that the “PeBL” initiative is a “learner-centred process that supports the gradual and deliberate transfer of responsibility between educator and student”.
The “PeBL” model is something that I spent some more time exploring in depth this week as “Blended Learning” is an approach that I’ve been researching and implementing over the past few years within my own classroom. In 2014 I started out my Blended Learning journey by transforming the way that I typically taught Math by "Flipping my Classroom". Essentially this means that I no longer teach the content at the front of the room, and instead my students learn online through the use of educational videos prepared by me that are housed on our Flipped Math Website. These videos, which are prerecorded, typically range anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes and are generally viewed at home. Then, the following day, what used to be viewed as “homework” is instead accomplished at school during class time with me. The major benefits of this approach is it allows for more personalized interactions with students during class time (instead of lecturing at the front of the room) and it provides students with the opportunity to work at their own pace through the content.
Another blended learning project that I’ve found particularly empowering for my students has been Genius Hour. In this inquiry-based learning project, students are provided with one hour a week to learn about something that they have a passion for, or want to learn more about. The learning is typically achieved through the use of a technological device to research and gather information about their topic. The major emphasis of this project is not a final product or presentation, but rather on the documentation and reflection of their learning journey throughout the duration of the project. To me, this project aligns perfectly with one of Sun West’s principles of personalized learning, which is “giving students voice and choice”.
Image One
Image One
I’ve selected Image One as I believe it relates with the goals of the Connected Educator Project, (which I also happen to be using a spring board for my major project) but more on that later! As I mentioned earlier, one message that is relayed to all participants is that the project is about more than just devices. The focus of the technology that educators are being supplied with needs to help students achieve outcomes, rather than becoming the outcome as suggested in the image. While it is certainly valuable to have students learn new programs and software, the utilization of technology needs to extend past that. As educators we should not be assessing what technology students are able to use and how proficient they are with it. Instead we should be focusing on how those tools are able to help them achieve success in within their learning.
Something else that struck me when I viewed this image was the comparisons it draws to the SAMR model that Bart Cote mentioned. When looking at the left column, many of these ideas, such as “making a prezi” or “creating wordless” are at the Substitution or Augmentation level. While there is certainly nothing wrong with engaging with technology at these levels, it’s important to understand that not all learning opportunities need to be restricted to this end of the “SAMR Swimming Pool”. As educators wade into the deep end of the swimming pool, many of the answers listed in the right column demonstrate the results that can be achieved through utilizing technology at the Modification and Redefinition levels.
As an educator with a passion for teaching with technology, I found this weeks content quite interesting, specifically the readings that dealt with the issue of student personal devices in schools. While many of the articles presented opposing viewpoints and varying solutions, one thing was abundantly clear - this issue won’t be going away any time soon. Over the past eight years, I’ve witnessed the evolution of policies regarding personal devices, and have been part of many discussions searching for effective solutions to deal with them at a school level. In staying true to the spirit of this unit, I’ve broken down the issue of BYOT within schools using the metaphor of a play.
The Issue: BYOT (Bring Your Own Technology)
In my division (Regina Catholic Schools) there is no longer a question IF student personal devices belong in schools, but instead how to ensure they are being utilized appropriately and effectively. With so many devices in our classrooms each day, the battle we face as educators is how to ensure students are using these devices responsibly and not for personal use during class time. When looking at this issue from an elementary perspective, the students involved are Grade 6-8 students as they are the only ones allowed to bring devices to school.
The Main Dramatis Personae
Students: Grade 6-8 students, provided they sign a “Personal Electronic Acceptable Agreement” form, are given the opportunity to bring their own personal devices to school. While side effects may trickle down to lower grades, the primary issues revolve around students at this grade level.
Teachers: Tasked with finding ways to effectively utilize student technology within their classrooms and ensure they are not being used inappropriately.
Administrators: Supporting teachers, and providing direction with how BYOT is utilized within their buildings
Parents: Responsible for reading and signing BYOT forms that are sent home and supporting teachers if issues arise.
Teachers: Tasked with finding ways to effectively utilize student technology within their classrooms and ensure they are not being used inappropriately.
Administrators: Supporting teachers, and providing direction with how BYOT is utilized within their buildings
Parents: Responsible for reading and signing BYOT forms that are sent home and supporting teachers if issues arise.
Props
The specific types of personal electronic devices allowed are typically decided by administration, but often include: phones, ipods, tablets and laptops
Scene
Personal devices could be found anywhere within the school setting. Some examples are classrooms, hallways, lunchrooms, playgrounds etc.
Conflict
The main conflict that arises as a result of BYOT in schools is ensuring students are using their personal devices to supplement their education and not for personal use. A common side effect that takes place in schools is the use of social media, specifically apps like Snapchat and Instragram. These can be a major conflicts, as students have capability to take photos and post them to their social media, both with and without the consent of other students. Not only is this a privacy concern for the school, but can also lead to other issues such as cyber-bullying. Another common side effect of BYOT is the use of texting in class. This modern day version of “note passing” can be a major issue and distraction for students.
The Plot Twist: Turning Conflicts into Successes
As mentioned earlier, the adoption of BYOT into schools is something I’ve experienced from the beginning of my teaching career, and as a result I’ve learned what does and doesn’t work to combat this issue effectively. Below are a few of the insights I’ve gained while embracing student devices in the classroom:
1. Education.
As mentioned in many of the articles this week, a common reaction to combat inappropriate use of student devices is to simply ban them from school. This was something that was debated at many of the meetings I’ve attended and was thankfully never agreed upon. Simply banning devices is a short-sighted and reactive plan that ignores the most powerful tool we have - education. Instead of making their devices a taboo topic, we can use education and digital citizenship to teach them how to use them appropriately and responsibly. Through meaningful lessons and concepts that are reinforced throughout the year, we can turn our students into digitally literate citizens to help eliminate issues before they happen.
2. Clear Routines and Procedures.
It is incredibly important to establish clear routines and procedures for the use of personal devices within the school. Taking the time to write these out, send them home and go through them with the students, ensures everyone is on the same page. It’s also very important that educators take the to review these as needed throughout the year. In my experience, some of the most common procedures revolve around when students are allowed to use their personal devices, and when they need to be put way. An example in many classrooms is the use of a double sided image of a device, one with a regular side, and one with an “X” over it. This is typically placed on the whiteboard and when the image displays the regular side, students know they are able to use their personal device. Consequently, when the “X” is facing students, they understand that their personal devices should not be out.
As mentioned in many of the articles this week, a common reaction to combat inappropriate use of student devices is to simply ban them from school. This was something that was debated at many of the meetings I’ve attended and was thankfully never agreed upon. Simply banning devices is a short-sighted and reactive plan that ignores the most powerful tool we have - education. Instead of making their devices a taboo topic, we can use education and digital citizenship to teach them how to use them appropriately and responsibly. Through meaningful lessons and concepts that are reinforced throughout the year, we can turn our students into digitally literate citizens to help eliminate issues before they happen.
2. Clear Routines and Procedures.
It is incredibly important to establish clear routines and procedures for the use of personal devices within the school. Taking the time to write these out, send them home and go through them with the students, ensures everyone is on the same page. It’s also very important that educators take the to review these as needed throughout the year. In my experience, some of the most common procedures revolve around when students are allowed to use their personal devices, and when they need to be put way. An example in many classrooms is the use of a double sided image of a device, one with a regular side, and one with an “X” over it. This is typically placed on the whiteboard and when the image displays the regular side, students know they are able to use their personal device. Consequently, when the “X” is facing students, they understand that their personal devices should not be out.
3. Providing Students with Specific Opportunities for Personal Use
Even the most responsible students will be still be tempted to use their devices to check messages, snapchat or scroll through their Instagram account throughout the day. Heck, find me a teacher who’s never used their phone for personal reasons while they’re at work and I’d be amazed. Instead of tirelessly attempting to police this issue, providing students (who have earned the privilege) with opportunities for use, may be a more effective approach. This would involve the explanation to students that as a result of responsible use during class time, they will be allowed to use their devices during specific times throughout the day. Some of these times may include: recess, lunch, or during tech and talk breaks, provided they are using their devices appropriately. This notion of compromise was also highlighted in the in Macleans article “Should schools welcome cell phones in class?”, when exploring personal device use at recesses. The author, Michelle McQuigge, summarizes the benefits of this approach by writing, “Such an approach strikes the right balance [and] it still gives teachers the flexibility to tap into the technology for their lessons while limiting distractions among students”.
4. Outlining Clear Consequences
It is also important to have clear consequences in place for students if they are not using their devices responsibly, or neglecting the terms of the “Acceptable Use Policy”. The consequences should be something that have been agreed upon beforehand by staff and are consistently applied throughout the building. An effective consequence that has been implemented in my buildings has been the “Three Strike” approach. With this approach, if a student is caught using their devices inappropriately, the device is taken away on the first offense and returned at the end of the day. If the student is caught a second time, it is taken to the office and parents are required to pick it up and have a discussion with the administration. Should the student continue the behavior a third time, the device is taken away and is no longer allowed at the school.
The Bottom Line
While there can most certainly be conflicts that arise due to student devices in schools, when looking at the bigger picture, the positive side effects far outweigh the negative. Through taking a proactive approach to this issue, we are enhancing learning through integration of technology into classrooms as well as providing more opportunities to educate our students in becoming responsible digital citizens.
"Extant models of leadership tend to unreflexively privilege leader agency over that of other organisational actors. As Banks (2008: 11) puts it: ‘Conventionally, leaders show the way, are positioned in the vanguard, guide and direct, innovate, and have a vision for change and make it come to actuality. Followers on the other hand conventionally track the leader from behind, obey and report, implement innovations and accept leaders’ vision for change.’” (Pg. 5)
This quote left me with a feeling of frustration as I believe this type of leadership would create an environment that would not allow “organizational actors” to work effectively. As I mentioned in my previous blog post, I’ve had a lot of experience in being a part of situations where leaders work hard to build a sense of community in their buildings and view everyone as part of the team. Opinions are valued and leaders fully embrace the fact that they do not have all the answers, which in turn, shifts the focus from a single vision to a shared one amongst all parties involved. This style of leadership however, seems to emulate that of the Autocratic Style, in which the leader has “complete power over staff”. While there may be specific situations where this type of leadership is effective, overall I believe that this will lead to low morale and long-term failure.
This quote left me with a feeling of frustration as I believe this type of leadership would create an environment that would not allow “organizational actors” to work effectively. As I mentioned in my previous blog post, I’ve had a lot of experience in being a part of situations where leaders work hard to build a sense of community in their buildings and view everyone as part of the team. Opinions are valued and leaders fully embrace the fact that they do not have all the answers, which in turn, shifts the focus from a single vision to a shared one amongst all parties involved. This style of leadership however, seems to emulate that of the Autocratic Style, in which the leader has “complete power over staff”. While there may be specific situations where this type of leadership is effective, overall I believe that this will lead to low morale and long-term failure.
Based on data from 98 MBA students and executives, Parry and Kempster conclude that the charismatic leadership narrative is one of an enjoyable and supportive family, which includes a place for discipline and tough love when required. Within this narrative, the charismatic leader is required to take on the role of a respected family member, creating an enjoyable and rewarding work context by being a supportive and caring colleague, but not a friend. Would-be leaders, it is suggested, need to intentionally adopt this archetypal identity as part of their leadership development. (Pg. 8)
This quote stuck out to me because in our previous leadership styles reading, the Charismatic Style was one that I really connected with due to its exciting and engaging nature. Parry and Kempster’s notion that this style can be viewed in a family context is intriguing as it indicates that the basis of Charismatic Leadership is empathy. This wasn’t an idea that I full realized before, however when the fifth Principle of Leadership approach is taken into consideration, it makes perfect sense: “Be well versed in basic human nature and recognize the importance of sincerely caring for your workers”. Another aspect of this quote that resonated with me was the importance of maintaining professionalism and understanding the distinction between being an approachable, caring leader and a friend. At the end of the day, the leader is still responsible for ensuring progress is being made. By falling into the “friendship trap”, a leader can unintentionally create a negative work environment, where their failure not only affects themselves, but their entire team as well. This notion is summarized perfectly by Chris Myers, who in his article on Forbes, wrote “If you don’t lay out expectations for the team, push people out of their comfort zones, and hold people accountable, you’re failing in your most important role as a leader. Trying to be everyone’s best friend is a fundamentally selfish act.”
The first symptom, initiative overload, manifests itself when organizations launch more change initiatives than anyone could ever reasonably handle. At a large U.S. pharmaceutical firm, a team of midlevel executives had spent three days working on a new change initiative when one executive admitted that the team was not ready to take the exercise seriously. Although the team members believed that the initiative was vital, they felt it had little chance of making a difference. Many change initiatives at the firm, once started, had not been completed; they were dropped midway when yet another new “superb initiative” was launched. Moreover, so many initiatives were already in progress, and the executives were already so overworked, that launching a new one would only cut further into the precious time they had left to run routine operations and to serve their customers.
This quote resonated with me as it is something I believe teachers experience at both the Government/Senior Administration level as well as the School Based Administration Level. In my time as an educator I’ve experienced many meetings where staff are introduced to new initiatives that will "revolutionize and improve" our profession, only to be discarded within a year or two for something different (Hoshin Kanri anyone?). When this type of disruption occurs, it becomes difficult to convince staff to commit to current initiatives when they’re already looking at what’s coming next. This disruption can also be found in schools when buildings experience an administrative change. This change can be difficult for a staff as sometimes initiatives that were started by a former administrator can be dropped as a result of a new administrator wanting to “make their mark” in their new building. As mentioned above, this creates a difficulty in getting staff to invest in anything long-term if the consensus is that it will be gone when the next admin walks through the door.
“(1) You never go around your boss. (2) You tell your boss what he wants to hear, even when your boss claims that he wants dissenting views. (3) If your boss wants something dropped, you drop it. (4) You are sensitive to your boss’s wishes so that you anticipate what he wants; you don’t force him, in other words, to act as boss. (5) Your job is not to report something that your boss does not want reported, but rather to cover it up. You do what your job requires, and you keep your mouth shut.” (Pg. 6)
To me, this quote perfectly summarizes what can happen when a leader is completely ineffective in their role and becomes, as Steve Wihak would say, “Pig-headed”. In this scenario, there is absolutely no relationship between a leader and their staff, which sets the stage for major issues that may not be visible right away, but will inevitably lead to long-term failure. This really emphasizes the importance of building relationships in order to cultivate a positive culture where employees feel comfortable sharing their views and concerns with leaders. Not only does this provide leaders with valuable feedback and ideas, but continues to strengthen the relationship between a leader and their staff.
Based on data from 98 MBA students and executives, Parry and Kempster conclude that the charismatic leadership narrative is one of an enjoyable and supportive family, which includes a place for discipline and tough love when required. Within this narrative, the charismatic leader is required to take on the role of a respected family member, creating an enjoyable and rewarding work context by being a supportive and caring colleague, but not a friend. Would-be leaders, it is suggested, need to intentionally adopt this archetypal identity as part of their leadership development. (Pg. 8)
This quote stuck out to me because in our previous leadership styles reading, the Charismatic Style was one that I really connected with due to its exciting and engaging nature. Parry and Kempster’s notion that this style can be viewed in a family context is intriguing as it indicates that the basis of Charismatic Leadership is empathy. This wasn’t an idea that I full realized before, however when the fifth Principle of Leadership approach is taken into consideration, it makes perfect sense: “Be well versed in basic human nature and recognize the importance of sincerely caring for your workers”. Another aspect of this quote that resonated with me was the importance of maintaining professionalism and understanding the distinction between being an approachable, caring leader and a friend. At the end of the day, the leader is still responsible for ensuring progress is being made. By falling into the “friendship trap”, a leader can unintentionally create a negative work environment, where their failure not only affects themselves, but their entire team as well. This notion is summarized perfectly by Chris Myers, who in his article on Forbes, wrote “If you don’t lay out expectations for the team, push people out of their comfort zones, and hold people accountable, you’re failing in your most important role as a leader. Trying to be everyone’s best friend is a fundamentally selfish act.”
The first symptom, initiative overload, manifests itself when organizations launch more change initiatives than anyone could ever reasonably handle. At a large U.S. pharmaceutical firm, a team of midlevel executives had spent three days working on a new change initiative when one executive admitted that the team was not ready to take the exercise seriously. Although the team members believed that the initiative was vital, they felt it had little chance of making a difference. Many change initiatives at the firm, once started, had not been completed; they were dropped midway when yet another new “superb initiative” was launched. Moreover, so many initiatives were already in progress, and the executives were already so overworked, that launching a new one would only cut further into the precious time they had left to run routine operations and to serve their customers.
This quote resonated with me as it is something I believe teachers experience at both the Government/Senior Administration level as well as the School Based Administration Level. In my time as an educator I’ve experienced many meetings where staff are introduced to new initiatives that will "revolutionize and improve" our profession, only to be discarded within a year or two for something different (Hoshin Kanri anyone?). When this type of disruption occurs, it becomes difficult to convince staff to commit to current initiatives when they’re already looking at what’s coming next. This disruption can also be found in schools when buildings experience an administrative change. This change can be difficult for a staff as sometimes initiatives that were started by a former administrator can be dropped as a result of a new administrator wanting to “make their mark” in their new building. As mentioned above, this creates a difficulty in getting staff to invest in anything long-term if the consensus is that it will be gone when the next admin walks through the door.
“(1) You never go around your boss. (2) You tell your boss what he wants to hear, even when your boss claims that he wants dissenting views. (3) If your boss wants something dropped, you drop it. (4) You are sensitive to your boss’s wishes so that you anticipate what he wants; you don’t force him, in other words, to act as boss. (5) Your job is not to report something that your boss does not want reported, but rather to cover it up. You do what your job requires, and you keep your mouth shut.” (Pg. 6)
To me, this quote perfectly summarizes what can happen when a leader is completely ineffective in their role and becomes, as Steve Wihak would say, “Pig-headed”. In this scenario, there is absolutely no relationship between a leader and their staff, which sets the stage for major issues that may not be visible right away, but will inevitably lead to long-term failure. This really emphasizes the importance of building relationships in order to cultivate a positive culture where employees feel comfortable sharing their views and concerns with leaders. Not only does this provide leaders with valuable feedback and ideas, but continues to strengthen the relationship between a leader and their staff.
“Native Americans spoke of a different kind of leadership. It was a leadership that is decentralized. Every person had a role to play. Each persons’ role is important to the whole. No other person can make the exact same contribution. The total contribution is an organic whole that can only be understood over life cycles.” (Pg. 6)
A common notion between each of my blog posts has been the importance I place on connections and relationship building between a leader and their team. In essence, this quote perfectly summarizes the side-affects that leaders can utilize in order to create a positive team environment, an in turn, achieve long term success within their buildings. By connecting with their staff, leaders are gifted with the opportunity to learn the unique strengths that each staff member possesses. Leaders can then use the knowledge of these strengths to put their individual staff members in the best position to succeed. It also builds a sense of pride and self-confidence among staff, as every person feels that what they’re doing is important to the overall success of the team. I also believe that by focusing on the strengths of team members, leaders can decrease the amount of conflict within a building and instead promote understanding and an appreciation for the positive contributions that each person brings to the table.
Over the weekend I had the opportunity to read an awesome article about different styles of leadership. I was very intrigued by this idea as it is something that I haven't put a lot of thought into so far in my career. While I’ve had numerous leadership positions and opportunities in my life, I’ve never really taken the time to self-reflect and contemplate the type of leadership style I possess. This was a large part of why I found this to be such an interesting read – I found myself drawing connections between my own experiences (both as a leader and team member) and the seven leadership styles. The more I read, the clearer it became that each style has its own pros and cons, with the effectiveness largely dependent on variables such as the environment/situation as well as the personality of the leader. The notion that there is no “one size fits all” approach to leadership was intriguing and had me questioning which style of leadership I currently possess, which ones I would like to try out, and which ones I knew wouldn’t work for me.
In our initial forum post, I had I written about how I viewed my leadership style as that of a servant leader/coach. However, upon further reading, I believe my style is more complex than I initially envisioned, and the foundation of which lies in my personality. As a teacher I’ve always felt that my two biggest strengths were my ability to connect with my students, as well as building meaningful relationships with them. While reading the article I immediately saw a connection between these strengths and the fifth Principle of Leadership Approach, “Know your people and look out for their well-being. Be well versed in basic human nature and recognize the importance of sincerely caring for your workers”. I now whole-hardheartedly believe that the basis for my leadership style is rooted in my love for interacting with others.
In our initial forum post, I had I written about how I viewed my leadership style as that of a servant leader/coach. However, upon further reading, I believe my style is more complex than I initially envisioned, and the foundation of which lies in my personality. As a teacher I’ve always felt that my two biggest strengths were my ability to connect with my students, as well as building meaningful relationships with them. While reading the article I immediately saw a connection between these strengths and the fifth Principle of Leadership Approach, “Know your people and look out for their well-being. Be well versed in basic human nature and recognize the importance of sincerely caring for your workers”. I now whole-hardheartedly believe that the basis for my leadership style is rooted in my love for interacting with others.
In my relatively short time as an educator I’ve had the privilege of working with some pretty amazing administrators. While each of them had their own unique strengths and leadership styles, there was one thing that they all had in common – team mentality. Each of these admins worked hard to build a sense of community in their buildings, and made sure that staff never felt that they were working for them, but rather working with them to achieve something greater. It may sound corny, but being a part of a staff like this really felt like you were a part of something special each day you walked through the doors. This charismatic approach to leadership is an idea that I’ve worked hard to replicate within my own classroom and I something now view as a key component of my personal leadership style.
Leadership Styles
While reading about the seven different leadership styles, there were three that really stuck out to me:
Charismatic Leadership Style:
When I first saw the title for this style, my initial reaction was that is was a "Michael Scott" leadership style that depended on the leader being liked by his/her team. However, the more I read, I realized it was actually much deeper than this and really seemed to suit my personality. As mentioned earlier, making connections and building relationships are two of my biggest strengths and I believe they would be great assets when motivating and inspiring others (which is a major part of this style). Another aspect of this style that I found beneficial was how it lends itself naturally to creating a team mentality among workers. A team-environment where all members are excited and motivated to achieve a common goal should always yield positive results. While overall I was impressed with this style, there was one aspect that concerned me - the notion that everything could fall apart in the leader's absence. I believe with this style a leader would have to find a delicate balance between motivating their team, without having them fully reliant on them.
Charismatic Leadership Style:
When I first saw the title for this style, my initial reaction was that is was a "Michael Scott" leadership style that depended on the leader being liked by his/her team. However, the more I read, I realized it was actually much deeper than this and really seemed to suit my personality. As mentioned earlier, making connections and building relationships are two of my biggest strengths and I believe they would be great assets when motivating and inspiring others (which is a major part of this style). Another aspect of this style that I found beneficial was how it lends itself naturally to creating a team mentality among workers. A team-environment where all members are excited and motivated to achieve a common goal should always yield positive results. While overall I was impressed with this style, there was one aspect that concerned me - the notion that everything could fall apart in the leader's absence. I believe with this style a leader would have to find a delicate balance between motivating their team, without having them fully reliant on them.
Laissez-Faire Leadership Style:
I was initially intrigued with this style because of the amount of trust a leader must have in their team in order to accomplish goals. While the shared trust between leader and team members would definitely be a strength, I found myself continually fixating on the lack of control as a major downfall. The more I read about it, the more uncomfortable I became, as it forced me to see the flaws in my current leadership style. I am definitely a person who likes to be in control and can have a hard time letting go. This made me a little concerned about my own leadership style as I feel that I have the capability to become the very thing I detest in a leader, a “micro-manager”.
Creative Leadership Style:
Out of the seven styles mentioned in the article, I knew immediately that was the one I wanted to adopt into my own leadership style. While I initially saw myself gravitating towards the Charismatic Style, the minute I saw this, I knew it was an even better approach to leadership. Not only does this style combine the “Inspiration and Motivation” from the Charismatic Style with the Trust/Relationship from the Laissez-Faire Model, but it appears to borrow many of the best parts of the other styles as well. I was also intrigued with how this model embraces failure rather than fearing it. Failure is a powerful tool and can be a great asset in building long-term success.
Overall, this was a reading that I think will have a major impact on my leadership going forward as each the styles listed above helped me learn more about myself and the type of leader that I want to be. Were there specific leadership styles that stuck out to you?
Also, a shout out to Adam Scott Williams for The Office inspiration from his blog!
I was initially intrigued with this style because of the amount of trust a leader must have in their team in order to accomplish goals. While the shared trust between leader and team members would definitely be a strength, I found myself continually fixating on the lack of control as a major downfall. The more I read about it, the more uncomfortable I became, as it forced me to see the flaws in my current leadership style. I am definitely a person who likes to be in control and can have a hard time letting go. This made me a little concerned about my own leadership style as I feel that I have the capability to become the very thing I detest in a leader, a “micro-manager”.
Creative Leadership Style:
Out of the seven styles mentioned in the article, I knew immediately that was the one I wanted to adopt into my own leadership style. While I initially saw myself gravitating towards the Charismatic Style, the minute I saw this, I knew it was an even better approach to leadership. Not only does this style combine the “Inspiration and Motivation” from the Charismatic Style with the Trust/Relationship from the Laissez-Faire Model, but it appears to borrow many of the best parts of the other styles as well. I was also intrigued with how this model embraces failure rather than fearing it. Failure is a powerful tool and can be a great asset in building long-term success.
Overall, this was a reading that I think will have a major impact on my leadership going forward as each the styles listed above helped me learn more about myself and the type of leader that I want to be. Were there specific leadership styles that stuck out to you?
Also, a shout out to Adam Scott Williams for The Office inspiration from his blog!
Matt Bresciani
I'm a middle years teacher in Regina, Saskatchewan, working towards a Masters Degree in Education.
Archives
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019