"‘Gen Y’ Teachers Want to Innovate; Education Leaders Lag Behind" edweek article
"‘Gen Y’ Teachers Want to Innovate; Education Leaders Lag Behind"
By Sabrina Laine
from the article:
Generation Y teachers, those 20-somethings who connect with their friends via online social-networking sites and live with the world at their fingertips, are inherently going to be incompatible with a stagnant education system that can be painfully isolating and uninspiring. Will the system bend to their will or break their spirit? What does the answer mean for the future of public education in this country?
Whether schools nurture or negate the ideas of Gen Y teachers will be the 21st-century litmus test for their ability to lead in a knowledge-driven, global economy that is growing increasingly, and exponentially, competitive as our students fall dangerously behind. Just as the workplace is learning how to integrate Gen Y professionals on the brink of the biggest labor shortage in history, schools need a lesson in leveraging the next generation of teachers to take learning to the next level.
Generation Y teachers want to create, not conform. They want to color off the page, but are told to teach to the test. They want to work in small groups, but are given unmanageable numbers of students. They want to commune with colleagues online and across the school, but they are confined to their classrooms and limited to one-on-one teacher mentoring. They are sometimes pressured by peers to maintain the status quo, but they want the power to make a difference. They want financial stability and respect, but the importance of their role is monetarily marginalized. They want to co-teach, job-share, receive bonuses, and try their hand at leadership roles, but unions and politics can be unmovable barriers to work/life balance and optimum job satisfaction. But most important of all, Gen Y teachers want support from their leaders to innovate and inspire their students."
Any reactions to the article?
By Sabrina Laine
from the article:
Generation Y teachers, those 20-somethings who connect with their friends via online social-networking sites and live with the world at their fingertips, are inherently going to be incompatible with a stagnant education system that can be painfully isolating and uninspiring. Will the system bend to their will or break their spirit? What does the answer mean for the future of public education in this country?
Whether schools nurture or negate the ideas of Gen Y teachers will be the 21st-century litmus test for their ability to lead in a knowledge-driven, global economy that is growing increasingly, and exponentially, competitive as our students fall dangerously behind. Just as the workplace is learning how to integrate Gen Y professionals on the brink of the biggest labor shortage in history, schools need a lesson in leveraging the next generation of teachers to take learning to the next level.
Generation Y teachers want to create, not conform. They want to color off the page, but are told to teach to the test. They want to work in small groups, but are given unmanageable numbers of students. They want to commune with colleagues online and across the school, but they are confined to their classrooms and limited to one-on-one teacher mentoring. They are sometimes pressured by peers to maintain the status quo, but they want the power to make a difference. They want financial stability and respect, but the importance of their role is monetarily marginalized. They want to co-teach, job-share, receive bonuses, and try their hand at leadership roles, but unions and politics can be unmovable barriers to work/life balance and optimum job satisfaction. But most important of all, Gen Y teachers want support from their leaders to innovate and inspire their students."
Any reactions to the article?
Tags: 21st+century+skills, administrative+support, innovation
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Stephanie Sandifer on
-
"If you're gonna innovate, why not REALLY innovate?
Why a school? Let's start with figuring out what the goal is.
Is it supporting Education?
Is it supporting Learning?
Is it supporting Society?
Is it ... what?...
...Is *school* the answer? Heck, is Education even the answer?"
Outside of the box thinking -- YAY!
I agree. Let's not recreate the system outside of the system -- let's create something entirely new altogether.
-
Permalink Reply by Ed Jones on
-
But what does any of that mean?
I mean, this is classroom 2.0, not existentialist 2.0.
-
Permalink Reply by nlowell on
-
If the discussion of Classroom2.0 doesn't include at least an acknowledgement that the classroom itself might be an obstacle, then where does that discussion happen?
MySpace?
Stephanie called for some innovative thinking in designing an educational system to meet 21st century needs. I'm suggesting that serious innovation needs to at least explore the possibility that what we've always done ain't necessarily the way we ought to do it.
Starting with the fundamentals.
Why are we here? What's the point? Can we agree on what the purpose is? Is there actually only one purpose? Are we talking about a multipurpose construct that's masquerading as a monolithic entity?
I don't know. That's why I suggested the discussion.
-
-
What is man? Who or what is God? Why does man exist? Do we exist? Can we know if we exist? Are you a video game testing me?
Look, 50 percent of urban and minority students do not graduate from high school. Many who do are performing at a watered down 9th grade level. People who graduate with honors (like me) are missing some of the most fundamental things which are necessary for being culturally literate in the particular society we live in.
We in the US don't send enough students on to science, engineering, and medical schools to maintain core competency in these fields. We don't learn enough of world and us history to understand the issues that confront us on the world stage, not to mention the rule of law and ethics we've eeked out over the past 5000 years.
Surely you're aware of these issues? If you're not, my apologies. If you are, and insist on returning to these omphaloskeptic cosmologogical questions instead of addressing the issue of how do we structure a world class profession, then...in my book, you are one of the obstacles, thick as thieves with the reactionary old guard who obfuscate all discussion of change.
Which, of course, is anyone's right. :-)
-
-
Yanno, I was gonna chalk this up to just another disconnect between me and reality, but when a conversation about change in education gets shut down by name calling, we do everybody a disservice.
So, no, Ed. I will not sit down and shut up.
I am aware of the issues you raise. And I'm aware that we got here by following the path you're advocating we stay on. Fifty years of misguided policy, and a hundred and fifty of inertia have created this monster. Personally I think it's time we did something different.
Posit: Classrooms are not for learning. They are established for the efficient (but not necessarily effective) application of scarce resource -- teacher time.
Posit: Educational research into "best practice" is - for the most part - structurally flawed because it's based on unstated assumptions. There are no "best practices" because learning is not a mass-production commodity. That's the thinking that got us here.
Posit: Current educational policy in the US is driven by political agenda aimed at keeping the population stupid, docile, and compliant. It operates on FUD and is highly effective at maintaining the status quo.
Posit: The Global economy is approaching a singularity event. Market forces in China, and india are going to continue to cause upheaval in the status quo as their purchasing power permits them to dominate markets around the globe.
Posit: The US economy - based on Industrial-Capitalist models of control of the means of production - is already collapsing. Outsourcing, off shoring, and a widening gap between the poorest and richest members of our society will hasten that collapse.
Posit: There is a window of opportunity to begin transforming the status quo that may be -- at most -- a decade. It is already possible for anybody with an idea, drive, skill, and an interenet connect to make at least a comfortable living. The need for diplomas, degrees, and other certifications of school attendence is already obsolete.
Posit: Core competencies from the Industrial Revolution are less important for the welfare of the populace than they are to the maintenance of the status quo.
Now. What is the current state of Education in the US?
About 20% of Americans over 25 have no high school diploma.
Fewer than 25% of Americans over 25 have a college degree.
About 6% of Americans over 25 have an advanced degree
and fewer than 1% of Americans have a doctorate.
There are about 7million teachers in the US.
There some 65,000 school districts
To maintain the current system:
Every single teacher needs to skill up at least 10 years in the next five.
Every single school district needs to get a grip on policy and practice to require that to happen.
Every single parent has to realize that "it was good enough for me" is NOT good enough for their kids.
We have to get over the past and start figuring out how in the wide world of sports we create an economy in this country that allows us to thrive again.
So, tell me Mr Jones. Where, exactly, does your "world class profession" fit in here? If the foundational questions are just so much navel gazing, then could you share the plan with the rest of us?
-
-
n, That's a bit more constructive. And yes, ..vitamin D deprivation may have carried me away a bit.
Actually, to go back to the original spirit of your question, I think we all agree on the need to get "out of the box". There have been a couple of excellent discussions here. The first was, What if we closed all the schools?. The second was What if We Closed All the Ed Schools?
Of the two,the second got more traction. The teachers here, anyway, seem to recognize how disconnected from reality the ed schools are.
-
-
I read those threads as they were developing.
It's axiomatic. "We teach as we're taught."
Ed Schools are no more disconnected than the school districts. The serious disconnects seem to be between the public's expectation of Education and the delivery payload of schools.
Educational policy is being driven by FUD, and politics.
Educational practice is being driven by scarcity.
There may be a case against Unions but having seen what the "elected representatives of the people" (school boards) try to pull on our local educational establishment, I can't fault teachers for wanting to protect themselves -- and by extension the kids -- by forming Unions.
But back to the question: What IS the goal here?
A self-reliant populace?
Restoring the sheen on America's besmirched scientific reputation?
Maintaining the infrastructure that keeps 65,000 school districts and 7million teachers employed?
There are some structural obstacles as well.
School is daycare. I'm a parent with kids in public school. I *need* them to be in school so I can go to work. If they learn something in school, that's gravy, but frankly they get most of their education here. There's a breakdown because whileI have the skills and knowledge necessary to teach my kids, many don't.
Truthfully, I'd rather have them spend school time a little more usefully, but because of the politics and practice, I'm not terribly convinced that's going to happen.
Here's what *I* think has to happen short term.
a. Repeal NCLB. The Feds kick in only about 10% of the national budget on public education and efforts to comply with this dog are costing the nation's schools too much of that 10%. Some argue that it costs more to do the tests than the Feds give. I think that's true. We get about 32mil here in Colorado in Federal aid to public education and some estimates are that it costs us 35m to demonstrate compliance. No Child Left Behind can only be operationalized as "No Child Gets Ahead." Thats un-sat.
b. Get some indemnification for schools so that they can't be sued by parents for teaching kids stuff the parents don't agree with. My kids learn more stuff I wish they didn't from the kids on the playground than from school. Of course, now that I think of it, I did, too, when I was that age, and even 40-odd years ago, I'm convinced that those lessons were the really valuable ones so maybe it's not so important that schools be able to teach. Just have recess.
c. Get rid of all the COPA, CIPA, Grandmother Protection filtering laws. Cutting kids (and teachers) off from key elements of the web because somebody might see a boob or WORSE a penis is ludicrous. Instead of having access to key elements -- and having the opportunity to teach when stupid stuff happens -- teachers are prevented from accessing tools that are critical in the current economy. Moreover, by cutting off access from school, these rules effectively give kids free-rein at home, and on their cellphones by almost guaranteeing no adult oversight in those school-banned spaces. "If it protects just one child..." cannot be the governing principle if the corrollary is "It's ok to hurt all the rest."
There's three ideas. Your turn. -
-
Permalink Reply by Connie Weber on
-
Hi Ed--
What? Uh...huh? I'm going to have look up some of those words. Actually, I think it's a pretty good idea to discuss the purpose of things.
You are always taking a stand for who gets left out in the system, which is very important to keep front and center. Thank you.
Doesn't the question of how to structure a world class profession necessitate discussion of purpose, of essential meaning in education? Where would be the starting point?
-
-
n, NCLB is an evil that was necessary, but never should have been. The teaching profession (IMNSHO) should have been monitoring its own results. It should been on top of quality control, and should have been dealing harshly with those schools and teachers who were cheating students. It should have been stretching to include parents and community, not lock them out. It should have been helping/requiring its members to purchase private sector errors and omissions / malpractice insurance like every other profession.
Back to the original article, it seems that these new teachers sense that their profession is disconnected from the practices, standards, and aspirations of other knowledge professionals.
Will they remake the profession? Will they stick with the status quo truck-drivers model? We shall see....
-
-
"necessary"? Arguable. From an education standpoint, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. From a political standpoint, absolutely. It was an important stone in the Bush legacy. It wouldnt surprise me if it came from Babs and Laura.
But back the the article. I'm reading it as "omg these poor new teachers are going to run into the bandsaw just like the last 10 or 12 generations have, but now that we have the internet, we're all gonna be able to watch the pathos unfold."
Yea. I'm a cynic.
And I hope I'm wrong every day of the week. -
-
-
Good points, Nathan. Especially like this question:
"Are we talking about a multipurpose construct that's masquerading as a monolithic entity?"
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Report
Win at School
Commercial Policy
If you are representing a commercial entity, please see the specific guidelines on your participation.
Badge
Follow
Awards:
© 2024 Created by Steve Hargadon.
Powered by
