Development, Development, Development, after reading chapter 22 and going back through the previous chapters on instructional design it seemed that the key word in all of this was development. It took many different shapes however, in the corporate context it seemed like it was the development of materials to be used by employees, the P-12 aspect it seemed to be the development of ideas and a whole enity with the systematic change. Instructional design in the realm of higher education seemed to be the development of all three. A professor would have to develop students through teaching and guidance. They would also have to develop materials through there writing in journals and other periodicals. They have to develop whole enitites in what they call faculty development. The key in all of these is that something is being created, to take this back to teaching terms we as teachers are also constanting developing things, we have to develop materials and ideas so that we can develop the minds of our students.
Another thing that really jumped out at me while reading chapter 22 was the emphasis on the hierarchy of higher education. It seems that every synopsis written by one of the professors delved deeply into the what exactly everyone's role was and that there was a ladder that needed to be climbed to get to a certain point. Now, I know that there is a hierarchy in life, and there that people are always trying to climb the ladder to get to certain points. I see it at my school, although we are all teachers and in the hierarchy of the school are ranked the same, so people get more things then others. This usually comes from experience and leadership tendencies. I am sure that this is the same idea in the business sector. They may not have the distinct roles like in higher education, but they do have promotions, some businesses have manger programs that can work on a hierarchy. I wonder if this idea of the hierarchy can work in a k-12 environment? to me seems like it has some merit. After a teacher becomes tenured there are losing part of what makes someone work hard which is working to keep your job. Many people will still do the same if not more because of the value system they have, but not everyone. If there were steps to climb past tenure could this make a difference? I think it could. Older teachers sometime get a bad reputation as mailing it in to retirement, it my short career it has been the opposite the older teachers I have encountered have been great mentors and some the best teachers I have seen, maybe we should reward them for their time spent and leadership the exude.
I think it is a good idea to reward the leadership brought on by the older teachers. I have had wonderful teachers help me in my first years. They have tenure, but continue to always be there for us younger teachers. If I did not have these teachers to turn to I would be lost at times. Even things like what to do on picture day are answered by these teachers.
ReplyDeleteI also agree it would be a good idea to reward the leadership, not only for teachers, but even in the business and industry area. All incentives like that have been removed--we are all just doing the best we can to hang on and only those who really love what they are doing are stepping up to meet the challenges, improve their skills, incorporate technology, attempting to learn new things and stepping out of their confort zone. The others are there to meet the delines and prepare for the "tests". There needs to be a happy medium here, but I don't know what we can do to fix this.
ReplyDeleteMargie
You bring up a fascinating idea about a hierarchy within the k-12 school system. I am not entirely sure how to respond to it. I often think that education should be run more like a business. Having a controlled hierarchy in the school system would definitely change the dynamics of how a school is run, how the teachers teach, and would weed out those who no longer belong teaching.
ReplyDelete