In a recent newsletter, James Clear offered the following challenge: Think of the best coach, teacher, or leader you ever had. What can you learn from them? Think of the worst coach, teacher, or leader you ever had. What can you learn from them?
It was easy for me to identify the best leader I ever had. When I was still in college I had an admin job in the office of a small construction company. My boss, the office manager, was very direct with me from the first day, telling me “I want you to not only learn everything I know, but also outgrow my skills and knowledge.”
What can I learn from that? She was confident in her abilities and value to the organization. She did not feel at all threatened by me, even as she understood one day my value to “someone” might be greater than hers. She wanted to mentor me and help me grow.
The worst leader, there’s been a couple so I’ll meld them into one, since some characteristics were very similar. They used their power to diminish me. Their tone in “instructing” was threatening rather than guiding or supporting. One of them out and out lied and used gaslighting to try and “control” me.
I need to be honest, authentic, and trustworthy.
What can I learn from those experiences? When I am in a more “powerful” relationship (e.g. with students) I need to continually reflect on my behavior and make sure I am using that power to guide, support and mentor rather than break down. I need to be honest, authentic, and trustworthy.
Recently, a team of five #Meliora students uploaded a newly refined version of their history fair project. Next week, they will be competing at Illinois History Day, the last step in their quest to qualify as national contestants.
National History Day (#NHD) provides a good example of the Project-Based Learning (#PBL) #process and #lifecycle. Students are first challenged at a local/school level to create a project, within a specified #framework. As pointed out in the High Quality Project Based Learning Framework, and by John Spencer, high-quality PBL is not a free-for-all, but rather #learnercentered work conducted within the boundaries of a defined structure.
The NHD project framework consists of the following specific criteria:
Must strongly incorporate the annual #theme (the 2018-2019 theme is “Triumph & Tragedy in History”).
A choice of five categories: paper; exhibit; performance; documentary; or website. This variety offers students abundant #voice and #choice in the product they create. Ultimately, the product serves as their primary #evidence of #learning.
Constraints for each project category. For example, documentaries cannot exceed ten minutes in length. Conversely, they should not be much less than ten minutes long, (an unspoken rule) because if students cannot find ten minutes of evidence to support their argument, it suggests they have not looked into their topic deeply enough.
Supplementary documentation, including an annotated bibliography and a process (#reflection) paper.
#Public #presentation (#communication) before a panel of judges at each level of competition. The judges use identical evaluation criteria for each category of project, focusing on the clarity and strength of the argument the students develop in defense of their thesis statement.
Nearly every discipline uses a framework or blueprint for their creative work, it’s a writer’s workshop structure, an engineering process, the scientific method, or a design thinking framework. ~ John Spencer
Students have complete voice and choice in the topic they explore, as long as their thesis and argument fit within the framework. In past years, Meliora students have explored topics as diverse as “The Tucker Torpedo,” Women’s Suffrage, Michael Jordan (national contender) and Soul Train (national contender). The topics chosen reflect the students’ interests, while at the same time requiring them to conduct thorough research.
In many cases, the students started their journey with superficial knowledge. As they dug deeper, their knowledge and critical analysis expanded. Not only did they learn more about their chosen topic, but more importantly (shhhhh, don’t tell them), they developed a much deeper understanding of the historical context, content, and relevance.
In my role as #facilitator, I did not “teach” them about their topic. Rather, I asked them many open-ended questions: “Why did [event] happen?” “What else was happening in the [country, world] at the time?” “What was life like at that time?” “How do you know?” I also helped them locate resources, and persistently asked them to use proper research methods.
This year, the most significant #mindset growth this team made was arguably related to an interview they conducted. That one 20-minute activity (plus the preparation work) exponentially boosted their confidence and their belief that they have significance, not only in the teen world, but also the adult world.
As I also write here, students who participate in National History Day create multiple #iterations of their product, refining their work between each level of competition. Since the project framework remains constant, they invariably are faced with making tough decisions as to which evidence is most relevant to their thesis argument. There is frequent anguish as they remove a favorite quote or an image they love, even as they recognize that a particular element is less important than others they need to include.
This refinement process is an excellent tool for helping the students develop #criticalthinking skills. When they are struggling to make decisions and ask my advice, my standard response is, “In what way does it support your thesis?” Often accompanied by sighs and groans, they make the correct decision.
This is the documentary going to competition next week:
For the truly dedicated, here is the team’s first version:
There was a lot of chatter going on in my Twitter feed this morning, beginning with my friend Terry’s post “Let the Adjacency Begin: MYOB, Brightsiders!” Terry helpfully details his process for creating his short video. Sarah jumped into the conversation with her own “MYOB,” complete with details of her process. On the surface, one could declare that the two processes were different. However, in effect the processes are quite similar, it is just that the tools used were different. Kevin (as he is wont to do), decided to out-clever everyone and remixed Terry’s work with some additions.
In the meantime, in an adjacent conversation, Terry and I discussed real-life situations related to his post about this article, which describes some ways in which education and relevant learning are currently poles apart. After some yakking back and forth, and intertwined contributions from Ron and Sheri, Terry posted a #smallpoem about “précis” and “gist.”
I haven’t done much in the mix/remix arena for awhile, so decided to make my own creation, using pieces of Terry’s poem. My process: