Category Archives: writing

Relational Teacher Education: A new and inspiring concept for me

Posted on by
1

I recently read an interesting article by Dr Julian Kitchen, Associate Professor in teacher education at the Brock University in Canada.  As I read I found many links between Kitchen’s work with preservice teachers and the work I am trying to do with practicing teachers.

 Kitchen quotes Dewey: “…education is development from within” (Dewey, 1938, p. 17). This resounds with thoughts about learning versus development. Development is seen as something that comes from the outside, that someone “does it” to the teachers whereas learning is something internal, it is the union of stimuli from outside with the personal knowledge, experience, intelligence and beliefs of the teacher. This learning is of course something gradual which develops slowly, at an individual pace. This is far from the “boom” of “being developed” at a seminar or short course.

 

According to Kitchen “Relational teacher education is a reciprocal approach to enabling teacher growth that is respectful of the personal practical knowledge of preservice teachers and builds from the realization that we know in relationship to others. Relational teacher education is sensitive to the role that each participant plays as teacher and learner in the relationship, the milieus in which each lives and works; it stresses the need to present one’s authentic self in relationships which are open, nonjudgmental and trusting” (Kitchen, 2005, p. 196).

 

When I read this article, many of the things he wrote seemed to suit my view of my teaching and gave them a name. I had never heard of “Relational Teacher Education” before and hadn’t even thought about giving a name to my style of teaching. After completing my MEd thesis, I did make a conscious decision to respect the knowledge and experience the teachers bring with them and I even talk about this explicitly throughout the course. Many of the comments I receive from teachers at the end of my courses relate to these points.

 I also strongly believe in the social aspects of learning. In the past my courses have been built on sharing classroom experiences and I will definitely build on that this year. I will dare to give more time for sharing.

I am interested to explore the way that each individual (including myself) is both a teacher and a learner in the course.

 

Kitchen identifies seven important characteristics of relational teacher education:

“1. Understanding one’s own personal practical knowledge

2. Improving one’s practice in teacher education

3. Understanding the landscape of teacher education

4. Respecting and empathizing with preservice teachers

5. Conveying respect and empathy

6. Helping preservice teachers face problems

7. Receptivity to growing in relationship”

(Kitchen,2005, p. 196).

Some thoughts on these issues:

1. I must be committed to examining my own knowledge and experience. One of my advantages is that I really teach children and can try out the things I am talking about. I must remember to find more time to reflect on my own teaching both at school and in the course.

2. I am interested and committed to improving my teacher education. It took me years to feel comfortable with the title “teacher educator” but that indeed is what I am. I think I am improving over the years and this year, through my intensive written reflections, I should improve even more. What I should do is find a significant friend to read those reflections and discuss them.

 

3. I am trying to understand the landscape of teacher education – and my thesis is part of it. I don’t like dealing with politics but I have discovered that teacher education is a highly political issue. Maybe all teaching is? I have been leaving the policy documents to the end in my literature review and I think I should dive into them.

 

Kitchen writes: “I began to discover that we as teachers often have been told that our stories are inauthentic and that experts have the answers. I became aware that we have been forced to obey “objective” studies, even though they often run contrary to our classroom experiences. I awakened to the realization that we must discover our own voices because, as Roland Barth (1990) observes, “When teachers stop growing, so do their students” (Kitchen, 2005, p. 199).

 

My aim is to add to the growing body of teacher stories, stories which may at some stage be publishable. Teachers must know that they can learn from writing and rewriting their teacher stories and reading and responding to those of their peers.

 

Kitchen (2005) explains that “Relational teacher development and education recognizes the roles each participant plays as teacher and learner in the relationship and is sensitive to the milieus in which each lives and works (p. 200). I have often stated in my reflections that I am acting as teacher and learner in my sessions. I learn from each teacher I lead. Through my thinking about their work I reflect on my own and alter my own classroom practice and workshops.

This article contains a letter Kitchen wrote to his preservice students before meeting them in one of his courses. He writes: “This letter both invited preservice teachers to reflect on their tacit knowledge (Polanyi, 1958) and expressed my personal professional commitment to developing meaningful and respectful personal professional relationships with each of them. By sharing my experiences, I illustrated my engagement in reflective practice. By listening authentically to their stories, I modeled respect for teachers as curriculum makers. By providing them with reflective tools, I assisted my preservice teachers as they explored their personal practical knowledge (Connelly & Clandinin, 1988)” (Kitchen, 2005, p.200).

 

I would love to be able to write this kind of letter to my participants and for them to write a reply to me as their first task. This letter exchange could open up the communication between us and leave me with a far clearer sense of the teachers sitting in front of me than the dry questionnaires I have today. I wonder though if they take me as sincere before they get to know me? Israelis are so cynical. It certainly would take a lot of the talking out of the first stages of the course. I think I should give it a go – using Kitchen’s letter as a guide.

 

Kitchen writes “By responding personally and rigorously to their reflections on past and present experiences, I attempted to assist them in reconstructing their cognitive structures and their approaches to teaching. By engaging them in cooperative learning and team-building activities, I helped to foster a sense of community among those in the class” (p. 200-201).

 

What do I try to achieve in my own responses to teachers? I make connections between practice and theory, give names to the things the teachers are talking about, and aim to elicit extra or deeper understandings.

 

Cooperative learning is also a relevant issue – I am continually searching for ways to deepen this collaborative experience in just 30 hours.

Kitchen explains that relational teacher education is based on respect. This respect is many things – starting on time (maybe with something that they won’t want to miss?), not wasting teachers’ time , making the most of their time. This need for respect is obvious in many ways but not always easy. When a teacher arrives without a pen and notebook, when she sits knitting throughout the whole session, when I have to fight to get a word in…

 

“My constructive criticism of student work is not an uncritical stance. Typically, in responding to personal portfolios, I mirror back my understanding: I note patterns that extend across their metaphor and look for five critical incidents and five personal narratives, I respond to their interpretations, and I share related stories from my experience. Each of these interactions serves as an opportunity for dialogue and professional growth for both preservice teachers and the instructor. Although this is a time-consuming process, the students respect the results. When they nominated me  for Professor of the Year in 2001, they spoke of my “rigorous expectations,” “constructive criticism,” and “in-depth personal analysis of both content and  structure.” At the same time, I deepen my understanding of teaching and learning by hearing what my students have to say” (Kitchen, 2005, p. 202).

 Kitchen isn’t boasting here, he is explaining what works in his courses and according to the feedback from my courses, this is similar to some of the remarks I have received. I too learn from reading and responding to my teacher-students.

 After getting excited about these inspiring concepts, I return to earth and ask myself: Is any of this possible in a 30 hour course?

 

Reference:

Kitchen, J. (2005). Conveying respect and empathy: Becoming a relational teacher educator. Studying Teacher Education, 1(2), 194-207.

Posted on by
Reply

blog pic

A  few weeks ago I wrote about being invited to join a small group of PG students who meet monthly and last week I attended my first session. The group meets once a month, each time in a different home.

A few days before the session, H emailed out materials she is dealing with at the moment (interview transcripts, interview summary etc) and wanted to hear our opinions and ideas. She was searching for a different way to look at her data. We drank hot tea and discussed how we read her texts differently from the way she reads them and how they can be examined in other ways. The discussion was informal and extremely supportive – thinking together out loud in order to help her find her way in the mass of data.

I was interested to feel H’s interview style and the way her transcripts were organized. I was fascinated by the way she records her thoughts about the data and her attempt to classify her interviewees into distinct groups. From her descriptions I learnt new terms and was introduced to new theories.

I m grateful to be part of the group and believe that it will  be stimulating and supportive. The chance to look at the writing of others in unfinished drafts and to hear other doctoral students discuss their deliberations and breakthrough moments will be very influential in my work. I will be able to contribute to others and at the same time negate some of the loneliness and isolation of being an off-campus student.

I am supposed to present some work at the next session. As I’m not doing much at the moment, this could pose a problem but I am going to look at it as an opportunity. I have decided that during the Passover holidays I am going to finish grading the assignments from my Z course and write a narrative about the whole experience. As I don’t  yet have ethics clearance to include those assignments in my work, I will have to write about the course as a whole and more about my experience and understandings. Having to have a draft to show is a positive step in the direction of getting something done.

RF picture: http://www.images.com/

AATE Conference – Hobart, 2009: Giving My First Paper

Posted on by
2

When I mentioned to GP, my supervisor, that I was intending to attend the AATE conference in Hobart, his first reaction was: “Of course you are going to give a paper…”. I wasn’t intending on presenting a paper, in fact I thought I would attend my first conference as a listener and as a learner, and that some time in the future I would try my hand at presenting my work. I had no idea how this type of conference works in Australia, even in Israel I have only been to a few.

As usual, when encouraged by my supervisor to present my work to others, I felt inclined to try. I sat down (fairly quickly) and prepared my abstract. I told myself that if it wasn’t accepted I would still have the rich learning experience I was looking forward to, and that if it was accepted, I would worry about it later.

I have written enough about my anxiety and have shared my experiences delaying the preparation of the paper. I will now try to explore how the paper went (from my subjective point of you, of course). I am writing this three weeks after returning from the conference.

My paper was set to be given in a fancy board room with a large table and comfortable meeting chairs. From a technical point of view, everything went according to plan and my Powerpoint presentation worked well.

I was convinced that nobody would come to hear me, especially as this was the last session of the conference and there were another 14 sessions going on at the same time. Being up against a large session on the National Curriculum was especially tough competition.

In the end, I was relieved that I had a small audience and began my presentation on time. I was thrilled that the educators present stopped me to ask questions and to comment. If I had been worried about time, the paper fitted the hour perfectly.

I was especially pleased that each of the participants (those I didn’t know) shared what she was taking away from the session.

I am still trying to build my identity as a researcher, it’s a title I don’t yet feel comfortable wearing. I can honestly say that daring to present at AATE was a significant step in seeing myself in this new role. I’m happy I chose to present some of my Lit review in the paper, I feel it was relevant and important background to the work I have been doing.

Having one of the participants email me and then look up my blog was special for me. I thank her for her interest.

That seems to be it for my Masters thesis – squeezing two journal articles and a conference paper out of it has been rewarding and satisfying. Now it is clear to me that I will need to find new angles and experiences to write about.

I have some ideas, but no time!

I have one week left here in Australia and am already apprehensive about saying goodbye to family. It is comforting to know that my studies will bring me back again in the not too distant future.

 

Interesting materials on writing and publishing.

Posted on by
Reply

Often when I read Faultlines, Ward’s informative blog on writing a PhD, I encounter inspiring materials which help me as a writer and as a researcher. I have written here before that I began blogging after reading an article by Ward on her blogging experiences.

Today I read about Lilia’s honest post on publishing a PhD which is both exposing and highly personal.

Another wonderful source of information I discovered through Ward is the inspiring How I write series from Stanford – transcripts, videos etc.

Writing in the 21st Century – new report from NCTE

Posted on by
Reply

I heard about this new report, Writing in the 21st Century, by Kathleen Blake Yancey,  from Yankel on his blog and am very grateful for the link. The paper traces perceptions of writing and theories of teaching writing (Yancey uses the term ‘composition’) through  the 20th century and into the 21st century.

One of the main points she raises is that writing has never been respected or emphasized in society (and education) like reading. An interesting reason for this is presented. Yancey suggests that this is connected to the use of reading to convey messages (social, religious, political…). Reading is associated with control, writing can be used for self control.

Another interesting point is the place reserved for reading in the family and the community. Reading is associated with warm memories of story reading, church gatherings etc and memories of writing are more likely to be associated with difficulty or loneliness. The historical connection between writing and the labour of text production is also discussed.

The place of writing in testing  and the role of testing in the teaching of writing are explored.

I like the way each part of the report concludes with a remark about writing outside school. Despite what happened (or didn’t happen) in writing classrooms, people continued to compose. The same is true today. One of the challenges facing us  as teachers is to learn from our students what they are doing with writing outside the classroom in social contexts a) in order to learn from them about what interests them and motivates them to write and b) to force us to search for writing projects which are based in social contexts and are relevant and exciting.

New models of teaching writing must see writing as an intellectual activity done in social contexts. If we use the technologies available to us and believe in ourselves as teachers and our pupils as developing writers, the sky is the limit. The author uses a term coined by Deborah Brandt, “self-sponsored writing”. I wonder how we can give this writing more attention in the classroom in order to encourage it, applaud it and allow it to motivate our students in their “school sponsored writing”.

As I experiment with blogging in the classroom, I am convinced that that has the potential to form part of a new curriculum which takes into account that writing has changed, is changing and that many of our students are actually writers.

Personally experiencing peer editing before using the strategy in the classroom

Posted on by
Reply

After the last course at N, one of the teachers tried the peer revision strategies we explored, in her grade 2 classroom. She remarked that she could never (and would never) have tried the activity with her pupils if we had not really modelled and experienced it in the course.

I was happy to receive feedback on classroom developments coming out of the course and to hear that the time we are spending in personally experiencing strategies and reflecting on them is worthwhile.

The session at K was also fruitful. After a lecture (shortish) on revision practices and teaching revision, the teachers worked in groups to write a list of specific criteria for evaluating teacher narratives. They worked well and we had the opportunity to feel the difference between specific and general criteria.

Afterwards, the teachers worked in pairs – one as a writer and the other as an editor to work on the revision of their first narratives. They stayed close to the process I suggested for use in the classroom and they worked busily for almost an hour. Now I am waiting to see the revised narratives and to read the upcoming reflective pieces on the process.

Bureaucracy vs Teacher Desire to Learn

Posted on by
Reply

 

Yesterday, an hour before I left to teach my PL course at N., I had a phone call from the head of the centre where the course is held. She had bad news. There are not enough teachers enrolled in the course and the Head of PL in the area has decided to close down the course. Of course she explained that it has nothing to do with the content or the quality of the course, it is a purely financial decision.

My immediate reaction was anger. Why now? Where had they been for the past two months? Why didn’t they tell me before I sat all weekend preparing my lecture? And what about the teachers? They have attended four sessions and they won’t be recognised.

The answers I received were that the teachers will be able to join another course, even though they are also well into the syllabus. Is that taking the learning of the teachers seriously? Do they think these teachers are only studying to show that they are doing the compulsory 60 hours to get their salary rise?

I immediately wanted them to cancel the session, to call the teachers and tell them not to come. When I cooled down a little, I decided that that wasn’t fair and that I wanted to meet them face-to-face. I knew the teachers would be both disappointed and angry and that is how they reacted. They were angry that the learning process we have begun could be cut short. They sat down to write an email to those in charge saying that they are extremely involved in the learning process and that their students are also undergoing changes in their learning and writing as a result of the course.

I don’t know where things stand today, in the next few days I will speak to some of my peers and will try to find some more participants. Ironically, we had a new teacher join us yesterday. She remarked that she was surprised to find the group members talking in a common language and she explained that she could feel that the group had undergone significant learning together.

In spite of everything going on, we held the session. I dared doing something I haven’t done before. I asked the participants to do the writing task from last years national Meitzav literacy examination for 7-8 year olds (grade 2). Surprisingly nobody objected and the discussion afterwards was fascinating. We looked at the process each teacher underwent as she attempted the task. We discussed the differences between the texts produced and explored the teaching necessary to bring young pupils to success in similar situations.

This morning one of the teachers commented that the experience and the following discussion were very important and gave her a lot to think about. I’m happy I didn’t cancel.

As far as the future goes… who knows?

 

Free image: http://www.everystockphoto.com/photo.php?imageId=694082

First session of course at K – enjoyable!

Posted on by
Reply
This week  I began my second course, the one I am running at K. The course is supposed to be the same as the other one and I had the same program planned. For many reasons this session was more successful than the one I ran last week:
  • I was more experienced, my lesson plan and content were better rehearsed
  • My laptop connected easily to the projector and I could begin with the photo story presentation I had prepared on writing
  • The group was much bigger and more varied (25 teachers from grades 1 – 6, some of them literacy coordinators).
  • The centre itself has much more comfortable learning conditions, tables, chairs etc.
  • I had never met the teachers and they were eager (more eager?) to see what I have to offer.
  • I was excited by the prospect of contributing to the schools in such a remote, rural area. The centre is a two hour drive from my place (which is also far away from the big smoke!).

Surprisingly, I enjoyed the long country drive. As long as it doesn’t rain on Sundays, I will be fine.

Some of the things that interested me and demand thought and lengthy discussion are:

  • At least 3 of the teachers repeatedly remarked that writing is a born trait. Each time the idea arose I tried to attach a question mark to it. I commented that we will attend to this question during the course.
  • Many of the teachers were in hysterics when they read the description of the final assignment. A few remarked that they may have to drop out of the course because of the writing component. I tried to calm them down.

It is disturbing that some of the teachers who enrolled in a course on teaching writing aren’t 100% convinced that they have the ability to change the way their pupils view writing and write. One of my aims in the first meeting was to start a questioning process, one in which they will critically examine their own practice and  their beliefs concerning themselves as teachers and their pupils.

Royalty free image from: http://images.com

More exciting news… no more waiting!

Posted on by
Reply

My second narrative / article has been accepted by the English in Australia  journal and should appear early in 2009. I do need to do some alterations and they need to be in by mid – January. Once they are are in I will be able to say that my thesis is well and truly done.

In the meantime I need to make some changes to my blog – it will be developing from an MEd thesis blog into a PhD blog and I will have pages devoted to the professional learning courses I am leading. The only problem is finding time for everything. Working full time at school and planning lectures doesn’t leave too much writing time. I am waiting for the Channukah holidays, only three weeks to go…