As my doctoral program rolls right along, I am currently in the throes of the literature review section of my dissertation.  After some going back and forth between potential topics, I have decided to focus my dissertation on the theory of distributed leadership.

I’m still in the very early stages of the whole process; I have yet to develop a specific research question or methodologies by which to conduct research, but what I am doing presently is attempting to read everything about distributed leadership I can get my hands on.  With this in mind, I am turning to the folks in my online professional network (i.e., any educator with whom I connect via blogging and/or social networking) for some direction.

I know many of you either work in environments where leadership tasks are distributed across staff, or may even be in formal leadership positions in which you distribute these tasks.  In other words, you may have some personal and professional connection to or investment in this theory.  If you have favorite resources or authors on the topic toward whom you can point me, I would be very appreciative if you could leave a note in the comments or shoot an email to damian at apaceofchange dot com.  Of course, I am fully capable of using EBSCOhost and Google Scholar, but I’d like to see what articles, sources, books, or authors are favorites among my online colleagues, including critiques of the theory.

I thank you in advance for any suggestions you can send my way, and best wishes to all for a happy, healthy, productive, and educational 2012!

I read an article not too long ago (which, to my chagrin, I am unable to locate at the moment) that stated that while teachers are using online resources such as Twitter and blogs for professional networking purposes, school principals (and, presumably, other administrators) are not.  From my admittedly small sphere of reference, I find this hard to believe because I’ve been following the blogs and Tweets of principals and superintendents like Eric Sheninger, Michael Smith, Pam Moran, Patrick Larkin, Dave Sherman, Scott Elias, Melinda Miller, and many others for what feels like ages.  Beyond the text-based world, Scott and Melinda also host the excellent (but far-too-infrequently updated) Practical Principals podcast.  I assume, however, that the article author knows better than I (because otherwise I’d be writing for major blogs and magazines, right?), and that the vast majority of US school administrators are not connecting with each other online.

The summer I started Tweeting, blogging, and generally involving myself in this world of online networking with other educators (four years ago already, sheesh), I was asked in a Skype call what I felt was a barrier for other teachers to get started in these activities.  My answer then (a lack of a real clear “point of entry”) informs my contribution to Leadership Day 2011: I have created a Google Doc to which I invite you, blogging and Tweeting and Skypeing principals and administrators, to add your online info.  Feel free to add as much or as little info as you desire.  I’ve left columns for Twitter & Skype usernames, blog URLs, and specific areas of interest, among others, but please add new fields if I’ve left something important out.

My goal here is to create a document that you can hand to non-connected administrators (physically or digitally) and say, “Here’s where to start” when it comes to reading administrator-specific blogs or Twitter feeds, or who they can contact if they are interested in making connections for x or y purposes.

My thinking, of course, is that in addition to the general benefits networking affords, when more administrators understand and use these tools, there will be more support for teachers who wish to do the same, especially with their students.

Will you help build this “point of entry” directory for our yet-to-be connected colleagues?  If so, here it is.

The original plan was for PSLPs to be piloted in sixteen school districts throughout NJ over 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, but I’ve since learned that the pilot program has been extended through the end of the 2011-2012 school year.  In August 2010, the state released its initial findings (PDF), which I’ll summarize here.

The 2009-2010 Evaluation Report (linked above) cites eleven major findings from last school year and six major lessons to take into the current one.  I’ll just highlight a few:

Findings

• Buy-in and support are crucial: Findings 6, 7, and 9 all address the significance of not only teacher buy-in, but also demonstrable support beyond “lip service” from principals (or, I imagine, any school administrator) to the success of a local PSLP program.  The report noted that the schools that most effectively implemented the PSLP program all had strong training programs for staff and students, adequate resources, and regular opportunities to meet, voice concerns, and collectively problem-solve.  One example that pops up a few times in the findings is an aspect of personalized education to which I alluded in this post from February – the flexibility of the school schedule.  Principals who were perceived to be supportive were also those who allowed for flexibility in both the school schedule and staff scheduling.  It makes sense; if we are going to truly personalize learning experiences, it has to be in for a penny, in for a pound; no half-stepping here.
• Technology is key: Hate to say “I told you so”, but Finding #2 noted that the vast majority of schools in the pilot program used some sort of web-based program as part of the PSLP process.  If this is the direction in which NJ schools are heading, for better or for worse, teachers and other school staff are going to need to get comfortable utilizing online tools.
• We need a point man: Or woman!  From the report: “School representatives reported that PSLP programs require substantial coordination and planning, and agreed that without someone acting as the central coordinator in each school, PSLPs would be difficult to implement.”  The report stated that of the 16 pilot schools, only three used teachers as their PSLP coordinators (administrators and guidance counselors seemed to be the positions of choice for this job).  I’m of two minds about this: on one hand, it doesn’t make sense to me to burden the teachers – who are already adjusting to entirely new professional environment with trying to meet the individualized needs of all these students – with this additional paperwork.  On the other hand, as the ones with the most daily contact with the students, they’re the ones who know them, their goals, and their progress best.  Maybe the paperwork needs to be handled by an admin or support personnel with regular input from the teachers.  Which, of course, means building regular meeting times into the weekly schedule (see first bulletpoint above).
• Despite challenges, initial reports are favorable: Findings 10 & 11 indicated that a significant majority of polled staff members felt that the first year of the PSLP pilot program had a positive impact on students, and that they would recommend the PSLP process to colleagues in other districts.  The Evaluation Report acknowledges that a single year is not enough time to gauge all the potential pros and cons of this program, but upwards of seventy percent of educators polled felt that the program had a positive impact on student-teacher interactions, help-seeking behaviors, motivation, and engagement, among other things.  Seventy-three percent of teachers and one hundred percent of program coordinators polled said they would recommend PSLPs to other schools in their districts.

Lessons

No need to bulletpoint here; I think it’s sufficient to say that the lessons primarily drive home the absolute necessity of staff training prior to the start of the PSLP implementation as well as having principals who walk the walk in terms of supporting the initiative by providing more than just verbal support for the program.  No big surprises here.

Looking Ahead

Despite this report being published in August 2010, I wasn’t aware of its existence until midway through the current school year.  Now that I know the state is publishing these, I’ll be keeping an eye on the PSLP site toward the end of summer to see what more the 2010-2011 Evaluation Report has to say.  I am concerned about the logistical headaches a poorly implemented PSLP could create, but I am more hopeful about the potential for good this could hold if done right.

If you’ve read the document (go do it; it’s only 5 1/2 pages), what about the findings/lessons stand out to you?  Has your school or state implemented something similar?  Is NJ on the right track with this project?

After making my statement…

After sharing my views…

After all this and an application process that started over a year ago, today I received my acceptance letter into the 2011 Cohort for Wilmington University’s Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership program.

I start in September; “excited” doesn’t begin to cover it.

I’ve been sitting on this half-written post since December of 2009, according to WordPress.  No real reason why I never saw it through, but Susan Meisel’s comment on my last post about leadership certainly brought the sentiments behind it bubbling forth:

I believe all professionals in education should be practicing visiting and sharing. Teachers and administrators alike should be in classrooms, visiting, picking up strategies, observing students, and looking for “best of”. I realize that administrators are busy, and teachers need to be released for this, but it would go a long way to making excellent schools.

This also brings me back to a short Twitter exchange I had with sixth grade teacher, blogger, mainstay in my RSS reader, and all-around good guy Bill Ferriter back in September of 2009 (yes, I’ve been sitting on these links for over a year – knew I’d get around to this post someday!).  The exact context of the conversation evades me – probably something regarding how teachers & administrators view certain issues differently – when Bill said this:

(Follow Bill on Twitter at @plugusin)

Bill gets no argument from me that my schedule is a lot more flexible than that of a classroom teacher (though I doubt it’s the free-for-all many probably imagine it to be), but shouldn’t learning from our peers be something that is actively encouraged in a school community?

Now I’m not an administrator, but since leaving the classroom, I have gained a much more global perspective of the goings-on in my school district.  As a teacher, my perspective was fairly limited to what happened in my classroom, and maybe it extended to a department-wide level in some matters.  Despite that increase in the breadth, my perspective has become limited in another way – i.e., I deal primarily with issues of special education: students who have been identified as requiring special education and related services, those classes designated as such, and the teachers, therapists, ESPs, and various other personnel who travel in these professional circles.

On the other hand, I’d argue that it’s also possible to pull so far back from the “trenches” that you lose sight of the personal interactions and little details that impact operations.

Maybe there is no happy medium to be found (unless you work in a really small school or district), but I think Susan’s suggestion of release time is a vital one, and one that would address Bill’s concern.  As a young teacher, I would go on my prep period to observe master teachers in my department for tips on classroom management, lesson structuring – all the things that new teachers need to figure out on their own, but could really use a couple good models at the same time.  While I learned much from those observations, in hindsight, I probably also limited myself by only observing other English teachers.  I wonder what I could have learned about cooperative learning or project-based learning from sitting in on a Science or Art class, or more effective uses of film and primary sources from a Social Studies class.

I understand there are costs associated with bringing in substitutes to cover teachers’ classes while they observe, but is this not a valid reason to do so?  If you were to take a sick day or attend a conference, they’d have to call a sub anyway, am I right?  Even if that was an impossibility, could you give up one prep period per month to sit in on your colleagues’ classrooms and see what you could learn?  If you’re an administrator, is it possible for you to drop in on a non-evaluative basis?

In an age where budgets are being slashed left and right and professional development is usually one of the first items to go, I challenge you, dear reader, to devote one prep period per month from now until May to finding some in-house PD.  For my part, I am going to try to get in to at least two classrooms per month (beyond my student observations, group counseling commitments, etc.)  just to get a better understanding of instructional strategies, pacing, and – hell – just to try to re-establish some ties with a professional context I really haven’t seen in almost three years.  I don’t know if it will make me a better school psychologist, but perhaps it will help me become a more effective case manager.

I know you’re busy.  We’re ALL busy.  If your administration encourages this and gives you professional time to accomplish this, I think you’re very fortunate and should take advantage.  But when we’re not given time to do something beneficial for us and for our students, sometimes we have to make time.  Will you join me?

I plan to blog about my experiences with this in June, so please stay tuned.

What characteristics define an excellent administrator?

Bearing in mind I had to keep my answer concise, here’s what I came up with:

When I reflect upon the excellent administrators with whom I’ve worked, they have all possessed a few common core characteristics:

Students come first: When actions needed to be taken or decisions made, the best administrators keep the impact on the students at the forefront of the decision-making process, and they do what is right, not necessarily what is convenient.  They conduct themselves in ways that demonstrate respect for students as people and members of the school community – even in disciplinary contexts – and in doing so, earn the respect of their students.

Ask and listen: The better administrators with whom I have worked spent more time asking questions and sincerely listening to responses in order to guide their leadership.

Distribute leadership: The best administrators recognize the strengths of their individual teachers and draw upon them to strengthen the school as a whole.  They recognize, praise, and nurture the talents in their buildings and encourage collaboration and continuing learning among their staff.

Obviously there’s much more to be said, and I’d like to see if we can crowdsource this.  Off the top of your head, what can you say about the excellent administrators with whom you’ve worked?  What did they have in common?

Extra credit for tying it to some practice we non-administrative types can or should engage in.

]]> http://www.apaceofchange.com/2010/12/09/quick-thoughts-on-leadership/feed/ 3 http://www.apaceofchange.com/2010/10/17/giving-students-a-voice/ http://www.apaceofchange.com/2010/10/17/giving-students-a-voice/#comments Sun, 17 Oct 2010 18:42:09 +0000 damian http://www.apaceofchange.com/?p=584 I just completed a timed writing sample as part of the application process to the Doctor of Education program I’ve mentioned previously.  The prompt required me to take a pro or con stance on allowing students to participate in the curriculum development process.  Please forgive the lack of links or expounding on examples; after all, I only had 45 minutes to complete it, and the clock was a-tickin’ the entire time.  Below is my unedited response, as provided to the university admissions folks.

Educators, and teachers in particular, are often relied upon to be experts in many areas: content area knowledge, behavior management, child psychology, and public relations are just a few of the fields teachers must be able to navigate proficiently, if not expertly, throughout the course of their careers.  Most often, when teachers need support in these areas, they can turn to colleagues, mentors, or even external sources such as consultants.  Curriculum development, however, is one field in which the “experts”, at times, reach out to the people most directly impacted by the choices made throughout the process: their students.  This is not a universally accepted practice, as many educators feel that as experts, we should dictate curriculum.  While few people would suggest swinging to the opposite end of the spectrum and asking students to devise their own curriculum in its entirety, there is certainly merit to the idea of students and educators working collaboratively to develop meaningful, relevant curriculum.

Recognizing students as stakeholders in their own education speaks volumes to the tone and atmosphere of a school community.  When students are asked their opinion, whether on a controversial topic discussed in class or a plan for a new school program, it sends a clear message that these young people are respected and valued as members of the community, as opposed to simply recipients of our collective wisdom.  Many school communities give lip service to the concept of respect, but fail to act in ways that support the platitudes.  At one of my previous schools, students were included in nearly every committee-based decision making process, including hiring teachers and professional development planning.  The difference in how those students related to their school versus how students at other schools at which I have worked related is utterly palpable.  While it may not be logistically possible to have face-to-face meetings with every individual student, especially in larger schools, it is possible to either meet with small groups or designated student representatives in the curriculum development process.  This act of inclusion not only actively demonstrates how the school values its students, it also gives the students a more acute sense of belonging to the school community and of having a vested interest in their own education.

When students feel they play a proactive, rather than reactive, role in their own learning, they tend to be more engaged with the subject matter.  Educators are constantly looking for ways to increase student engagement due to the suggested correlative relationship between engagement and learning outcomes – i.e., the more engaged students are with the material, the better they learn.  What better way for educators to learn what engages a student than to ask one?  As desirable as a wholly individualized learning program for each student may be, most schools do not seem to be up to the task yet.  It is possible, however, to collect feedback from students about their individual strengths and interests, as well as potential career goals for older students.  From these data, educators can then work to incorporate their desired skills and standards to be taught into a framework that best engages their students.  Anecdotally speaking, I have observed this phenomenon many times as both a teacher and a school psychologist, especially among students who struggled in traditional classroom settings.  Given the opportunity to practice skills such as research, writing, and problem-solving in a context in which they had some say, they tended to do much better there than when contexts were imposed upon them.  Again, one hundred percent agreement is beyond the scope of most schools at present, but soliciting students for this kind of feedback at least raises the opportunity for increasing engagement, and thereby learning.

Of the myriad of skills and standards teachers are expected to instill in their students, very few are more important than the love of learning.  By tapping students for their interests, strengths, and opinions in the curriculum development process, not only do we allow them to perform better on our local assessments, we also allow them to develop all these skills in such a way that they can and will continue to use them long after their formal education has ended.  When a student has learned to conduct research on a preferred topic, the skills involved in the research process will be transferable to other aspects of his life, both in and out of the school setting.  My former students may not remember every detail of every novel and play we read in our classes, but I would like to think that, because I gave them some flexibility and choice in their assignments, they have retained those skills because they learned them in a preferred, familiar environment, as opposed to being dragged kicking and screaming through the process learning about a topic with absolutely no connection to their lives.  Skills must be taught within some kind of authentic, meaningful context; otherwise, I fear they will be forgotten as quickly as they are taught and assessed.

There are varying degrees to which educators can involve students in developing curriculum.  Certainly, there is no “one size fits all” approach, and each individual district or building must approach the prospect as best fits their unique situation.  There are also logistical and philosophical challenges that each school will face as they attempt to meet the diverse needs of diverse communities; however, these challenges will not deter the school districts that feel strongly enough about the inclusion of all students in their own educational process.  The sense of ownership, community, and engagement that such a program can bring to a school should be reason enough to give each student some degree of say in his or her own education.

This, unfortunately, is a microcosm of the larger “debate” (is it really a debate?  Really?) happening in the US surrounding education.  Politicians, celebrities, filmmakers, and everyone who has ever attended school (and is therefore an expert in education) are calling for the heads of bad teachers.

I want to keep this as apolitical as possible, but I just need to get this off my chest: nobody likes a bad teacher, myself included.  Nobody likes a bad anything – that’s why they’re bad.  But for all their bluster, the wonks still haven’t quantified what makes a teacher “good” other than their students’ standardized test scores (an argument so fallacious I don’t even know where to begin).

Let’s take this to the local level (let’s also, for the sake of argument, set aside the major contributing factors to academic success, like family SES and parent involvement).  Maybe you know of a teacher in your school who struggles, for whatever reason.  Maybe his classroom management is weak.  Maybe she doesn’t know her subject as well as she thought.  Maybe the kids don’t like him or he’s just not connecting with the kids on some level.  Instead of cutting her loose and hiring a brand new teacher, doesn’t it make more sense to provide that person with supports to help her become a better teacher and thereby strengthen the school community?

Here’s a fun fact about which I’m not proud: I almost lost my job after my first year of teaching.  I readily admit I was in over my head and did not have the skills – coming in over a year after graduating college and two since I started student teaching – to do my job effectively, or at least not while coping with the stresses of the job, for which I was wholly unprepared.  The period from September 2000 to June 2001 was one of the worst periods of my life; however, with some good supports in place, I was able to stick it out, learn from my mistakes, and start what would become, by all accounts, a successful eight years of teaching.  These supports included:

• Mentoring: I was paired with a veteran English teacher who was able to provide me with advice and act as a sounding board on a variety of topics – curricular and otherwise.  She helped me get through my first year in one piece, and also provided me with helpful insights about my practice, on both what I was doing poorly (which was a lot) and what I was doing well (which allowed me to build on my strengths and apply them to other areas).

• Collaborative Colleagues: I always like to say that I had 30 mentors that first year.  While I worked closest with my ‘official’ mentor, the other folks in my department were only too willing to share materials, experiences, and even let me observe their classes in the name of improving my practice.  Nobody locked their file cabinets when I came snooping around, and folks were happy to let me grill them on how they overcame some of the problems I had.  It was also helpful to know that these fantastic teachers I respected so much did have the same problems I had at one time, and that I wasn’t defective.  It was also nice to have someone other than my direct supervisor to talk to and learn from (see below).

• Support From Above: At no time in my first year did I think my supervisor or principal were out to get me.  I knew they wanted me to succeed because they backed up their verbal well-wishes with helpful, constructively critical observation writeups and providing access to teaching and classroom management resources.  My supervisor at the time also encouraged reflection and was available to me to sit & talk about what was troubling me and help me to troubleshoot and problem-solve my own issues.  It was often easier for me to do this with my colleagues during my first year because of my fear of being judged by my supervisor, but I did take her up on this offer in my second and third year of teaching.  It was a habit I continued through the rest of my time teaching with two other supervisors.

These supports all helped me to get my head around my new profession and what it means to work with young people.  If Year One was all about surviving, it was all about thriving from my second year on.  Once I had the basics down, I felt free to take more risks and explore new methods of learning with my students.  I had to learn to ride my bike before I could pop those wheelies, and while my first year was tough, you know that by my second year I was smiling well before Christmas.

Of course, there comes a point where losses need to be cut.  If a teacher makes it to the end of a probationary period and still has no control over the class, still is ignorant of their subject matter, or still can’t communicate in ways that reach young people, or for some reason chooses not to take advantage of the supports provided them, then perhaps it’s time for that discussion about finding a different line of work.  But to do so without providing some kind of rehabilitation (or, as in my case, regular old habilitation) smacks of arrogance – teachers are not interchangeable cogs.  Good teachers are not manufactured, they are grown. Nobody leaves an undergraduate education program as a “good” teacher – people can come in with a great deal of promise or potential, but good teaching is an art that takes years to develop, and there are no guarantees that substituting younger teachers for old ones will bring about any improvement whatsoever.

It seems to me what “bad” teachers need foremost are guidance and support, not ultimatums and pinkslips.

While undoubtedly many of today’s posts will focus on why and how administrators and supervisors should embrace technology (and don’t get me wrong; I believe they should), I think we first need to differentiate between “administrator” and “leader”.  I hope this doesn’t contribute too much to the “us v. them” mentality to which Gerald alludes in this comment (a valid point, and a problematic issue in any field, to be sure), but I believe it’s important to note that not all administrators (supervisors, headmasters, etc.) are leaders.  Surely, the specific attributes that best describe a leader will vary from person to person, but at the very least, I see that word as describing behavior, not a job title.

Conversely, not all leaders are administrators.  At the risk of sounding nostalgic, there was a very strong grass-roots movement among some of the teachers at my old school to evaluate technology and incorporate it into classroom activities.  A few years prior, in the late 1990s, the then-superintendent sort of put us on the map with regard to technology, but the curricular implementation seemed rather confined to this one project (although it was still pretty cool).  Still, perhaps even more importantly, the series of tubes infrastructure was in place, and steadily improving, from ISDN lines to Wi-Fi blanketing the 72-acre campus.  A few years after that project came to an end, this guy some of you might have heard of took advantage of all those empty Internets tubes and became one of the first to incorporate this easily-accessible technology that would come to be widely known as “Web 2.0″ into his classes.  A few years after that, I started investigating the utility of wikis with my English students.  Right around that time, several of my colleagues began using Skype with their World Language students and podcasting in their Social Studies classes.

The beauty of this is that it was not a formal, sanctioned movement, or a directive from on high; rather, some of us just started exploring options and becoming self-taught “experts” in our own rights in certain areas – Will was our blogging guru, I was the wiki guy, Jon and Ray were the people to talk to about Skype, and so on.  When we finally did come together, some of our supervisors and administrators had the foresight and humility to say, “You guys have really gotten this figured out, or are at least on your way, and we absolutely see the value in it – can you help bring this stuff to your colleagues?”  From there, that small core of five or six teachers started running after-school and summer workshops for our colleagues.  Eventually, the core group grew, as did our interests, tools of focus, and – perhaps most importantly – the number of teachers we were able to reach and help identify technological companions for their specific needs.  It was a beautiful, very organic development, thanks mainly to a) teachers who were not afraid to assume leadership roles in relation to their colleagues, and b) administrators who demonstrated true leadership by acknowledging the strengths of their faculty in areas that were largely foreign to them (the administrators) and trusting them to lead.

It should be noted that this approach of “bottom-up” leadership (as opposed to “top-down”) was implemented in many other areas with regard to technology as well.  A core group of teachers volunteered to be the first to be assigned tablet PCs at our school.  Once feedback was collected from this pilot group and the decision was made to roll them out schoolwide, the original cohort ran most of the subsequent training sessions (after all, they were far better suited to speak to the tablet’s impact and utility in the classroom than any administrator).  It’s also interesting to note that in this rollout, faculty & staff were not required to take one if they did not want one (I’ll just leave this there for you to opine upon in the comments…).  The same approach was taken some years later when the school decided to pilot a 1:1 student netbook program.  Teachers, who occupy one of the lower places in the traditional linear hierarchy of school authority, demonstrated multiple times their ability to be leaders in their school community.  This was not only supported, but celebrated and encouraged, by school administrators.

One lesson I’ve learned in the three years or so I’ve been active in online education communities is that there’s a tremendous amount of ego destruction that has to take place in order to really learn and improve one’s professional practice (at least, there was in my case).  Just as the teacher can never presume to be the smartest person in the classroom, the administrator cannot presume to be the best-informed on every single topic.  Mary Beth addressed this quite well in her post “6 Reasons I Surround Myself with People Smarter Than I Am”, and comments by Chris and Deven on that post pretty solidly address the implications for those of us in administrative positions.

I imagine there is a tremendous amount of pressure on school administrators to always have “the right answer” and know exactly what to do in all situations.  That goes with the territory, I suppose, but please remember that you also have an entire faculty of intelligent, dedicated professionals who work with you (you did hire intelligent & dedicated professionals, right?), and whose strengths and knowledge you can draw upon and foster, especially in the realm of educational technology.  Chances are there is a group of teachers in your school who have been tinkering and experimenting just as my colleagues and I did years ago.  Putting your ego aside and drawing upon these resources right under your nose can only benefit the students you serve, and provides a golden opportunity for you to be a leader in deed as well as by title.

In the meantime, please allow me to direct your attention to some projects to which I’ve had the pleasure and honor of contributing:

• Terry Freedman’s The Amazing Web 2.0 Projects Book is a free e-book describing over 80 Web 2.0 projects developed and implemented by teachers in classrooms around the world.  Head over to his download page for more details (and check out my write-up on the wiki created by my Honors British Literature class on page 70!).
• As I’ve mentioned before, I was a presenter at last November’s Technology Integration Showcase at the NJEA Convention in Atlantic City, NJ.  During my eight-hour shift on the floor of High Tech Hall, I was interviewed about social Web tools for educators for an episode of Classroom Closeup NJ.  You can watch the segment on the Tech Integration Showcase here (my bit runs from about 2:15 to 3:20).
• The Cooperating Teacher Leadership Network is an initiative based out of my grad school alma mater, Rider University.  The declared purpose of the group is to celebrate and support the folks who work closest with student teachers, but I think over time the positive impact of a group like this will ripple further into the entire teacher training program at Rider, with other universities hopefully to follow.  We’re in the process of planning a two-day conference for June 29-30 of this year, so if you’ll be in the Lawrenceville, NJ area this June and think you might be interested, check out our brochure (direct link to PDF).  Our Facebook fan page is still new and low on content, but feel free to become a fan if you’d like to see what we get up to in the coming weeks and months.

Add to this a few presentations I have coming up and a collaborative research project that I am very excited about, and my dance card is pretty darn full through the end of the school year.  I just hope I can stay focused as the seasons change and the weather draws me out of my winter hibernation!