evaluationmonday

=Evaluation for Monday 10 December (Wairakei Hui, 2007)=

The future for Education - Jane Gilbert
Jane really made us think about our own role within schools - and were we ready for thinking about a new way of thinking, a new way of presenting to teachers that would meet their needs and gain better outcomes for students Worthwhile revisiting the ideas and I enjoyed the sense of her sharing something she is still in the process of developing: that she wants the 'conversations' to flow out of her stimulus material / challenges I really appreciate the way Jane really works her material to challenge the particular audience she has - I have heard her now on three occasions and she continues to challenge me. Jane's responsiveness - she engaged with the people with questions / statements. The depth of the thinking she presents and her willingness to put ideas forward as tentative - she models the eniquiry process. Great stuff - again Just great to have a presenter at this level challenging us.
 * __PLUS__**

I liked the way Jane was succinct and to the point and left me wondering about my own positioning in terms of future thinking, (Tracy). We are certainly heading into challenging times. Jane has a way of capturing our thinking and responding to our questions

I liked the way Jane linked 21st century learning to 'what students need to do' and then teh key for us 'what etachers need to do'. Much food for thought. Challenging statements looking towards the future. Well presented. We spent significant time afterwards exploring the ideas Jane presented a refering back to what is happening in schools and the capacity tschools have to change in the direction Jane and the Revised Curriculum indicated is needed. Jane's presentation provided a great vehicdlefordiscussion and exploration. Too short - Did not find it as challenging as Jane siad I would. I found it a little repetitive of what she said earlier this year. I agree - a little repetitive. It was good tho' to revisit Repetitive & rushed through this stage. Not enough time, ideas and discussion for future thinking, esp new ideas. The power of the process - rather than the initiatice or the outcome. the connection to timperleys three levels of learning * connecting to prior knowledge: Adapting of adopting knowledge; or creating the dissonance that is required to be in the top 40 or 41% of Kegan's constructivist developement theory. Kagan's theory of adult development. Enjoyed the model of adult development.. Thought we could have contributed more or mused its worth in groups and thought about it more critically As for last statement - I agree
 * __MINUS__**
 * __INTERESTING__**

Workshop 1 - follow-up to keynote
Very good idea The discussions were very stimulating and thought provoking. There was much thinking and learning during the brainstorming - then the production of a presentation became the focus, but that's OK. Loved talking with new people I don't normally work with.
 * __PLUS__**

I like the way we were thrown in the deep end and had to work through the challenges of working out our interpretation, (Tracy). Really enjoyed the discussion with a group of talented people I didn't know and had not worked with before. Great discourse and exchange of ideas. Everyone able to have their say. I found this activity very challenging due to the time it took our group to uncover the groups thinking and to record the challenges identified. The pressure was on to have a presentation ready. I agree - time was too restricted The assessment became the focus and it made the discussion shallow. I was really looking forward to being able to discuss the implications of Jane's talk with colleagues. However, I found that as soon as our group realised there was an 'assessment task' for it the next day that we were to prepare for, it killed any in-depth conversation.
 * __MINUS__**

Found the links to Jane's presentation somewhat tenuous. I feel the activity did not successfully workshop the content of Janes's talk. We could have used more relevant material from the Knowledge Wave book. 21st Century ideas in presentation followed by 19-20th Century activity - a performance! Really killed any indepth discourse other than one idea we had to present. Why do we have to be assessed at this level by a performance? No real followup to Janés presentation - just a top-down pre-planned activity. The task of presenting dominated the group focus which was disappointing as there was so much to discuss which came out of Janes presentation, the links to the revised curriculum and furture thinking. the whole group stayed focused We looked to a process rather than the product emphasis and as a result, being bloody minded about that, enjoyed the dialogue and are trying not to stress too much about an expectation to present (so soon). Too much required from stimulus material which didn't intially read as a 'scenario". It would have been sufficient to have started the discussions/ dialogue without having obligations to report / present(and isn't this also what happens in classrooms too!)! How differently participants interpreted material we read.
 * __INTERESTING__**

I was nicely surprised to have the opportunity for a creative outlet for the reflections on Hargreaves (Tracy). A group of professionals from different backgrounds found a common theme on which to agree and present.

No one refused to do the performance - what a compliant lot we are!!

Futuristic BBQ
fun fun fun - we need more fun in our learning lives Absolutely concur.Such talent was exposed. Exposed! lol! And everyone I spoke to said they slept like a log afterwards --> laughter releases stress --> increases the likelihood of learning. Hilarious - Jane Barnett's talents seen never-ending We are a crazy bunch this was an awesome time - I haven't heard us laugh like that in such a long time. What riot!!! Crazy fun liked the way we could all participate at what ever level we wanted. A few wines and the laughter was sendless. abosulutely none!!!!
 * __PLUS__**
 * __MINUS__**

__**INTERESTING** How most of the men dressed up as women but the women didnt feel the urge to cross dress.__ I thought they dressed up a-sexually, or was it multi-sexually, except for the learned sperm which was certainly masculine although his whimpy, hesitant nature was of concern. In 2084 being reflective would not construed as "whimpy" but would epitomise strength and virility! The "sperm' has evolved. Less rush on a frantic journey. It stopped, turned back, reflected, carried on, went in a different direction, not necessarily blindly goal focused. I was skeptical about the task initially but it turned out to be an hilarious amount of fun. Well done those who were prepared to get fully involved, put themselves on the line a little and make it work.