Clay Shirkey's use of Ronald Burt's research ("The Social Origins of Good Ideas") reminded me of problem-solving and communication issues at the high school where I currently teach. His research showed that social bridging produced better ideas. We all know that high schools are full of cliques. I'm not talking about the ones with teenagers. I'm talking about the administrator clique, the secretary clique, the custodian clique, the history department clique, math department clique, and on and on. And it's common within departments--the English II clique. All of these groups tend to be closed groups that try to problem-solve without much consultation with the other groups. I think for many there's a natural resistance to bridging. It requires time and effort, and sometimes it's uncomfortable. I've served on several school-wide committees, and when new ideas were presented back to the school-at-large, there was some overt and covert push-back. Even within my department, most attempts at vertical planning and implementation of newly articulated subject-matter (i.e. research, grammar, formal writing, etc.) are ignored.
Needless to say, quite often "We do what we've always done and we get what we've always got." We aren't as successful as we should be. It's frustrating and ironic that educators (and I'm including those that have moved on to administration) often resist and even refuse to learn something new.
For me, I'm going to push for more social bridging inside my classrooms. In fact, using some of the Web 2.0 tools would be a way to bridge across all of my students, regardless of grade level in some cases. If I can consistently use these tools year after year, some of my students will continue to revisit the group and offer out of their own greater experience. Instead of trying to get my department to try some interdisciplinary discussion, I'll continue to work with those people in other departments who are also open to the possibilities of mixing it up.
On the other hand, I have benefited greatly from peer collaboration within my department. Sometimes one-on-one with another teacher in my grade level and sometimes in a learning community of 8-10 teachers who all teach English II.
Collaborating across the curriculum is intellectually stimulating and more challenging. Collaborating in a closed group is more comfortable and can be more productive.
I think the best results will come from both bridging and bonding.
You've got some great ideas about how to effect change and make connections among the folks in your school. Love it! I really like the idea of bridging grades or across years. I remember when I first learned about archives and legacies in instruction, and I thought it was such a cool idea.
ReplyDelete