NWP Highlights
Larry Meath
San Antonio, Texas
Nov. 20-21, 2008
After a long day of traveling, it was great to arrive in San Antonio, get settled into our hotel room, and get out for a bit of fresh air on the Riverwalk. The warm temps provided a welcome cap to the day.
Day one of the conference started with a 9:00 a.m. meeting with other university reps discussing “Strengthening the University Connection.” It became apparent from this meeting that the problems and issues we face at our satellite are not dissimilar from other sites. This was a theme that was reiterated throughout the two days of the conference. My notes follow:
Session 1: Strengthening the University Connections
Introductions
Writing activity—
Benefits of the university connections
The university
provides the ready-made infrastructure for educational activities
University
resources are relatively prolific
Potential
outreach through the university tentacles
Access to
interns in the SOE program to introduce the writing project to them early in
their careers.
Since we
are a new satellite, we are more or less feeling our way along and working
with the university can prove trying
Spreading
NWP concepts through school of ed and hopefully through the college of LA in
time.
The possibility
to get NWP concepts in the writing labs
Open and
Invitational institutes are housed on university campuses
Potential
to use university’s video conferencing equipment
Ideas from others—
People brought
to campus through various programs
“Saturdays
at 10” open to community and hosted by college
Credit/non
credit available
Praxis preps
to generate income
Challenges—
Fiscal issues—getting
presenters paid in a timely basis
Overhead
of the grant costs real dollars to the university in times of tight budgets.
Bureaucracy
of university
Creating
an understanding of what the NWP actually does
Finding
rooms during the summer inter-sessions of the university to house institutes.
Lack of
flexibility
One person
(the Dean typically) can make/break the project based on individual decisions
Requirements
to be self-sustaining by some universities
Opening
to interns is often discouraged because sites are looking for Teacher Consultants—to
provide leadership—also, pre-service teachers may not be ready due to
lack of experience (eg providing demonstrations of lessons)
Ideas to enhance university partnerships
Create a checklist of benefits for university
Offer credit/non
credit options
List NWP class by “name” on transcripts
Kids camps
Preservice teachers are required to attend 2 professional development sessions—Saturday
workshops fill that need for them and expose them to the NWP
Mention
the name of ASWC in appropriate forums to increase visibility of the site
Linking
Web site to UAF/SOE
How can NWP support the state sites?
Letter of
support
Report Template
that speaks to University administrators: include things like numbers who have
gone through the programs,
Requirement
for university: 1 to 1 match—However, others things are recommended: 25%
release time or at least time to lead,
Again, a common theme is the discord that sometimes occurs between the universities with their lack of flexibility and fiscal accountability issues and the school districts and/or sites. Much of the session was devoted to overcoming these, and it seemed often to focus on little things like public relations and recognition between all parties of their respective roles.
The afternoon was comprised of a working lunch/meeting with other satellites. Again, the same themes seemed evident. Other satellites discussed issues much like those mentioned in the morning session. The relationship between satellite and host site was of concern with others more so than with us as we are not fully aware of how that relationship will look after our reorganization. The brainstorming was good, but again, having separate time with Elyse provided real answers to most of our questions.
I think there was a sense of accomplishment for all of us in the ASWC to be able to meet and talk out the issues.
Friday I attended two sessions that dealt primarily with rural outreach and connecting with distant sites. The problems we face in Alaska are sometimes dramatic when compared with other states, but in some ways we are better off, especially since most Ak rural areas are relatively up to date with technology.
Technology was the focus of both sessions as answers to the issues of both distance delivery and relating to today’s students who are digital natives. The first session, “Covering the Distance and Offering Access with Technology” had the large group primarily working in smaller focus groups at our tables discussing the issues and formulating answers to the problems. I found that most of the information was similar to things either being done, or, more often, being proposed for the near future—especially things like video conferencing.
The second session, “Designing Technology Professional Development,” had a slightly different audience. Most of the people in the room were tech. liaisons, but I was comfortable with the discussion since I have had professional development with most of the software and delivery devices they discussed. Much of the presentation consisted of demonstrations of how these things impact the classroom, and they were impressive. I see this as prof. development that TC’s will need as part of their tool kit for future Open and Invitational institutes. The team from Western NY did a great job in demonstrating the efficacy of technology to students who are already hard wired.
Overall, I enjoyed the conference and felt I gained much from it. A certain amount of the knowledge I gained was clarity on issues specific to our satellite. More than anything, though, the ability to connect and plan with other members of the ASWC board were the most gratifying and worthwhile. The human connections, reiterated in the keynote addresses, are the ones that ultimately keep us motivated and actively engaged.