COLLABORATION IN ACTION (part 3)

Scenario 3 was a challenge - much more difficult than the previous 2 scenarios.  The most difficult part of the project was trying to coordinate meetings with so many different people.  Teachers are very protective of their planning time and meeting after school is a very touchy subject for some.  The second grade teachers that I was working with were not resistant to the much more intensive collaborative process but they were definitely not used to the higher taxonomy.  It took some patience on my part to move them from a very superficial, "resource provider" level of collaboration with the MC to one that was more involved in the planning and evaluation process of the unit.  I will say, however, that when the process was finished, the teachers all were very impressed with the product that was created and our hard work was evident in the quality of the unit.  No one person could have created and implemented the unit that we did - it was definitely a worthwhile collaborative process.  Working as the MC on the project was very interesting because it was such a large undertaking - especially involving the MARC outside the school.  Working with the MARC was a pleasure - they were so eager to help in any way that they could and contributed greatly to the first phase of our unit.  I think it's so important that our county has this resource and being able to bring their knowledge and resources to our students was very rewarding.  Overall, I believe the unit was a great success - everyone involved was very pleased with the product and we are all so excited to see how the children respond to the lessons.

"Evaluation" Delving Deeper

Self evaluation is more difficult than I expected.  It seems very indulgent in a way to deem your own work successful.  I suppose that is why we create specific criteria to use in our evaluation.  My group's criteria were based on the Standards for NC media coordinators - we focused on the big ideas of leadership, developing 21st century skills for a variety of learners, knowledge of learning, and self reflection.  I think our criteria was specific enough to be able to evaluate without bias.  I tried to look at my group members' units objectively and based my evaluations on the criteria that we outlined specifically.  Their units were both very successful as was my evaluation of my own.  I think that we all tried to use a high taxonomy level of collaboration in our units which naturally drove them to meet the criteria that we outlined.