The MACUL conference is an annual education conference at
Cobo Hall in Detroit, where educators from across the state and nation present
and observe the use of technology for the advancement of K-12 education. As a
cohort, we were lucky enough to attend the conference’s final day on Friday,
March 20. The conference was a the first time I was with so many other people
of the same field, but it was also an indication for me that I have yet to
really break into the field as a professional, and have more progress to make.
This indication came early on, as even in the coffee shop
outside of Cobo Hall, I spoke with other attendees who were able to speak about
their years of experience at a school, and how this conference was or was not
applicable to their context. Their anecdotal stories and mutual colleagues were
things I hope to accumulate over the coming years, and the conference was a
good first step. I felt a little out of place in the first session I attended.
Although it was led by former teacher of the year Gary Abud, an engaging
speaker and strong presence, the topic of teacher evaluation wasn’t really
something I could resonate with, being only an intern. I politely exited the
room midway through and reevaluated the schedule to look for the most relevant topic
at the next time. I found that at the session: “
It was incredibly relevant for my current context at
Tri-County, as the discussions of blending learning for at-risk students was
the basis for the topic, where to administrators of such schools gave insight
from their experience. The session also allowed me to feel more at ease as a
professional in the setting, as I was able to speak to one of the presenters
after the session for a few minutes, and compare his context to my own, and
bounce ideas off each other. Points made by the two speakers, while maybe not
all applicable to any at-risk setting, were incredibly poignant and honest.
They shed light on the fact that at-risk and alternative settings typically are
housed in old buildings or structures turned to educational institutions. The
speaker brought up the fact that when a student is looking for a second chance,
the least motivating thing is a physically unappealing or old space, and
instead we should be working to give them the newest buildings and many
resources. My notes are littered with one liners and bullet points made, as
well as action items I hoped to share with my colleagues back at Tri-County.
The biggest point that stuck with me was related to students
failing a class. In many situations, including unfortunately in my own school,
failing a class leads to ask students to redo the same exact class. While in
some cases, their poor results could be totally dependent on their choice not
to try or do anything, but those cases are rare. Instead, a student’s
performance has to be somewhat evaluated as well on the environment and context
they were put in, the teacher they were with, and the type of work they were
being asked to do. Instead of just repeating the same exact situation and
hoping for a change, the speaker encouraged constantly reevaluating the process
a student is going through, and working hard to put them in situations where
they feel they can be successful, and will be willing to work hard for success.
It isn’t easy, but it’s worth it, and I was happy to hear that type of thinking
being shared in a full room of enthused teachers.
