Most recent public comments by Megan Callahan - Tolin https://nowcomment.com/users/49600 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1321674 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1321674 without having some type of system in place how do we know if something is good or good enough? Is there a way to offer multiple pathways to the same end point? As far as student learning goes, I think it is hard to offer true connected learning opportunities in the current system. It has the potential to be grand. How do we help teachers help students discover the things they are passionate about? Would they be better at connected learning and a more self-guided approach if these were the strategies used from the moment they walked into schools ? Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:54:31 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1321662 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1321662 Tools like EdPuzzle and Nearpod assume that teachers want and/or need to always be in control of the content/pacing/etc. Tools such as these are simply supporting the status quo. Channeling Selwyn, I feel as if they over promise and under deliver. The goal is "student centered learning" when it is sometimes really just "teacher centered planning." On a separate note, the millennial in me struggles with knowing that I can learn things on my own, but the learning actually doesn't matter without the piece of paper (and all of the money) that says you actually learned something. Even if we see that learning and skill development can happen outside of institution there are systems in place (in this moment) that prevent advancement without degrees. And we all know that degrees don't necessarily equal skills/learning. Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:00:56 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1313197 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1313197 PD is designed to help everyone improve. It doesn't seem possible (or likely) that a building/district would purposefully provide a learning opportunity to one group of teachers and not provide that same opportunity to another group. If the goal is to improve as professionals it is inequitable to only provide training and support to a select group of educators. So while the science major in me understands why we would conduct a randomized-controlled trial - I can't wrap my head around how to do this when it comes to PD. I know that what is fair isn't always equal, and what is equal isn't always fair but If the end goal is improving student learning how can we justify not providing a service/experiences/opportunities to a group of students? Additionally, I don't see how we can have random sample and personalized learning experiences for teachers. Tue, 02 Apr 2019 18:27:58 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1312858 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1312858 End of session surveys are unreliable.They make me think of end of course evals. Those that love and/or hate the session will tell you their thoughts on how they felt about it Not whether or not learning took place or if that learning was actually applied in the classroom setting. And while I know this is a generalization it is a tad bit true. I think we have to really "begin with the end in mind" when it comes to teacher PD. So often one and done PD sessions are drop in, learn this shiny new thing, and go back and do it on your own. What do we value? What is the end goal? How can we personalize learning for individual teachers yet also all work toward a shared vision for the building/district? How are we going to know when we've arrived at said goal? How will we measure our success? Is it test scores? Student growth on defined outcomes? Teacher comfort? Is simply trying a new strategy a few times and reflecting on the experience enough? Overall, I think these items are harder to measure. They take time, effort, and forethought on the part of building/district leadership. Tue, 02 Apr 2019 09:47:44 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1213624 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1213624 If we want teachers to make real change we have to give them paid, supported time. If we (as in school leaders) value it, we have to make time for it. Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:44:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212654 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212654 I was working with district administrators the first week in January and this HS principal commented that he gets frustrated with technology sometimes (district has been 1:1 for six or seven years now) because there seems to be so much collaborative work that it is hard to tell individual student success. Reading your comments made me think of this moment which is pretty much the opposite of what is discussed in the interview. Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:40:01 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212024 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212024 on children. There is a piece of from this past fall titled, "The Digital Gap Between Rich and Poor Kids is Not What We Expected" that I use with my students as a conversation starter when we talk about the digital divide and more importantly (in my opinion) the digital use divide. So often tech is touted as a savior for those who have less when, as stated in the interview, this is not the case. And, while I know that the NY Times piece isn't grounded in academic research, I do find the point on the privilege of choice to be powerful and thought-provoking. https://nyti.ms/2JkjOuf Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:41:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211435 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211435 I don't really have anything intellectual to say here but I have to shout, "AMEN!" I'm not going to go on a rant here, but it is refreshing to know I'm not alone with this thought. Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:47:50 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211405 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211405 As PD is a significant portion of my job right now - this makes me cringe. The LA Unified story is often mentioned in "what not to do" situations. I guess I am just still struggling with why there isn't change when we know that teacher professional development is crucial to "successful" technology integration. I feel like it is common knowledge (maybe it isn't?) that the technology tool isn't the "game changer" but how we use the tool and what we are asking students to do with the technology is where the potential lies. Yet, so often, teacher training is less than optimal. How do we push to improve pd and other learning opportunities for teachers? Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:44:05 -0500