Re: MODELS for followup
Billy Spitzer (billy_spitzer@TERC.EDU <billy_spitzer@TERC.EDU>)
Wed, 11 Oct 95 15:45:38 0500
Rosalina,
You asked how teachers collaboratives are formed. Little's paper focuses on subject-specific
collaboratives. For example the PATHS humanities collaborative in Philadelphia involves teachers
doing research using the rich library resources in the city, teachers were eligible for minigrants to
support specific projects, and there were frequent colloquia among teachers and museum/library
experts. Lieberman & McLaughlin also discuss task-oriented collaboratives focused on a particular
discipline, pedagogy, school improvement process, or restructuring effort.
I think the task-oriented focus is key. With electronic communications, obviously geography can
become less of a factor. There are also examples of national projects (e.g., the Foxfire project),
that have local/regional sub-networks. Your message also highlights out the synergy between
electronic and non-electronic communication, especially when there are several teachers in the same
school or district.
I'm curious about how you see the relative roles of the workshop and "the network of professional
support" that arises afterwards. And, I'm intrigued by the "competition" you mention among districts
-- does this make it harder for people to discuss challenges and failures?
Kathleen,
You wrote that teachers who visit the museum learning lab use a listserve for planning, and that
other teachers listen in and contribute. What is this exchange like? Does it increase demand for
visits to the lab?
--Billy
Billy Spitzer
TERC
billy_spitzer@terc.edu <billy_spitzer@terc.edu>