Now that was easy

Let's just say in my employment record, the last 2 years was the toughest job I have ever had and yet howcome letting go was easier than I thought it woud.

Id say 'toughest' by far because I find the process of 'changing culture' the most challenging to do. It calls one to define one's standards of work and ways of working, or even question it and search for somekind of middle ground. It makes you look at the half filled glass and see for yourself what one can settle with or even settle without.  And yet interestingly, it gives you a sense of safety in the knowledge and comfort of your own limitations. A recognition of one's limitation hence pushes you towards contentment with what you are actually able to do and contribute and that others will surely do a better job at it. Therefore moving on means moving forward. And at this age, one is no longer hell bent on seeking  validation for one's efforts because the validation always comes later on after, and in a different form altogether.

The faculty is in a much better space. I was a witness to finally see how the right people are finally occupying the right spaces. With that comes the joy of looking back at my own work experiences and how Ive made uncertain spaces right for me.  Knowing that when all seems a bit right or a bit better or will be,  signals you to go ahead and risk yourself in exploring unfamiliar spaces.

Then with this looking back, comes remembering people who have helped you deal with uncertainties, and moreso, people who inspire you to do better.  This 2 year stint when I tried to apply  the extent of what I already know  (creatively) when it comes to running a school or monitoring a program is a good initiation to what I thought was a glitch but what I can now actually label as  mainstream culture pervading most local schools --the culture of silence, the culture of crabs, the culture of passive aggressive communication, the culture of lack of collaboration. They say it is a Filipino trait while I insist on saying it ain't because I have been in school cultures where I was fortunate to experience quite the opposite.  So that was like....ahhh ok. That only means, in the end, the choice is still mine.

The question is, have I contributed to the propagation of the  mainstream culture or have I tried to illustrate an alternate culture.  I would like to think I tried to contribute to the latter but in the end found it is easy to give up on it knowing that it is no longer my task and that my co-leads are in fact the right people who are better off continuing what they already are doing in the first place. And that if it will just take defining the roles others can take on  sooner as add-on roles, then this is looking at  second liners to occupy the front lines a few years from now. That was the neatest part of the job, btw.

Being an expensive redundancy to the process can now be an obstacle to my own growth and learning. Settling for the comfort of being expensive has never been a way to go for me especially after running a school and knowing the value of maximizing resources. Now that was the easiest to see.


Now going back to my greatest learning and realizations:
1) Kindness
It would not hurt to be kind. It is in the knowledge of one's kindness that one can go ahead and justify  being a bitch if you have to cuz you tried to be kind in the first place...only because you cannot settle for anything substandard. That I am capable of playing my B side in one context and my K side in another was quite splitting only to see that  I can reconcile and live with it.
And since few ones are now fine with using the B side, I need not play that role any longer.

 Then recently I practised kindness recently with one parent in my small school. I hope the fruits of that will grow this year. Thanks to MR and ME=meron pala akong matututunan sa mga Atenista..hehe.

Now the limits to my K side and B side is worth testing as I go back to UPOU.

2) Sense of others
I am not alone in my efforts and never was. I am one fortunate co-academic lead to have worked closely with fellows (AA & CF). And to acknowledge from the start that  coords from another dept (JL, VN & RE) are just as much as co-leads in my dept. There have been reliable folks in school who just need that space for affirmation. Or that I have always found ways to  seek support from a mere exchange of fresh ideas with SL and ZG... or the mature presence of  Is=PI + NI who surprisingly come from a mainstream school culture but have managed to keep themselves open-minded.

3) Humility
I am truly better off in a space where I know little than in a space where I know more because it reminds of humility--just to temper that UP arrogance in me.

And so, I will forever be grateful to MPL, who as DoF, has forever been consistent to who she was way  back. And knowing how human she can truly be (funny and crazy) like the rest of us.

4) Forgiveness
Yeah, this. That in the effort of doing my job, I made my own mistakes. And before I can even ask for forgiveness, I need to forgive myself first. I am good with that already--imagine all the casualties Ive had as AA Program Chair and living with the knowledge of casualties because my graduates  and all efforts  going into that outweigh the casualties. So forgiveness of this kind was easy.

But the forgiveness of another kind, when the other party misjudged you in someway and no apologies are coming your way, iiiiis tough! Then  logic and empathy in me kicked in:  I did it by looking at the case/s and seeing I have no baggage to carry so what if I carry that a little for someone who just had too much of it in life, pain included.  And seeing that while I did share common views with former leads, I am just one  person with a happier/ successful experiences in the area of 'learning',  'trying' or 'experimenting' and therefore was fortunate enough to be loved and will always see the good in my experiences (or rather too ADHD to settle with unnecessary pain). This part I love best and to the core! There is triumph in forgiveness after all.

Now I can say, THAT WAS EASY. Moving on...

DP Hist 11 Disequilibrium v. 2.015

I really need this mode...it is kinda hard when I don't exactly know where to turn to for very specific concerns re: the Hist new guide. This is what I truly miss about my former work. I know anytime I can bounce ideas with or unload to co teachers for anything about teaching and learning--offline or online...embedded in the craziest narratives of the day or even the sickest, greenest jokes over lunch, and this still happens 24/7 having my husband as the most reliable co teacher around.

Now at my 2nd year at Beacon, I have a small groupie I know I can turn to. I have AG, RE and JG to ask about DP HL/ SL matters. I have VN and JL to check on my sanity, AA to ask about her thoughts on my views, ML and CC about teaching, kids & classes, CF for ideas in my  MYP class, GG and PI  for organizational/ faculty-as-body views, ZG for acad reading and writing...

OMG, what list was that. It only shows how cluttered my brain can be.

Lately, and specific to History I am able to sound off  ideas to  and concerns with a new (but very experienced) teacher but still in times when I get confused (and bagot with myself for being confused) and then emotional in the midst of the confusion,  I think it best to shut up and listen first to my thoughts before I do anything.  That space between stimulus and response (naxx..what I gathered from HOS, hehe)

While I do recognize I can turn to my current DP coord for concerns re: grading, assessment and TSCs, Id really like a serious conversation about IAs and how it relates to the IB Exam paper assessments etc etc etc AND the course guide itself. Im sensing, there must be a better way to work with all these--tipong we hit 2 birds (or even more) with one stone...and in the end try to lighten the load on the students or actually maximize their brain efforts toward the common goal of meaningful learning. 

Here goes:

I was thinking what if to help students in that phase when they need to think of a research area of inquiry and their research question, which upon advice of former DP coord should be related to Philippine history,  we can actually look at THAT list of World History topics outlined by IB in their New History Guide. From the list, extract those topics and even from that list, why not develop specific WH topics for Grade 12?

And if so, do I rock the boat---this way: ask a co teacher and my coord whether another WH topic can be developed for the 12s next year in of support student related IA inquiries  which touch on the Philippines-SEA context?

And if so, which  former World History topic can then be replaced by this new WH unit/topic?

And if so, can the DP coord with the Hist 12 teacher also look at this topic/ unit development alongside  the DP Socio-Anthro course development?

So instead of actually looking at the History course as a topic listing of sorts, we look at the topics as a coherent web--with the routes, prescribed courses, case study like courses and world history option courses as somehow interrelated and we see THAT common strand we can work in so that we work around the IA?( I wonder then how we can view all our DP courses.) It's as if we do not actually have to start from scratch whenever we are faced with the IA.

Suma total, it is essentially a question of (and in the light of the new Hist Guide): Do we keep the Hist course safe and keep with the courses we have comfortably developed and enriched vs Do we take this as an opportune time to do the necessary change so that the Hist course can continue to evolve or redefine itself given student demands and interest on Phil History?

OR keep it safe cuz eventually, we shall cancel out Hist course and go for Socio-Anthro, just to be pragmatic about this. We have soooo much work to do  anyways.

So AHA...there must be something good coming out of doing a self study on this New History Guide_ m2017. It requires us to realistically look into our priorities as a program...and also a chance to ask ourselves--could it be that the Phil educ system have always sidelined Socio Anthro as a social science over History which seems to have dominated the SocSci discipline since time memorial...with History historically emerging even before the Social Science was conceived. Then all the more, we carve that space for Sociology and Anthropology, the Philippine kind in IB-DP.

Glad to have this out of my brain.

The Place of Teacher Directed Discussions + More

I thought I knew what this meant and how it occupies a rightful place in any class. For one, it's a technique I normally do with my grade schoolers to drive them to certain points. And ok, I admit that whenever I have a clear agenda in mind of a MUST KNOW from my list of WHAT-all-Filipino-children-MUST KNOW-&-understand about Social Studies, then I resort to this technique to test what my students know.  Also when students are immersed in their project based learning, and on their own or mostly and collaboratively with their peers, I feel that I still need to do short lectures just to see whether my students are in fact getting what they should be getting from our classes.

And after all, in college, it's the staple technique of most UP professors. Though most have bored me to death and I end up going back to the handout or readings to do my self study just to nail a passing grade, I have found myself actively engaged (but silently) with very few professors, and professors who  do it really well, namely: Dean Acoymo (300 level course, Educational Philo class),  Dr Manzano (300 level Curr Studies courses), Sr (or Dr) Priscilla Mananzan (100 Level Educ major course) and Prof Casambre (100 level Speech Class). Their styles are quite varied--ranging from narrative ones, theatrical ones, relaxed ones, and the talsik-laway-but-so-what-Im-great type. The sexiest of them all is Dean Acoymo (he reminds me of Winnie the Pooh bec of his shirt; such a fashion model with his colored contacts... so masculine and yet so loveably and admirably gay. what an aura!)  What I love about the experience of being at the receiving end of their teacher-directness is this: I got a unique experience out of their lectures. Their discussions have triggered thoughts, daydreams, questions, and more questions---and so in my mind, I validate, I wonder, I ask-- I come out of it challenged and moreso inspired. Even in online learning platforms, lectures and conference presentors, Im sure there's quite a number out there, effectively delivered through YouTube or Podcasts, and live classes in MOOCs or online conferences.

Now comes this Harkness Discussion at The Beacon Academy which made me question teacher directed approaches. Mailin very much believes in it. And I admit, I was a bit of a skeptic (though I never get my skepticism in the way): like what's the diff? what's this western construct? or some recycled idea?  isn't HD just like small group discussions with guide questions or something like opening up minds and ideas or having students freely respond to a story through minimal prompts or minimally invasive teaching?

But hey, because I am eager to try, I did try it. And I must say, it spelled the difference in the way I listened to adolescent learners. HD is truly one decent, research based classroom practice among an array of student driven teaching approaches.

My prior experiences and mode of thinking as a grade school teacher is to actively listen to my students share or discuss.  But then while doing so, I  have a dropdown list--are my students getting this, this, this and so on? I have clear measures on the knowledge and understandings Id like to hear at a certain point and time. If I do not hear it, then they omg they haven't learned it :( In  Harkness Discussions however, my brain behaves differently. Though I give a set of guide questions, I end up actively listening, but gradually, I am learning to recede and let go of my guide questions because I am after finding out these: what am I learning from my students? what am I getting about how they are learning? At this day and age, and in the context of learning the IB way, IB trained teachers can just assume that students can spill out K &Us cuz after all at the MYP and DP level, it is a given that they are critical and conceptual thinkers. Though that is largely a given, what  is mostly is HOW they use it and arrive at it--the process of constructing knowledge is always a wonder to me and to my mind, one way to really know the process (not the product) is to immerse in their thought processes represented by their spoken communication.  HDiscussion is about recognizing the learner's process and most of all their insights and their new found knowledge from their own perspectives.

Having been convinced of HDiscussion in my Year 1 at Beacon, I therefore ask: does it mean we throw Teacher directed discussions out the window? Well, Id be thankful of course. For one, while I do find teacher directed discussions as a respectable technique, it doesn't mean I am competent at it…especially when handling topics I am learning and relearning. Lecturing is the least of the approaches I resort to here at Beacon because we do want things largely driven by students...also because Id rather do online discussions than F2F. Online discussions  (and even live online ones) allow me the time to organize my thoughts in writing before I spill otherwise I can be winding and jump from one idea to the next. Or even let's say I give myself time to do my ppts and notes, by the time I face the students, sometimes, I miss out on important details. Yikes! But then I still had to risk  doing so  because my History class openly said they do want lecture-discussion types. It's a way for them to validate their understandings. Then again, I just sense I have gaps in the way I do my teacher directed discussions. When I use it to facilitate giving feedback, wrap-ups or to introduce a unit, I'm a bit ok. But to do a sustained one for about 30-40 minutes or even beyond without my students getting bored, that remains to be my challenge. Hence, I do hold an admiration for gifted Winnie-the-Poohs who can do it successfully.

And also, a part of my brain holds on to these:

• I believe in the diversity of teaching practices as long as it is aligned to a specific philosophy and learning theory.
• I also think academic freedom benefits the students most because in the end, immersing in the experience of learning from different types of teaching practices (and not necessarily the prescribed ones by an accrediting body) makes one's learning holistic. 
• This is also me saying with a strong and solid learner presence and self regulated learning expected of a largely IB driven student population, in the end, learners will always choose to make something out of their learning AND NON-learning from a diversity of courses, teachers, classmates and teaching styles.

• And this is also me saying that because NOT ALL learners are that way, there is a place for explicit skills instruction and teacher directed learning...discussions and lectures included.
• And to me HD is not EQUAL to teacher-directed discussions or lecture. I am for preserving HD  for how it is defined and researched by its worthy proponents and instead search for a commonality=different means to a common end we can all benefit from.

Therefore I think a better school in the end, is the one that skillfully combines these: learner driven, subject driven and teacher driven approaches. As it is, having a Harkness Discussion in its purest,  research based sense ( More on HD here ) is great and should still be balanced off with lectures which are just as great, when done verrrry effectively and selectively. It is one good way to demonstrate the quality of thinking through, or some kind of consciousness raising especially if a slice of our student population need to see divergent thinking vs/ and logical, systematic thinking at work.

And so this request to learn from a peer. Itago na natin sa pangalang Eomer. I just happen to know his resume (hehe), and teacher evals by students (double hehe). So I know,  he is more experienced than I. If it were a choice of a social scientist (Eomer) vs a self learned social studies teacher (Eowyn), I believe the social scientist is THE teacher to have in any high school. Therefore I kinda felt so relieved to know that he'll be teaching the Hist 12, students I once handled. It also means I can rely on an I&S co teacher anytime.  And Im just as curious about what makes this teacher tick and what  I can learn from these 'ticks'--which is really the whole point of a peer learning session.  (And btw,  Eomer comes across as a secure and relaxed person. I recall him going straight to the ALT with a question or 2 about one in service output we had to do. He nailed the DP History course aim in his poster.  I never felt I was an LC around him  and that I was just any co- teacher around him. So yeah, I can level with him anytime and need not second guess my being blunt or straightforward.  And who gets to witness an Anthro major teach these days by the way...the only Anthro teacher I know passed away so Eomer must come from a  rare breed of intellectuals....a historian is common, but  an anthro major with a teaching experience in history must be a great blend)

After the observation, this is how I really felt: "Kainis...kainggit...bakit ba hindi ganito ang HS world history teacher ko!!!" As usual I felt as deprived a student that I was back then.  And now asking: have I deprived my Hist 11 last year...my gahhhhdddd!!!

These are the reasons for my envy, btw:

1) This teacher embedded his discussion in an ongoing narrative. He was just like telling a story which is what makes History attractive. And you can see JW completely attracted to the topic.

2) The source analysis was placed in a non intimidating and natural context. In his ppt are curated photos, paintings, stats, and he would just spill historical tidbits here and there. (Yeah right Aleta, and your source analysis was so textbook bound due to the required COPVL of IB which I had to do by the book!!!) 

3) The teacher modelled a way of thinking through history--moving from past to present--global to local. His content knowledge was very much intact and that is why he can model the way to navigate the knowledge and understanding expected of world history topics.

4) The I&S completely surfaced but subtly--an interplay of Econ, Culture, Geog and Philo. And this was, again, done skillfully and not something forced as THE facts one should know or arrive at like how some teacher directed discussions can turn out to be.  Though I am able to comfortably do that among my Gr 5-7 students with the amount of concepts and knowledge I have, doing this among the higher levels require mastery (and experience in the manipulation) of content knowledge to be able to do the integration skillfully. And if in case he disagrees that he has mastery of such knowledge, then that only means, he must have the gift of teaching (yes I do believe in this classification having been around all types of teachers...there are the gifted types, now whether you are born with it or acquired it is matter of debate)

5) The Criterion A wasn't left out at all. Key terms, people and events were all part of the narrative---the historical details in support of the big ideas were clearly there. It was good to witness how an MYP I&S class provides the breadth needed for a Hist 11 class which requires an in depth  examination and closer analysis of WH topics. 

AND finally (oops back to my LC hat), as a teacher observer I didn't feel this teacher was out to demo-please me at all. Yes, I did get a sense of teaching-the-pakitang-gilas-(at gilalas)-kind during my stint of  teacher observation modes in some job. Eomer didn't come across as a sage on the stage (like how Sandel can come across or how some whites are in TEDTalks or an all knowing, saksak-ko-sa-baga mo-ang-values-o-views KO). He was not out there to mold you rather let you consider a manner of thinking or perspective. He simply came across as a teacher who does love what he knows (like from the 19___ teaching days), the act of finding out  and  freely shares what he continues to discover and access as a digi-migrant among our digi-native youth. 

Hence, there is a good place for teacher directed discussions, only when done effectively. (And not doing either or effectively IS worse, haha!)

I now have arrived at somekind of reappreciation for two approaches @work.

BUT, here's decluttering  noise 4me:

I therefore conclude, there is more required to run a high school class of a range of adolescent critical thinkers...even the silent ones like GM had his head up the whole time and not even an NB pulled a test question/ remark.  This means in the PCK of things, the CK bears more weight as a starting teacher in any HS, and the PCK or PK can later on follow. Which only validates the fact that what should be licensed in a BSE 2B teacher is CK more than pedagogy. And the fact that among teacher volunteers for HS, it is more advantageous to get BS/ BA grad rather than an Educ grad (a key finding in  teacher training among UP teacher volunteers in public school).  I therefore think TBA must find value in the BSE or BS major of teachers because the PK and PCK will surely fall in place.  The added MA Educ provides the frame for theorizing and reflection. Without that  BS/ BA Major in a discipline, the MA Educ may not hold water. This is me putting on a teacher education hat (can't help it).

Of course, I am  not one to be envious 4ever. Good that I am also a teacher-learner  (and a most fortunate parent) who can celebrate in the realization of having a co-teacher who is obviously most capable. Lastly I am simply gladful that we have this kind of teaching in our midst. In the end, it still is a good blend maybe of my bookishness-follow-the-DP-Guide manner to preps HLs and his au naturel. But I dont think my strategies will always work, esp for SLs.

As to whether I can translate or put into action what I learned from his classes is something I need to chew on. Can I just practice among Gr 7-8 students (and not DP where the stakes are a bit higher)?  I now have a new experiment to look forward to :)  X=pure HD  vs  Y=HD + lectures but the concern would be related to examining learner presence, and qualitatively.