TeachMeet Alternatives: follow up

Posted on | August 29, 2009 | 14 Comments

It is natural, when we read something, to focus on those parts of a text that interest us most. The comments on my previous post on this subject – Time For A TeachMeet Alternative? – amount to a very stimulating discussion of the issues that I raised. However, I was interested to note how many of the commenters focused on issues that, while important, were not what I regard as the central one.

Many commenters, understandably picked up on the issue of the ‘echo chamber’ effect, namely the potential for TeachMeets to become gatherings of the converted. Tom Barratt, however, pointed out that the manifest evolution of the TeachMeet concept, the attendant growth in numbers turning up at the events, and the real changes in practice happening as a result, indicated a genuine grass-roots advance taking place (Ian Hallahan and Nick Hood made very similar points). As Tom wrote:

….the ongoing success [of TeachMeet] is surely an indication of grass roots change. Real transformational change. Change in the way that teachers perceive CPD, in my opinion that is very important – and not to be overlooked….

However, while I think the echo chamber is an important issue (and I agree with Tom, Ian and Nick that there are definite trends that mitigate its worst effects), I don’t think that this was the central point I was trying to make. At the risk of merely repeating something that was not clear the first time I wrote it:

…. the key restriction, I believe, is the insistence that all presentations should be based firmly in classroom practice…..

Some commenters did pick up on this core issue. Ewan McIntosh recognized, I think, if not the absurdity (the word I used and for which I was taken to task, most generously, by Jaye Richards and by Nick Hood) then at least the not-wholly-appropriate aspect of seeing people who have long left the classroom behind standing up to offer advice to classroom practitioners.

But even this was not the central point! The core issue, for me, was this:

If we restrict ourselves to discussion of what is happening in the classroom, we immediately limit the possibility of questioning whether the classroom itself should even exist in its current form or at all, and whether the school that surrounds that classroom is the best, most humane and most effective way to ‘do’ education in the changing context of the 21st Century. In other words, by accepting the core guidelines of TeachMeet as the starting point, we hinder our own scope for seeking societal or global alternatives to the status quo in formal educational organization and curricular structures. Piecemeal change becomes the order of the day rather than wholesale transformation.

Krysia Smyth caught the issue:

You talk about “genuine systemic transformation”. TeachMeets are never going to achieve this….

Leon Cych picked up on an important aspect of the question when he wrote:

I feel that if TeachMeets aren’t going to just become a self-congratulatory hermetically sealed meetup then parallel activity needs to happen outside of and then interact with other communities. Surely if everyone is into emergent communities then they need to evolve at some point rather than produce new inflexible orthodoxies of protocol.

Many commenters were happy that continued evolution of the TeachMeet concept (and it is great to see that no one, despite Leon’s words above, seems to regard the original as an untouchably pure concept – all are prepared to see it change) would offer enough variability and breadth of possibility to deal with the limitations of the original. It is a self-evident fact that many TeachMeets have already shifted at least parts of their focus beyond the classroom.

Continued evolution of the concept might well deal with my central point (and Ewan’s DreamMeet idea, of deliberately reversing some of the TeachMeet ‘rules’ occasionally, is a one that deserves to be given a chance to blossom). Nonetheless, I would like to identify a few willing souls who might be interested in getting together, virtually or f2f, to play around with some ideas in order to come up with some alternatives (but not replacements) for TeachMeet, one or more (or many!) formats that would offer real opportunities to discuss the big questions at the systems level. A similar grass-roots development in this ‘big picture’ area, such as we have undoubtedly already seen with reference to classroom practice within TeachMeet, would, I believe, be an important addition to the Learning 2.0 landscape.

Some good ideas have already been mentioned by the commenters on the earlier post. Con Morris, for instance, felt that ‘a good old-fashioned debating format’ might offer scope for inserting real ‘perturbation’ into discussion. Peter Schneider suggests we look at the great work being done by Julie Lindsay, Vicki Davis and others with the ‘flat classroom’ concept. Tom Barratt, who isn’t sure that we really need to look for an alternative, nonetheless suggests that we ought to look at the variety of ‘unconference’ types already in use out there.

All in all, the earlier post certainly pulled in a mass of valuable comment. It would be great to see discussion continue around the fringes of the next few TeachMeets on some ideas and possibilities for either evolving the TeachMeet format or developing alternatives will happen, or more likely both!

NB – A matter of blogging courtesy: because most of the links above are to the individual comments made in my earlier post, I want to add a set of links to the commenters themselves. They are: Ian Stuart, Con Morris, Stephen Lockyer, Ewan McIntosh, Nick Hood, Krysia Smyth, Leon Cych, Jaye Richards, Peter Schneider, Ian Hallahan, Gordon Brown, Dan Nstone, Tom Barratt & Cassie Law.

Technorati Tags: teachmeet, unconference, education, transformation

Category: Web 2.0, change, education, innovation, learning, schooling, social networking, social technology, society, teaching, technology, transformation

Comments

14 Responses to “TeachMeet Alternatives: follow up”

Gordon Brown
August 29th, 2009 @ 9:21 pm

Nonetheless, I would like to identify a few willing souls who might be interested in getting together, virtually or f2f, to play around with some ideas in order to come up with some alternatives (but not replacements) for TeachMeet…

I’d be interested, John.
Nick Hood
August 30th, 2009 @ 10:04 am

I’m up for this, John. I’m especially interested in promoting a more reflective, informed and engaged professional community. I think your initiative is driving that way.
J Arrol
August 30th, 2009 @ 10:04 am

I agree with others who suggest that wider educational issues could be tackled at unconferences. I had never considered some of the issues discussed at Education 2020, especially the standard School layout. I mostly sat back and listened at the unconference, feeling that I knew so little and had so much to learn. Listening to the impassioned discussions was an eye-opener.
The thing most striking to me at Education 2020 was the intensity of the discussion. If a group of people who wanted change found it difficult to find common ground, how much more so when the idea of change is raised with those who favour the status quo? There was so much to say that we covered far less than was intended. There is certainly more to be said. I would like to join you wherever the discussion ends up taking place. I might even have something to say.
Ian
August 30th, 2009 @ 10:54 am

I think the discussion is only beginning I am up for that
Leon Cych
August 30th, 2009 @ 3:17 pm

Yes would definitely be interested in this…
Joe Wilson
August 31st, 2009 @ 2:43 pm

yes sure up for this
John Connell
August 31st, 2009 @ 7:17 pm

Let’s get something going at SLF then – something fairly informal as a starting point. Any suggestions?
Claire McCallum
September 1st, 2009 @ 1:15 pm

Could set up a breakout area (ironically) at the TMSLF to discuss ‘Son of SLF’?

I’m definitely interested John
John Connell
September 1st, 2009 @ 3:15 pm

Nice idea, Claire!
Iain Hallahan
September 3rd, 2009 @ 12:08 pm

As a wise man once said – “I love it when a plan comes together!”. I’d be very interested in joining in too, and seeing what we can come up with although I’m also noticing that this might be becoming more than ‘a few’, so you can let me know.
Teachmeet….LeadMeet…..TreeMeet? And now GregMeet! : John Connell: The Blog
September 3rd, 2009 @ 6:17 pm

[...] had some great responses to my recent posts (here and here) on possible extensions or alternatives to the venerable and valuable TeachMeet concept. A small [...]
Ewan McIntosh
September 11th, 2009 @ 6:14 am

Hi John,

Apologies in advance for a bit of a ramble. I’ve not even finished my first coffee of the day.

I’ve been interested in how the discussion is going, but I’d pick up on an assumption made about the purpose of TeachMeet.

The ground ‘rules’ of what I and others put down over the first few meets were reactive, in response to people abusing the event (namely sales people), so the use of “in the classroom” as a condition of activity should be taken with a pinch of forward-looking salt. When I developed TeachMeet I was not a practicing teacher in the classroom The classroom is poor choice of language, but one most folk understood the messaging of.

Actually, the only core ethic of TeachMeet that is really worth bearing in mind to keep expectations of what the thing might hold, is that it is never around the ego of any one person or group of people.

This is why there is no keynote, no pre-selected speakers, no decision on who speaks first, last or at point x, y or z to pick things up after a few, how do you put it, “off-the-ball” speakers (we could equally say “ahead of their time”, “too technical”, “not what floats my boat”.)

This is also why variations are to be encouraged beyond the ’speaker’ – we’ve got roundtables, tree-based discussions… but they’re just different facilitation techniques where facilitator takes a backseat role to the stars of the show – the participants.

Whether it is leaders of education as we saw at LeadMeet, bloggers we saw at ScotEduBloggers’ Meetup (arguably the first TeachMeet) or good ol’ TeachMeet à l’ancienne, they all hold this same, rather Scottish-feeling core of being about the group rather than the élite, who are normally to be seen at the bigger conference off which a TeachMeet might hang.

For me, that’s the only core ethic that’s REALLY worth holding onto. Though 12 hours of 45 minute presentations would still bore me to tears.
John Connell
September 11th, 2009 @ 9:48 am

All points taken, understood and agreed with, Ewan. In a sense, the discussion itself over the past couple of months has been the best indicator of the strength of the TeachMeet concept. My harangue following the Islay Edu2020 TeachMeet shows, I hope, my own complete sympathy for the democratic, anti-elitist, non-hierarchical philosophy that underpins the concept. That two or three self-important people got the spirit of that gathering so wrong showed precisely why that core principle is so important, and why it has to be retained.

I think that if this conversation has clarified the malleability of TeachMeet – and I think it has – then I for one would have no problem with simply continuing the very interesting process of evolving the concept further. That, of course, will not be done by talk or by debate, but by those organizing events who see the need to play around with this or that bit of the concept in order to meet the particular needs of the event they have in mind.

I have no argument, for instance, with David Muir when he states in the TeachMeet Alternatives wiki set up by Ian Stuart: ” I’m not looking for TeachMeet to revolutionise education. As long as I get excited by other people’s enthusiasm, TeachMeet will be serving its purpose for me.” [in comment at the foot of the wiki]

That’s fine. But I hope he and others of like mind are equally content to let those who do want to revolutionize education to find the time, space and format (or formats) in which to discuss the nature of the deep transformation that I and others believe has to occur in education if it is to continue to serve learners into the future.

I sincerely believe that no one should ever feel the need to defend the TeachMeet concept (other than against those whose interests continue to be served by the more elitist and status-ridden event formats) – its core ethic is one that just works, and that core ethic, I am sure, will survive as the concept develops, and even as alternatives appear, if they do in time.
Stephen Lockyer
September 21st, 2009 @ 12:45 pm

As one of the organisers of the recent Sussex & Kent TeachMeet (TMsuKe), I can certainly see many perspectives at work here. There was a healthy mix of new and ‘old’ TeachMeet faces, and we all agreed that the ability to share good ideas was, if not closed to others, then certainly a challenge to make more accessible to other members of staff.
After the TeachMeet, several of us discussed this dilemma, and some spoke of their feelings as a cascader of information and knowledge – Lone teacher samples idea, shares with others, others pass onto rest of staff.
In some senses, this is also about scalability. Do TeachMeets necessarily need to scale? one minute technical setup time limits at TMSLF09 are necessary due to demand – has the need outgrown the event itself?