PART A – LEADERSHIP BY DESIGN - #1
THE DISCOURSE OF OUR PROFESSION – TEACHERS AS PUBLIC INTELLECTUALS
General Introduction
This is the first in a series of sessions titled “Leadership by Design”. As an introductory session, the scope is wide, challenging and hopefully provocative – seeking to set the tone and timbre for themes to be explored in our learning community over the weeks to come.
Beginning are perhaps most generative when they start with ourselves – and so this session builds on an exploration of a number of basic questions (set out below) that frame our professional practice:
1. WHAT ARE OUR STANDARDS OF PRACTICE?
a) As envisioned by ourselves?
b) As articulated by the OCT?
2. ARE WE MOVING OUT OF AN ERA OF DISENGAGEMENT?
3. ARE TEACHERS PUBLIC INTELLECTUALS?
NOTE: This section builds loosely on concepts in discourse theory – which examines how language acts shift & shape us. According to discourse theory, language is not a fixed system of symbols and significance, but rather an expression of power and authority. Discourse theory offers tools of analysis to consider how do we as teachers define ourselves and how are we defined by others, through daily instructional and institutional practices.
For more on discourse theory see -
http://www.press.jhu.edu/books/hopkins_guide_to_literary_theory/discourse-_2.html
Activity
This is our first “knowledge building” on-line discourse activity. Candidates should review the Professional Online Discourse Handout for details about this important component of the course. You are also reminded to carefully review the Professional Online Discourse Assessment Rubric, and if you want to offer any feedback on the criteria and comments please do so by Thursday.
As a knowledge-building activity, candidates are asked to use the following readings and prompts as guides to producing written reflective notes (REMEMBER: consider preparing your responses in a word processing document, then cutting and pasting it to a WebKF note). However, a CRUCIAL part of the learning emerges out our engaged critical dialogue – therefore, your questions and “build-ons” to your fellow candidates are as important as your own initial musings.
You are to respond to EACH of the UNDERLINED questions below (#1A & 1B, #2 and #3) in three distinct notes within your respective group views. Attach your notes as build-ons. (Work in the same groups as those for the Seminar Hosting Assignment.)
Plan to devote approximately one hour per question/discussion thread with no more than 3 ½ hours for the entire discourse session.
1. What are our standards of practice?
A. As envisioned by ourselves?
i) What are your own standards of practice?
ii) How would you define or describe the qualities of a “master teacher”?
iii) Why might defining your own standards of practice be a useful exercise to engage in? How can it be limiting?
B. As articulated by the OCT?
Review –
The Standards of Practice for the Teaching Profession and
The Ethical Standards of Practice
Both are found linked through the Ontario College of Teachers website at:
i) How does the OCT attempt to respond to these questions – what are possible positive elements of their efforts? Limits?
2. Are we moving out of an era of disengagement?
A. Review - “Somewhere Between Hope and Fantasy: Discovering Teacher Commitment and Passion in an Era of Disengagement” by George Richardson (four pages) at
i) What three aspects of the article resonate with your experience in Ontario?
ii) Reflect on the mood within your school of the past year. Has there been a shift to reclaim the terrain of professionalism: moving toward hope without being fantastical?
3. Are teachers “public intellectuals”?
A. Review “Education Incorporated?” by Henry Giroux in Educational Leadership October 1998 | Volume 56 | Number 2
For those of you who were unable to locate it yesterday, it can be found at the following link -
i) What might be the value of rethinking ourselves as public intellectuals?
ii) Would these views resonate with your colleagues?