Over the summer, colleagues across the college read several books–but a cohort looked at two texts specifically for our group: A Guide To Documenting Learning and The Digital Scholar.
Thursday we met to think about a few key headlines and to grapple with a few core questions, check the provocations out below (or download them for your own use):
Review the five different headlines, questions and blurbs. Look for what needs’a pin: find ideas that we need to come back to later on.
Using the protocol below, consider what our current state (of digital scholarship and capacity to document learning) is, and then think about where our desired state might be:
So what were our takeaways?
There is a need to address ‘critical linking,’ or the ability to understand quality resources from clickbait. It is difficult to squeeze now literacies in when balancing the demands of exam preparation. Documenting learning needs to be authentic, but our awareness of how to make sure it is authentic whilst not disruptive is still something we are working on. We are being innovative with Sky School: are there lessons from that project that could be grafted elsewhere?
So what did I personally take away?
Approaches to ‘looking for learning’ are still foggy for me, I’d love to come back to this with a group again. Book club’s which rely on over the summer reading are tough–in hindsight, perhaps professional reading is better suited for the school year. Pace–I often think short and well-organized meetings are very powerful: could we repeat something like this in a 25 minute session? I think we could. I love hearing about what other peers are reading, and Goodreads has given me so much insight into what a few colleagues are doing. I wonder if there is value in encouraging more members of staff to use that space for a quick and easy add-on level of Transparency? I’ve blogged about this a few years ago, and find myself thinking about it again–how could it be embedded into the PLP?
One Comment Add yours
I enjoyed the documenting learning book – I thought it was trying to package documentation as part of learning – and I think we had these conversations when we first developed the AAA+ model for the same reason… to say that documentation might be awareness, but to make it into abstracting understanding, and moving that into application is powerful… so I think there is a strong link. I thought that the documentation of, for , as is very useful, but the authors fluffed some of the possibilities of this… documentation of ‘learning’, to strengthen the process of learning, and to strengthen the process of learning how to learn is a longer but more accurate description of their argument. Overall, a good book!