Reading Writing Responding

In today's day and age it seems strange to be talking about the ownership of ideas. That's not yours, that's mine. Really, can one person hold an idea and what is actually achieved by that? For example, if someone comes up with a similar idea, aren't we benefited by having a conversation with that person or group about how we could make both ideas awesome, rather than deciding which idea is more valid? Although some love the glitz and glory that comes with being the one behind the great idea, to give an idea life sometimes we need to relinquish some of that control, we need to hold it lightly, allow for different perspectives and provide others a meaningful voice in the discussion. A lone nut who keeps an idea to themselves is oddly enough still a lone nut. For in the end, it takes a village and sometimes the most important thing we can do is let it go.

Universal Design for Learning by  Giulia Forsythe  (Flickr) In a recent post , I wrote about the idea that a PLN, whether professional or personal learn network, as actually being something that you do, a verb, rather than something done, a noun, I think that the same argument can be applied to the notion of curriculum. Too often when we discuss 'curriculum' it is as something stagnant, something finished, something complete, a document held in the hand. However, treating it in this way misses something, denies the reality that it is something that is constantly developing, growing, adapting, changing and evolving. One of the reasons that we see curriculum as being something stagnant is that often the changes can occur over long periods of time so we do not consider it as something constant. For example, in my time teaching, I have seen three significant curriculum shifts. Firstly the transition from CSFII to VELS. This was significant because it moved subject b...

I was faced with a new challenge the other day. With the choice of the new professional learning communities the group that I was allocated to was given an additional challenge, that we would in fact be leaderless, that we would work collaboratively to develop a focus and go from there. Initially, I was apprehensive, as I had concerns about where technology had been heading - the group was meant to focus on using technology to engage. However, what was interesting was the group did manage to develop a voice of its own, a collective voice, with everyone adding their own question and concern. This got me thinking again about +Dan Donahoo 's keynote at ICTEV13 Conference that a community is not about everyone doing the same thing, rather it is about recognising the place of everyone in the village.  . This led me to reflect upon a bigger problem that has developed in the past few years, the mix and match of different technological devices and platforms. The school I work at has ...

In a recent  post  responding to the act of giving so prevalent in this festive season, +Aubrey Daniels International  suggested that maybe it is not such a good idea to buy the boss a holiday gift. In the same vein as David Letterman, Daniels provides ten reasons to support his argument: 10. If you do it because others do it, you are doing it for the wrong reason and you will probably resent it 9. If the boss expects it, s/he is a bad boss to begin with and a gift may act as a positive reinforcer for bad boss behavior 8. If a gift affects the boss’ behaviour toward you, it is not a healthy work situation for you or the boss 7. It puts pressure on the boss to reciprocate and it is not a good idea to put pressure on the boss 6. It gets expensive for the boss if there are a number of direct or indirect reports who need reciprocating 5. It is the economy, stupid 4. It may cause the boss to question your motive 3. It is a good time to break this...