I think some of our models are much more sophisticated in their design and
far beyond the reach one, teach one approach. I think the Bay Area Writing
Project model (and its decendents in the mathematics and sciences) is one
of the best examples.
First, it is explicitely structured for learning about the design of
quality professional development for others--not about the discipline per
se or leadership out of schooling context.
Second, the project sites carefully select teachers who are already good,
confident and open-minded AND who feel a calling beyond the 30 students
(or 150) in their classrooms. It also provides many opportunities for
teachers to duck-out of extra leadership opportunities if they reconsider
along the way, without exiling them from the learning community (they are
still a part of the writing project community and always will be for life,
even though they don't take on these extra roles).
Third, the sites are directly responsible for matching the expertise and
experiences of the teacher consultants/leaders with the needs of teachers
or schools asking for Writing Project help. Otherwords, most teachers are
really good at one or more things, but no teacher is great at everything.
The projects are not trying to create SUPER teachers (like SUPERman).
Rather, the sites carefully place, support and coach their teacher
consultants in leadership opportunities or positions that they are
competent and prepared for and most likely to succeed. If it is a school
service, or a free-standing institute or other project or event sponsored
under the auspices of the site, the site takes full responsibility for the
arrangements and support of the teacher consultant in designing and leading
the experience, including the responsibility to assure that the teacher
leader is compensated adequately. That is why you find in mature writing
project sites that almost all of the programming conducted by the teacher
leaders and the site facilitators spending all their time supporting,
coaching and assisting their teachers--less than 10 percent of the site
programming is conducted by the site facilitators themselves.
And finally, the site is responsible for finding additional leadership
opportunities for their teachers all the time, from creating their own
programming to watching out for other opportunities like state or local
curriculum committees, instructional materials reviews, special school or
district projects, or other professional opportunities. They will always
be part of the writing project site family and often end-up directing the
activities and areas of growth for the writing project site itself. (Many
actually go on to take-over or start a new writing project site--the
writing projects rarely have problems with creating indigenous leadership
for natural turnover in their sites--that's one reason the projects have
survived for 25 years now.) So it is a continuous growth cycle (where some
of the teachers may grow to be experts in completely different areas that
the areas of expertise that they came in with).
There are variations on this model. But I think many people in math and
science too easily dismiss the Writing Project, despite its national
reputation, because it's a different discipline. They don't understand
that the model is really about teacher leadership (and excels at teacher
empowerment), not about the discipline per se. I really think that they
have cornered the market as far as developing teacher leadership is
concerned. The rest of us could learn a lot if we took the time to really
study and experience it.
What I fear the most is these sort of generic leadership institutes that
are taught out-of-context of what is most important to teachers--and that
is the teaching-learning process (e.g., Covey or Peters or Deming) and/or
the Amway model (e.g., reach one, teach one, training trainers, everybody
go back at teach a workshop, etc.). I think that we are in danger of
perpetuating conventional wisdom and tradition regarding teachers and
leadership without bringing our knowledge about both things together and
looking at examples where the mold has already been broken.
Dennis Bartels
Exploratorium
_____________________________________________________________________________
TEECH Leadership Development Discussion
To send a response, send mail to teech_leadership@teech.terc.edu
To unsubscribe from the list, send mail to ntlist_manager@teech.terc.edu
In the body of the message: unsubscribe teech_leadership <email-address>
View or post messages from the Web at http://hub.terc.edu/terc/teech.html
______________________________________________________________________________