I am attending the 2008 Congress here in Vancouver and have just completed a pre-conference workshop for new scholars. It was somewhat interesting. There was a panel of 4 scholars talking about finding balance. I don't think the workshop was for me really, I think it was more geared towards new profs. So that makes me believe that the words "new scholar" should be defined. When do you become a scholar? When you publish? Am I a new scholar? when you have obtained your PhD? Anyway, I thought it was for grad students and although many of the attendees were grad students, the questions posed were mainly about beginning profs and the advice given by senior profs. The big point of advice was creating that sense of community amongst profs and finding a place for you, seeking out people who can support and work with and for you. One thing, from all 4 panels that I did not get is: balance. Yeah yeah, good advice, but how do you balance it all. Is saying "no" really the answer? Or you giving up opportunities? Which opportunities should you say no too? It seems to me, from listening to these panels that it all depends on you. So if it is all personal, shouldn't we just go for it and perhaps we get burnt perhaps we have success? It was all a bit confusing. It seems to me that all 4 brought very different experiences to the table and that there is no right or wrong answer to live and work successfully in academia. Now, that is a statement: live and work successfully!
I want to know how you can do that. In fact, live and work successfully may be defined very differently from one person to the next, so how can we even decide on that course before we embark? I should therefore just look inside myself and figure out what I want in life and what living and working successfully is to me.
Yet, it is not that simple as rules and regulation and the hierarchy in universities may encourage or hinder that success. That is what is new to me. I think by explaining what I want in life and work personally and than find a program/university to fit that life style will be a vital choice in my future. I don't believe it should be the other way: that you must change depending on the university you decide to teach in. I don't know if I am completely crazy thinking this way but that is what I think I would like to do.
I want to live and work in a smaller community that has a small or medium size university or teachers' college. I also need to be close to nature and I must be able to explore nature in person, meaning I need to be able to go outside and be active outdoors. I would want to live in a safe community that values activity and health and it would be great to have a community where I can ride my bike safely, just as I did in Europe. I want to be able to raise children in that community and want them to go to good schools that instill the same values that I will at home.
As for my work, I want to be able to teach teachers and do action research within teacher education. I also would like strong partnerships with the schools as I want to focus in on the transition into the teaching profession and how to smooth that transition through closer collaboration between universities and schools. Oh and I would like a few lakes and mountains. haha
I know I can find that, I have yet to look for it as it is a ways off but one day I will. Most importantly is that for me, it is not important to become a "big" (whatever that means) "scholar", but I want to be a "valued" "teacher" for teachers.
That being said, I must get back to my thesis or else that dream above will never become a reality!
Friday, May 30, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Thesis Time!
A journey it is and active, yes, I have yet to relax this week. It has been hectic as I am between two conference, dealing with finishing a paper for publication, my thesis and moving to Arkansas. Trying to minimize the cost is a challenge but I will do it.
My thesis writing is going OK. I will know more next week.
My goal, and I must have these short time goals or I go nuts, are:
- Get the structure of the findings done
- Get the free writing done
This by the end of the Congress, which is June 3rd, the day I fly to LR. So I have less than a week, spending most of today on running errands for the move in the hope tomorrow will be a writing day. Thursday I will arrive in Vancouver at 8 am so I hope that I can take most of that day as writing as well.
Friday: New Scholars workshop (am), writing (pm).
Sat/Sun: depending on the writing I will be either writing or doing a few sessions at the conference (which I would prefer but we can not always have what we want, priorities priorities!)
Mon: J. presents so I want to go see that and after that me and C. present as well.
Than I have the rest of the day to discuss the thesis or to write.
Tuesday, I have to travel to LR so not a lot will get done.
And than Starting next Wed it will be writing until it is done!
Is it a roller coaster? yes, up and down, or more like 5 steps forward, 6 steps back, slow process!
Hope I get to express how I am feeling during these trying times, but I may not have time.
Wonder why?
My thesis writing is going OK. I will know more next week.
My goal, and I must have these short time goals or I go nuts, are:
- Get the structure of the findings done
- Get the free writing done
This by the end of the Congress, which is June 3rd, the day I fly to LR. So I have less than a week, spending most of today on running errands for the move in the hope tomorrow will be a writing day. Thursday I will arrive in Vancouver at 8 am so I hope that I can take most of that day as writing as well.
Friday: New Scholars workshop (am), writing (pm).
Sat/Sun: depending on the writing I will be either writing or doing a few sessions at the conference (which I would prefer but we can not always have what we want, priorities priorities!)
Mon: J. presents so I want to go see that and after that me and C. present as well.
Than I have the rest of the day to discuss the thesis or to write.
Tuesday, I have to travel to LR so not a lot will get done.
And than Starting next Wed it will be writing until it is done!
Is it a roller coaster? yes, up and down, or more like 5 steps forward, 6 steps back, slow process!
Hope I get to express how I am feeling during these trying times, but I may not have time.
Wonder why?
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Emotional Scaffolding
Talking about an emotional roller coaster! I was doing just fine this morning, yet I fell apart completely by 10 pm. Why? Maybe it is the fact that I at time, as many grad students seem to experience, can't see the trees in the forest. My tasks are simple:
1) Write paper by this weekend (due June 1 but allowing time for edits) on my TGfU poster.
2) Write thesis.
In fact, I should not even be worrying about the thesis, see doing it again! Right now, I am focused, or at least should be on my paper, which talks about a small part of my thesis and may in fact be a chapter in my thesis, which is always a good thing. However, realizing that this paper will be 4500 words, I starting thinking that my thesis should include a various amount of chapters all about 4500 words each, which is just stupid to think that but alas.
After communicating my plans for the paper with one of my committee members, I heard what in fact I knew, that I should focus on my paper on one aspect of the thesis. While I created my poster in a more general sense, writing a paper like that would mean submitting an entire thesis. So, when I thought of wikis and TGfU: a collaborative approach to games education, I decided to take a closer look at collaboration in wikis, and how collaboration affects learning. In fact, through the study, I found out that in order for students to learn more about games education, not just superficial learning but really learning or "deep learning", the students expressed that they must do 3 things: collaborate, equally contribute and communicate. The word collaboration in a wiki means creating interactions with the content, yet because the content is created by the students, it means to have interactions with the various levels of text, created, edited and enhanced by students. Learning seems to happen by building on their own previous knowledge and on each other's ideas. This notion of scaffolding comes from Vygotsky who looks at teaching from a student centered approach. Scaffolding means creating knowledge from the ground up. You start with the student, who brings with him/her experiences and knowledge, which is different from anyone. In order to enhance that knowledge, teaching new knowledge is in order. A variety of ways exist to teach concepts that are new, but from a student centered approach, direct teaching would not be one of them. If you teach in a direct fashion you would tell the student the knowledge you think it needs to know, without considering whether or not that student has the necessary prior knowledge to understand the new concepts. The way that I learn, and I truly believe it is the only way I learn, is by building onto my prior knowledge. I still remember times where something very simple was taught to me, but unless I memorized for the sake of memorizing, i would not understand the concept because I could not relate to it. If there was nothing in my repertoire that would somehow relate to the concept I was suppose to understand, there was no way I would remember it, let alone understand it. So, the only way I learnt was by teaching me something that would build on something that I already knew. Now, I am sure I am not the only one that learns this way and in fact, I think most students learn this way. If this is the case, than the only way to teach is student centered from the bottom up. First, getting to know you students and what they know, and second, build on their learning. This, with a class of 30 may not always be possible, even though I could come up with some projects that would proceed in that way. Technology, more specifically wikis can actually facilitate this process. In fact, let's say you begin with a certain heading, for example: history of TGfU. Through research, students will find the answers, because history is written somewhere and you pretty much have to find accurate sources so you can validate that what you are writing down is in fact the history behind TGfU. To do so, you should check different sources, a form of triangulation. teaching applications, skills and concepts, are all things that could easily be found through research as well. This shows me that when students did not provide the wiki with the correct content, the students did not triangulate or check a variety of sources. They also did not read and try to understand the parts because if they would have read the content, they may have noticed it was not correct. Also a factor may be that the model was not in their prior knowledge. This would be unlikely as they were taught these concept in class before hand and as they are working in groups of 7, I am sure one student understood. Than again, if one student creates text, did other read it? So there could be many causes for failing to provide the content under the scaffold the teacher provided. If the students, in the pilot, did not get the scaffold, it must be more clearly defined. The third section of the wiki requested that the students apply their knowledge in developing games according to the TGfU approach. This section is where most students struggled. IN fact, the findings show that starting in week 4, most students explained they were lost. They just did not understand was they needed to go, so students just added something. Because we wanted to see if a wiki and scaffolds could hold on its own, the teacher refrained from interfering. The study shows that the students reflected on their frustrations in the journals but did not ask the teacher any questions on how to do it. This shows me that either they thought that the teacher would respond to the journals and because the teacher did not, they must have been doing something right or, it may also be that they thought they could solve the problem as a group and once one student added text, the rest went with it. Even if a student really knew it was not the right way, they still went with it. This also may have to do with the length of the project as it was a pilot, 5 weeks. So, in order for a student to meet the weekly requirements, they just complied with the rest of the group, even though some may knew that it was not correct.
Scaffolding, as I mentioned starts from the bottom up. First the teacher provides scaffolds, meaning headings or titles. These should create a reaction from the students so they would interact with the content in form of doing research and submit their findings below. This process does not require a lot of thought so it should be easy if the scaffold provided is in fact a specific concept, such as history for example. The teacher provided history and philosophy scaffolds for the students in order for them to understand the foundation of this approach. Later on, as the students were to design their own games according to the approach, they had to know and understand the approach to do so. But in fact, the third section seemed extremely difficult for the students. Only one group actually managed to complete the task, however, the games were not in progression as was requested. The two games belonged to the same category but did not show a connection between them. You could not flow from one progression to the next.
This shows me that the third step was too big of a step. I assume that because of the massive response of the students, who just did not get it, but also from my own experience teaching the approach. When teaching how to build a progression according to the TGfU model, I started with an initial warm-up game (modified), than practice tasks within game forms connected to the modified game and the tactical objective and later flowing into another game, which would focus in on practice and assessment. I still recall that it took some time for students to understand that progression and I made it as simple as possible. I say simple, because I focused mainly on tactics and also I explained mainly creating open space. I also did not mention the pedagogical principles of exaggeration and simplification and so on. The reason why in fact,in theory I did cover all of the 6 steps in the TGfU model, but not in practice is because I only had one class and needed to keep it simple. I also followed lessons where the students needed to create lesson plans on BMS with those 3 parts in mind (warm-up, acquiring, closing activity). IN order to show consistency, the only thing I changed was adding the tactical focus and teaching using questioning.
Knowing that that is the only two aspects I changed and still students had some difficulty, the scaffolds provided on the wiki could have been too complex. I believe that with a simple template, where each section is clearly defined, the students could have been more successful.
When going back to scaffolding again, the first two sections initiated and facilitated scaffolding, meaning, students were able to feed of each other and build on each others' knowledge. The good thing about wikis and working as a class or group is that you combine strengths. So, some students who have prior knowledge on the subject can start and others can build on as they begin to understand the concepts themselves. In the final section, scaffolding did not seem to occur much. The only time students were scaffolding is directly related to the games, meaning the explanation of the games, which were new and possible modification to the games. Students have long been introduced to adaptation of games and how to do that. So many of the students reflected in their journals that from reading the game, they were able to add something to it, to make to game more or less challenging. The students did not however see the need to produce the progression of games. Only one student reflected upon his frustrations that the games are not in a progressive form, they are simple independent games and he felt it was wrong. That the games should be connected in some way from simple to more complex, just as he was taught in class. From the researcher's perspective, if only one student realizes the intent of the scaffold, than that shows that the scaffold did not initiate the process of scaffolding. It shows that scaffolds need to be produced in small steps, one at a time and they should be clearly defined so students know what is asked of them.
I am suddenly realizing that I just wrote the outline of my paper, even though this is much of a reflective piece and the voice of the students must still be integrated, I feel much better now, realizing that I can take this and organize my thoughts better.
I wrote my title as emotional scaffolding because I think I build on my own feelings. If I feel down, I usually think of good things in order to alter the course of my emotions. This time however, it is not as easy to get out of this mood and if you begin to think about one stressful thing that leads to another and yet another, soon, you lose control and break down. That is pretty much what happened. I was doing well today but seeing how much work I had to do made me focus on things I had to do next week and deadlines that are creeping up, instead of thinking of one concept after another just as I had outlined: scaffolding, scaffolding in wikis, wikis and TGfU,...
Next time I should get to my blog sooner so I would avoid the hassle of the emotional roller coaster, as I know, for me, that reflecting upon my experiences clears things up in my head. Suddenly I can see trees!
1) Write paper by this weekend (due June 1 but allowing time for edits) on my TGfU poster.
2) Write thesis.
In fact, I should not even be worrying about the thesis, see doing it again! Right now, I am focused, or at least should be on my paper, which talks about a small part of my thesis and may in fact be a chapter in my thesis, which is always a good thing. However, realizing that this paper will be 4500 words, I starting thinking that my thesis should include a various amount of chapters all about 4500 words each, which is just stupid to think that but alas.
After communicating my plans for the paper with one of my committee members, I heard what in fact I knew, that I should focus on my paper on one aspect of the thesis. While I created my poster in a more general sense, writing a paper like that would mean submitting an entire thesis. So, when I thought of wikis and TGfU: a collaborative approach to games education, I decided to take a closer look at collaboration in wikis, and how collaboration affects learning. In fact, through the study, I found out that in order for students to learn more about games education, not just superficial learning but really learning or "deep learning", the students expressed that they must do 3 things: collaborate, equally contribute and communicate. The word collaboration in a wiki means creating interactions with the content, yet because the content is created by the students, it means to have interactions with the various levels of text, created, edited and enhanced by students. Learning seems to happen by building on their own previous knowledge and on each other's ideas. This notion of scaffolding comes from Vygotsky who looks at teaching from a student centered approach. Scaffolding means creating knowledge from the ground up. You start with the student, who brings with him/her experiences and knowledge, which is different from anyone. In order to enhance that knowledge, teaching new knowledge is in order. A variety of ways exist to teach concepts that are new, but from a student centered approach, direct teaching would not be one of them. If you teach in a direct fashion you would tell the student the knowledge you think it needs to know, without considering whether or not that student has the necessary prior knowledge to understand the new concepts. The way that I learn, and I truly believe it is the only way I learn, is by building onto my prior knowledge. I still remember times where something very simple was taught to me, but unless I memorized for the sake of memorizing, i would not understand the concept because I could not relate to it. If there was nothing in my repertoire that would somehow relate to the concept I was suppose to understand, there was no way I would remember it, let alone understand it. So, the only way I learnt was by teaching me something that would build on something that I already knew. Now, I am sure I am not the only one that learns this way and in fact, I think most students learn this way. If this is the case, than the only way to teach is student centered from the bottom up. First, getting to know you students and what they know, and second, build on their learning. This, with a class of 30 may not always be possible, even though I could come up with some projects that would proceed in that way. Technology, more specifically wikis can actually facilitate this process. In fact, let's say you begin with a certain heading, for example: history of TGfU. Through research, students will find the answers, because history is written somewhere and you pretty much have to find accurate sources so you can validate that what you are writing down is in fact the history behind TGfU. To do so, you should check different sources, a form of triangulation. teaching applications, skills and concepts, are all things that could easily be found through research as well. This shows me that when students did not provide the wiki with the correct content, the students did not triangulate or check a variety of sources. They also did not read and try to understand the parts because if they would have read the content, they may have noticed it was not correct. Also a factor may be that the model was not in their prior knowledge. This would be unlikely as they were taught these concept in class before hand and as they are working in groups of 7, I am sure one student understood. Than again, if one student creates text, did other read it? So there could be many causes for failing to provide the content under the scaffold the teacher provided. If the students, in the pilot, did not get the scaffold, it must be more clearly defined. The third section of the wiki requested that the students apply their knowledge in developing games according to the TGfU approach. This section is where most students struggled. IN fact, the findings show that starting in week 4, most students explained they were lost. They just did not understand was they needed to go, so students just added something. Because we wanted to see if a wiki and scaffolds could hold on its own, the teacher refrained from interfering. The study shows that the students reflected on their frustrations in the journals but did not ask the teacher any questions on how to do it. This shows me that either they thought that the teacher would respond to the journals and because the teacher did not, they must have been doing something right or, it may also be that they thought they could solve the problem as a group and once one student added text, the rest went with it. Even if a student really knew it was not the right way, they still went with it. This also may have to do with the length of the project as it was a pilot, 5 weeks. So, in order for a student to meet the weekly requirements, they just complied with the rest of the group, even though some may knew that it was not correct.
Scaffolding, as I mentioned starts from the bottom up. First the teacher provides scaffolds, meaning headings or titles. These should create a reaction from the students so they would interact with the content in form of doing research and submit their findings below. This process does not require a lot of thought so it should be easy if the scaffold provided is in fact a specific concept, such as history for example. The teacher provided history and philosophy scaffolds for the students in order for them to understand the foundation of this approach. Later on, as the students were to design their own games according to the approach, they had to know and understand the approach to do so. But in fact, the third section seemed extremely difficult for the students. Only one group actually managed to complete the task, however, the games were not in progression as was requested. The two games belonged to the same category but did not show a connection between them. You could not flow from one progression to the next.
This shows me that the third step was too big of a step. I assume that because of the massive response of the students, who just did not get it, but also from my own experience teaching the approach. When teaching how to build a progression according to the TGfU model, I started with an initial warm-up game (modified), than practice tasks within game forms connected to the modified game and the tactical objective and later flowing into another game, which would focus in on practice and assessment. I still recall that it took some time for students to understand that progression and I made it as simple as possible. I say simple, because I focused mainly on tactics and also I explained mainly creating open space. I also did not mention the pedagogical principles of exaggeration and simplification and so on. The reason why in fact,in theory I did cover all of the 6 steps in the TGfU model, but not in practice is because I only had one class and needed to keep it simple. I also followed lessons where the students needed to create lesson plans on BMS with those 3 parts in mind (warm-up, acquiring, closing activity). IN order to show consistency, the only thing I changed was adding the tactical focus and teaching using questioning.
Knowing that that is the only two aspects I changed and still students had some difficulty, the scaffolds provided on the wiki could have been too complex. I believe that with a simple template, where each section is clearly defined, the students could have been more successful.
When going back to scaffolding again, the first two sections initiated and facilitated scaffolding, meaning, students were able to feed of each other and build on each others' knowledge. The good thing about wikis and working as a class or group is that you combine strengths. So, some students who have prior knowledge on the subject can start and others can build on as they begin to understand the concepts themselves. In the final section, scaffolding did not seem to occur much. The only time students were scaffolding is directly related to the games, meaning the explanation of the games, which were new and possible modification to the games. Students have long been introduced to adaptation of games and how to do that. So many of the students reflected in their journals that from reading the game, they were able to add something to it, to make to game more or less challenging. The students did not however see the need to produce the progression of games. Only one student reflected upon his frustrations that the games are not in a progressive form, they are simple independent games and he felt it was wrong. That the games should be connected in some way from simple to more complex, just as he was taught in class. From the researcher's perspective, if only one student realizes the intent of the scaffold, than that shows that the scaffold did not initiate the process of scaffolding. It shows that scaffolds need to be produced in small steps, one at a time and they should be clearly defined so students know what is asked of them.
I am suddenly realizing that I just wrote the outline of my paper, even though this is much of a reflective piece and the voice of the students must still be integrated, I feel much better now, realizing that I can take this and organize my thoughts better.
I wrote my title as emotional scaffolding because I think I build on my own feelings. If I feel down, I usually think of good things in order to alter the course of my emotions. This time however, it is not as easy to get out of this mood and if you begin to think about one stressful thing that leads to another and yet another, soon, you lose control and break down. That is pretty much what happened. I was doing well today but seeing how much work I had to do made me focus on things I had to do next week and deadlines that are creeping up, instead of thinking of one concept after another just as I had outlined: scaffolding, scaffolding in wikis, wikis and TGfU,...
Next time I should get to my blog sooner so I would avoid the hassle of the emotional roller coaster, as I know, for me, that reflecting upon my experiences clears things up in my head. Suddenly I can see trees!
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Returning to base - Just for the fun of moving!
After being gone for 30 days and following the TGfU conference, I find myself back in Winnipeg, experiencing the same neck pain I did before I left. Neck pain from sitting behind my laptop all day. Not sure why I have neck pain here and not somewhere else but I just realized how much of my job is on the computer and how the internet sure brought a lot of changes into this world.
It is not just because I am a grad student that I spend more time on the computer. Did graduate students 20 years ago write their thesis on a type writer? By hand? wow! wow! wow!
The reason why I spend most of my day on the internet is because my research is on wikis, my blog is on the computer, my friends and family are in the computer (as a way of saying they are far away and only reachable by email), my articles, research and the library itself are all on the computer and my thesis must be written on the computer.
I don't think it is a bad thing though, just the neck part, but that is my own fault. I should get up every half an hour and do some pilates!
Anyway, returning to base. I am at home and have exactly a week to write a 4500 page paper for publication and have about 3 weeks to complete my thesis. The paper however will be part of my thesis so that is a good thing. I am at this stage right now that I feel so excited about being alive! I know it is weird but the tast of being almost done with my Masters and starting a doctorate is something very special. As for my masters, I have done the research, I know what I need to write, I just got to write it! Every day I write a little piece. I set small goals for myself. After the poster presentation, I take parts of that and create text around it. Show the perceptions of the teacher candidates within it so I can create a vivid story. Writing has never been a favorite thing of mine and to say the least I always feel inadequate as a writer.
I really do not think it has to do with the fact that English is my third language, although at the time I think I speak better English than I do dutch, which is on one side a bit sad; but I think it has to do with the fact that I used to do really bad in school in languages. I always failed spelling (thank goodness for spelling checkers) and I could never remember the grammar rules and messed up many times. It however does not mean that I don't like to write! I mean if I did not like to write I wouldn't be writing this now would I? What I conclude is that I enjoy writing but believe I am not very good at it. Still I do it and keep doing it! Why?
Now lets give this a spin. A child loves playing games but is not very good at it, yet still he or she continues to do it! Why?
Do I have a purpose to write this? yes I do but I did not start this blog with a purpose in mind. I know this gets published and people will read it and my mistakes will come out so my not write this in a personal diary where no one would read it? Why the blog?
For me it is easier! And more fun! I enjoy writing on this blog because I love to reflect and enjoy using the computer. I also enjoy the fact that someone could read it and respond to it. And knowing that people can read it, makes me want to write on it every day, just so I can provide a new piece of writing. I am a very open person and don't really care that people know these things of me. I like it that people get to know me, all of me, not just me in a social setting, like at a party, but also in writing, during a challenging time. All while I am doing something (writing), that I am not very comfortable with. But the more I write the better I will get. In fact, I believe that using this blog makes me more aware and attentive to my writing style. Ok, maybe just a little.
So let's think back to the child in PE. The child who loves playing games but is not very good at it yet still keeps going. This child does not give up! Why? Does play have a purpose? Does play make you happy and feel good about yourself even if you are not good at it? Or does it have to do with the fact that the child is not criticized while playing. The child plays and will continue to play until someone stops him or her. As teachers, this is important to know. If we let the child play and see that he or she is enjoying the game, but is not very good at it (what defines good, in who's eyes?), do we let him or her play? Why or why not? I think there are three possibilities here.
1) Let the child play, do not interfere, the child will learn by trail and error
2) Teacher knows what to do how to improve his or her game play, stops the child and tells it how to play better... will the child still enjoy the game?
3) Teacher knows what to do how to improve the child's game play, observes, play with the child, asks the child what he or she enjoys about the game and asks if he or she wants to learn something new about the game. Teacher gives the child a choice! Will the child enjoy that?
I am a number 3 teacher. I try not to tell a child what to do, without asking them questions first. Teaching student centered means teaching from the child, it is the child who directs the teaching. I believe that all children are ready to learn something but what they are ready to learn is unique to each child. Channeling teaching towards the child's need and readiness is a good way to teach, I think. And in my teaching, so far, from my experiences, I enjoyed teaching like this and find it way more fun than direct teaching. I also realize that if I for some reason put purpose before person (student), most likely, someone gets disappointed.
I should probably rephrase the direct teaching part as I do think there is a time and a place for direct teaching! I believe that you can be student centered and teach direct. I believe the teaching style depends on the student and some students learn best through the direct teaching method. However, one should never assume that if a student for example, preferred direct teaching of a jump shot, that that student would automatically want direct teaching of everything. It is important to ask the student how they wish to learn something together with what. Why do I say that? Because for me, someone who is not too found of competition, the play, the process was always more important than the outcome or points scored. In fact, when I was in a basketball club I used to only show up for practices and I loved the practices because I loved moving. I did not show up for games to often because most times we sat on the bench and i really did not get to touch the ball all that often. In fact, I would probably enjoy doing an hour of drills more than going to a game. Weird? I don't think so. At least in a drill I get to touch the ball and move! A lot! So going to a more student approach and letting the children play is an important point in my philosophy of teaching!
How come I start out and than end at a total different point of focus. I really have a difficult time to stick with a certain topic of reflection. That is why usually, even though I start with entering a title, by the time I am finished writing the blog the title doesn't match it! So maybe I will use a two fold title. Meaning the first part was a title connected to what I was going to talk about and the second one was a title on what I have been talking about.
Get it?
It is not just because I am a grad student that I spend more time on the computer. Did graduate students 20 years ago write their thesis on a type writer? By hand? wow! wow! wow!
The reason why I spend most of my day on the internet is because my research is on wikis, my blog is on the computer, my friends and family are in the computer (as a way of saying they are far away and only reachable by email), my articles, research and the library itself are all on the computer and my thesis must be written on the computer.
I don't think it is a bad thing though, just the neck part, but that is my own fault. I should get up every half an hour and do some pilates!
Anyway, returning to base. I am at home and have exactly a week to write a 4500 page paper for publication and have about 3 weeks to complete my thesis. The paper however will be part of my thesis so that is a good thing. I am at this stage right now that I feel so excited about being alive! I know it is weird but the tast of being almost done with my Masters and starting a doctorate is something very special. As for my masters, I have done the research, I know what I need to write, I just got to write it! Every day I write a little piece. I set small goals for myself. After the poster presentation, I take parts of that and create text around it. Show the perceptions of the teacher candidates within it so I can create a vivid story. Writing has never been a favorite thing of mine and to say the least I always feel inadequate as a writer.
I really do not think it has to do with the fact that English is my third language, although at the time I think I speak better English than I do dutch, which is on one side a bit sad; but I think it has to do with the fact that I used to do really bad in school in languages. I always failed spelling (thank goodness for spelling checkers) and I could never remember the grammar rules and messed up many times. It however does not mean that I don't like to write! I mean if I did not like to write I wouldn't be writing this now would I? What I conclude is that I enjoy writing but believe I am not very good at it. Still I do it and keep doing it! Why?
Now lets give this a spin. A child loves playing games but is not very good at it, yet still he or she continues to do it! Why?
Do I have a purpose to write this? yes I do but I did not start this blog with a purpose in mind. I know this gets published and people will read it and my mistakes will come out so my not write this in a personal diary where no one would read it? Why the blog?
For me it is easier! And more fun! I enjoy writing on this blog because I love to reflect and enjoy using the computer. I also enjoy the fact that someone could read it and respond to it. And knowing that people can read it, makes me want to write on it every day, just so I can provide a new piece of writing. I am a very open person and don't really care that people know these things of me. I like it that people get to know me, all of me, not just me in a social setting, like at a party, but also in writing, during a challenging time. All while I am doing something (writing), that I am not very comfortable with. But the more I write the better I will get. In fact, I believe that using this blog makes me more aware and attentive to my writing style. Ok, maybe just a little.
So let's think back to the child in PE. The child who loves playing games but is not very good at it yet still keeps going. This child does not give up! Why? Does play have a purpose? Does play make you happy and feel good about yourself even if you are not good at it? Or does it have to do with the fact that the child is not criticized while playing. The child plays and will continue to play until someone stops him or her. As teachers, this is important to know. If we let the child play and see that he or she is enjoying the game, but is not very good at it (what defines good, in who's eyes?), do we let him or her play? Why or why not? I think there are three possibilities here.
1) Let the child play, do not interfere, the child will learn by trail and error
2) Teacher knows what to do how to improve his or her game play, stops the child and tells it how to play better... will the child still enjoy the game?
3) Teacher knows what to do how to improve the child's game play, observes, play with the child, asks the child what he or she enjoys about the game and asks if he or she wants to learn something new about the game. Teacher gives the child a choice! Will the child enjoy that?
I am a number 3 teacher. I try not to tell a child what to do, without asking them questions first. Teaching student centered means teaching from the child, it is the child who directs the teaching. I believe that all children are ready to learn something but what they are ready to learn is unique to each child. Channeling teaching towards the child's need and readiness is a good way to teach, I think. And in my teaching, so far, from my experiences, I enjoyed teaching like this and find it way more fun than direct teaching. I also realize that if I for some reason put purpose before person (student), most likely, someone gets disappointed.
I should probably rephrase the direct teaching part as I do think there is a time and a place for direct teaching! I believe that you can be student centered and teach direct. I believe the teaching style depends on the student and some students learn best through the direct teaching method. However, one should never assume that if a student for example, preferred direct teaching of a jump shot, that that student would automatically want direct teaching of everything. It is important to ask the student how they wish to learn something together with what. Why do I say that? Because for me, someone who is not too found of competition, the play, the process was always more important than the outcome or points scored. In fact, when I was in a basketball club I used to only show up for practices and I loved the practices because I loved moving. I did not show up for games to often because most times we sat on the bench and i really did not get to touch the ball all that often. In fact, I would probably enjoy doing an hour of drills more than going to a game. Weird? I don't think so. At least in a drill I get to touch the ball and move! A lot! So going to a more student approach and letting the children play is an important point in my philosophy of teaching!
How come I start out and than end at a total different point of focus. I really have a difficult time to stick with a certain topic of reflection. That is why usually, even though I start with entering a title, by the time I am finished writing the blog the title doesn't match it! So maybe I will use a two fold title. Meaning the first part was a title connected to what I was going to talk about and the second one was a title on what I have been talking about.
Get it?
Friday, May 16, 2008
TGfU Conference
As I lay in bed, 12 midnight, I reflect upon a long day of many highlights.
I arrived late last night into Vancouver. I believe it was 2 am when I finally settled into my room at Gage Towers. I was happy to be here after a 12 hour journey from Little Rock. Three flights, thank goodness no delays!
Got up at 6 to get ready for the big day! My first poster presentation! I was to say the least stoked! Sharing your work is exciting yet scary but as a grad student I have learned to take criticism or answer the tough questions. A memory of my thesis proposal flashes in front of me. How I did not think that a proposal was more like a defense. But I think that hearing the tough questions then made me more relaxed now. So I was ready!
Off I went to the conference. I must admit that although I was very interested in what Judy Rink was talking about, I had a difficult time concentrating. Through my head went: did I bring this, is my poster safe, will I be asked tough questions, will people like the wiki idea, will I be able to stand on my feet at 6 pm tonight,... Yes, pretty basic questions that required only a few braincells, much less than the amount that was needed to comprehend the lecture presented in front of me. Anything I take away from the session:
- Good thing I took notes! I knew I wasn't focused so later on I can review the notes and maybe remember! (First thing you learn as a grad student: have a note pad with you at all times! You never know when that magical research question is going to pop up!)
- TGfU needs a theoretical foundation ----- learning theory, linear theory (?) - Note to myself: look it up!
- Constructivism: nothing new!
- Subconscious level vs conscious -- made me think of surface vs deep teaching but probably had nothing to do with it.
- ....
- need my notes... later, too tired now.
After Rink, I went to put up my poster and pretty much walked around the poster board about 40 times that day. I visited all the people around and attempted to join in more session but well, as I noticed that I was continuously showing up late and missed the boot, I did not get too much info from the sessions.
I did learn that doing a poster presentation is quite relaxing and fun! My favorite part, who would have guessed? Was talking to people and sharing information and asking them if they would be interested in creating a global tgfu wiki.
When I arrived at home, I believed I had 12 people I invited to join the wiki I had pre-made.
Now the ball is in their court, I hope to attract more people and get the ball rolling!
I am quite excited to see how the wiki will evolve.
Thinking about how late it is and the full day set out for me tomorrow.
I am loving every minute of the conference though, to me, most importantly is the networking involved, I am actually getting to know people! That is very neat! I hope that using the wiki I get to know even more people and I can start an active dialogue to translate knowledge to a variety of people in theory and practice.
I arrived late last night into Vancouver. I believe it was 2 am when I finally settled into my room at Gage Towers. I was happy to be here after a 12 hour journey from Little Rock. Three flights, thank goodness no delays!
Got up at 6 to get ready for the big day! My first poster presentation! I was to say the least stoked! Sharing your work is exciting yet scary but as a grad student I have learned to take criticism or answer the tough questions. A memory of my thesis proposal flashes in front of me. How I did not think that a proposal was more like a defense. But I think that hearing the tough questions then made me more relaxed now. So I was ready!
Off I went to the conference. I must admit that although I was very interested in what Judy Rink was talking about, I had a difficult time concentrating. Through my head went: did I bring this, is my poster safe, will I be asked tough questions, will people like the wiki idea, will I be able to stand on my feet at 6 pm tonight,... Yes, pretty basic questions that required only a few braincells, much less than the amount that was needed to comprehend the lecture presented in front of me. Anything I take away from the session:
- Good thing I took notes! I knew I wasn't focused so later on I can review the notes and maybe remember! (First thing you learn as a grad student: have a note pad with you at all times! You never know when that magical research question is going to pop up!)
- TGfU needs a theoretical foundation ----- learning theory, linear theory (?) - Note to myself: look it up!
- Constructivism: nothing new!
- Subconscious level vs conscious -- made me think of surface vs deep teaching but probably had nothing to do with it.
- ....
- need my notes... later, too tired now.
After Rink, I went to put up my poster and pretty much walked around the poster board about 40 times that day. I visited all the people around and attempted to join in more session but well, as I noticed that I was continuously showing up late and missed the boot, I did not get too much info from the sessions.
I did learn that doing a poster presentation is quite relaxing and fun! My favorite part, who would have guessed? Was talking to people and sharing information and asking them if they would be interested in creating a global tgfu wiki.
When I arrived at home, I believed I had 12 people I invited to join the wiki I had pre-made.
Now the ball is in their court, I hope to attract more people and get the ball rolling!
I am quite excited to see how the wiki will evolve.
Thinking about how late it is and the full day set out for me tomorrow.
I am loving every minute of the conference though, to me, most importantly is the networking involved, I am actually getting to know people! That is very neat! I hope that using the wiki I get to know even more people and I can start an active dialogue to translate knowledge to a variety of people in theory and practice.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
A collaborative Masters Thesis? Why not?
I am excited and anxious at the same time. Tomorrow I am flying to Vancouver to present my poster at the TGfU (Teaching Games for Understanding) Conference. I will be presenting the whole day on Thursday. This poster outlines the findings of my research for my thesis.
I will, if I have an hour, write about my first two years of graduate school, well 1.5 years as I started Jan 2007 and it is now May 2008.
I will take a picture of my poster and post it below. The title of my poster is: Wikis and TGfU: A collaborative approach to games education.
I began making this poster about a month ago after my data analysis. It is amazing how much thought can go into a poster and how much revising it needs. You think it is all done and than someone poses a question which makes you think of new or different ideas which in the ends makes you change the content of the poster. From going through this process I wonder about the effects of qualitative research. What I mean by this is that I interpret data a certain way, depended on my own experience and knowledge. The same data may be interpreted differently if analysed by a different researcher. This brings up various vital points.
1. This is often why qualitative research is said to be too subjective and not "true" ( than again, what is true? who says something is true? How can you be sure something is true? Why is the truth necessary in the first place, or better, why do we focus on the truth and not on creating vivid images/interpretations of peoples' perceptions? )
Obviously I am talking about research or studies involving human beings and how they experience certain events. I do see value in mixed studies as well as I see value in quantitative research but I think it is important that the question of study predicts the type of research you will do. I guess in the research, the qual/quan dichotomy has often been seen as a battle, but I believe it should not be looked upon as one. I believe it has nothing to do with whether the methods used or of qualitative or quantitative nature, it has to do with choosing the appropriate method to answer the question you are asking.
2. If two researchers can interpret data in different ways, would it not be an advantage to produce more collaborative research projects, meaning having two researchers conduct, analyse and write up the study together. Making my point, as a graduate student, I think it may be a positive influence to have a collaborate effort. Knowing that is not always possible as you must find two students in the same area. Knowing that can not always be easy is due to the fact that I am the only student in my Faculty interested in PE pedagogy at the moment. But! I do know that a Masters is different than a Doctorate and as from my own experiences and the amount of guidance I have asked for from my committee members, especially my advisor, I think a collaborative Master thesis is something to consider. Just think of the positives:
- collaboration creates communication, reflection and broadening of perspectives.
- more aspects of the study can be explored together rather than asking all your questions to your advisor who obviously often has more than 1 grad student. So unless you were as fortunate as me, who does have a very good advisor, this may be a positive aspect to collaborative research.
- Two heads together may do more work and push each other, while independent research is often lonely and procrastination is not uncommon.
- In a masters program, you are learning all the trick of the trade, why not do it with two, combine experiences and knowledge and construct new knowledge as you go, individual and collaborative.
- a Masters thesis is a big undertaken and a collaborative project may be less threatening to students. I just know that my decision to commence grad work may have been easier knowing I was going to do a collaborative project rather than an individual one.
- I had a difficult time getting to my research question, collaboration may make this process easier.
- Two mind are stronger than one and growth is greater in the long run as you can learn by your individual involvement but also collaborative.
- Using a wiki will help this process :) Yeah I know, promoting the product! Oh well!
I bet I can come up with many more reasons but as I have to pack for Vancouver I will do that first. Remembering NOT to FORGET my poster! Not tomorrow, not on the plane!!!
That alone will be a big accomplishment!
Here I go!
I will, if I have an hour, write about my first two years of graduate school, well 1.5 years as I started Jan 2007 and it is now May 2008.
I will take a picture of my poster and post it below. The title of my poster is: Wikis and TGfU: A collaborative approach to games education.
I began making this poster about a month ago after my data analysis. It is amazing how much thought can go into a poster and how much revising it needs. You think it is all done and than someone poses a question which makes you think of new or different ideas which in the ends makes you change the content of the poster. From going through this process I wonder about the effects of qualitative research. What I mean by this is that I interpret data a certain way, depended on my own experience and knowledge. The same data may be interpreted differently if analysed by a different researcher. This brings up various vital points.
1. This is often why qualitative research is said to be too subjective and not "true" ( than again, what is true? who says something is true? How can you be sure something is true? Why is the truth necessary in the first place, or better, why do we focus on the truth and not on creating vivid images/interpretations of peoples' perceptions? )
Obviously I am talking about research or studies involving human beings and how they experience certain events. I do see value in mixed studies as well as I see value in quantitative research but I think it is important that the question of study predicts the type of research you will do. I guess in the research, the qual/quan dichotomy has often been seen as a battle, but I believe it should not be looked upon as one. I believe it has nothing to do with whether the methods used or of qualitative or quantitative nature, it has to do with choosing the appropriate method to answer the question you are asking.
2. If two researchers can interpret data in different ways, would it not be an advantage to produce more collaborative research projects, meaning having two researchers conduct, analyse and write up the study together. Making my point, as a graduate student, I think it may be a positive influence to have a collaborate effort. Knowing that is not always possible as you must find two students in the same area. Knowing that can not always be easy is due to the fact that I am the only student in my Faculty interested in PE pedagogy at the moment. But! I do know that a Masters is different than a Doctorate and as from my own experiences and the amount of guidance I have asked for from my committee members, especially my advisor, I think a collaborative Master thesis is something to consider. Just think of the positives:
- collaboration creates communication, reflection and broadening of perspectives.
- more aspects of the study can be explored together rather than asking all your questions to your advisor who obviously often has more than 1 grad student. So unless you were as fortunate as me, who does have a very good advisor, this may be a positive aspect to collaborative research.
- Two heads together may do more work and push each other, while independent research is often lonely and procrastination is not uncommon.
- In a masters program, you are learning all the trick of the trade, why not do it with two, combine experiences and knowledge and construct new knowledge as you go, individual and collaborative.
- a Masters thesis is a big undertaken and a collaborative project may be less threatening to students. I just know that my decision to commence grad work may have been easier knowing I was going to do a collaborative project rather than an individual one.
- I had a difficult time getting to my research question, collaboration may make this process easier.
- Two mind are stronger than one and growth is greater in the long run as you can learn by your individual involvement but also collaborative.
- Using a wiki will help this process :) Yeah I know, promoting the product! Oh well!
I bet I can come up with many more reasons but as I have to pack for Vancouver I will do that first. Remembering NOT to FORGET my poster! Not tomorrow, not on the plane!!!
That alone will be a big accomplishment!
Here I go!
Monday, May 12, 2008
A little bit of history
I started this blog just yesterday for two reasons. 1) to inform the public on the road one graduate travels on, the ups and downs, the moments of excitement and despair and 2) to provide myself with a space where I can reflect upon this fascinating journey. To begin this blog, I will provide some insight into my path through education so far.
I first went to Kindergarten. ok, I won't go that far, but I did go to kindergarten for 3 years which most (at least non-Europeans) have gone through. I guess it is the same as preschool but kids in Belgium do go to school from the age of 3, which I believe to be a very good system. Less money of day care and more learning and social interactions for the children. But whether or not you send your kids to kindergarten is not the point here.
I grew up in Belgium and went to school there as well. K-12 or as we say it in Belgium, elementary K-6 and secondary 1-6. I jumped around a little bit in schools, I started off doing languages but later ended up in arts school with a desire to learn more about architecture. Which is an interest but it ended up nothing more than that. My passion, as it turns out could be found in education, more specifically teaching PE (or LO in dutch). How did I find out? After high school, I decided to go into psychology as I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life. During that year, I realized that I liked going to school but not in the program I was in. I only had classes a few times a week and for the rest of the time I worked in a bar. I guess nobody told me that I should be studying at that time, not working. But in the end I did learn about Freud, my only class I actually passed that year. During the exams I was reflecting on my year and knew I was not on the right path. It was my friend who told me I should become a teacher. After all, I was a ski instructor and camp leader and loved that. So after that year I signed up to the teachers' college in Gent in the program of Physical Education. A three year, integrated education program, very intense but worthwhile, even besides my growing fear of gymnastics.
Yes, if you see me perform some gymnastic ground moves here in North America, they all think I was pretty good but unfortunately the gymnastic standards in Belgium were very high and I did fail gymnastics every year even though I worked hard at it. There comes the ultimate debate between effort and performance or a combination. My mark was solely based on performance and therefore I failed. However, that did not hold me back. I may have not been able to do a perfect cartwheel of the high beam but I did know how to teach it! My love for teaching was not inhibited by the pressure I endures at school.
After three years, I graduated with distinction which is like 70 %. Again, the bar is much higher in Belgium as it is extremely difficult to get 80's or 90's. Receiving a 60 or 70 was like "YES!, I don't have to take this class again!" If we did not have so many classes I guess we would have more time to study. But we did go to school just like a high school student. In class from 8:30 until 5pm! We also received both theory and practical sessions plus teaching practicum each year. I can write a lot about my three years there and maybe one day I will but overall, it was intense yet worthwhile and it provided me with a solid base for teaching PE.
Not that that stopped me from pursuing different dreams after graduation. You would think I'd go straight into teaching school but no, I wanted to chase a few dreams before embarking on teaching first. Experiencing the world, traveling and meeting people was something I always dreamed about and so I decided to go on a cruise. Well, that is if I had money! But I did not, so I decided to work on one. Which I did, I ended up working for 6 months at Disney Cruise lines. I worked as a youth counselor with 3-6 year olds and babysitting 0-3 year olds. It was fun for the first 4 months, than i got tired and after 6 months I was done. Returned home to begin chasing a new dream: becoming a paid ski instructor!
I found several jobs on the Internet and applied. I received jobs from Vermont and Aspen and choose to go to Aspen. I taught skiing for two full seasons there. Mainly at a group call powder pandas, 3-5 year olds. Elementary children seemed to be my passion.
Maybe later I will fill you in on more about these two positions but this is suppose to be just an outline of what I have done before returning to education.
After Aspen, I went out to Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada where I started at the university of Manitoba. In Manitoba, the government expects teachers to have at least 4 to 5 years of education so I went back to school and received a BPE. All in all I now have two BPE's I guess. A bit strange but I did what I had to do.
What did I learn at the U of M? English! Well, still learning each day... I also learned terminology in PE in English, which was extremely valuable. And it is there that I became really interested in teacher education. I mean that while I went to school there, I learned the subjects but started to critically evaluate the education system, especially in terms of PE and health.
After my two years, I decided I wanted to still this thirst for knowledge by attending the graduate program but I later changed my mind as I thought I would be a hypocrite if I would study teacher education without ever really being a school PE teacher. Yes, I have taught many PE lessons, but mainly in summer camps and private so public schools are different.
I decided to teach and ended up teaching every subject in the book. I taught Math, English, Science, Social Studies, French, leadership, PE (K-10), Outdoor education,...
I taught in 4 different schools and 2 different school divisions as I thought it would be good to have a diverse experience. No two schools are alike and the same goes for school divisions!
I really started to think about the differences between schools, school divisions and the education systems as they apply to different countries. The main focus point of my interest was the need to know why there is such a big difference between PETE (physical education teacher education) programs in Belgium and in Canada. And not just why but who prepares teachers for what? And in general, are we really preparing teachers how to teach PE? If so, great, why is that not internationally known or if not, what can we do to create a better preparation program?
Many questions which started the need to begin a masters program at the University of Manitoba.
I first went to Kindergarten. ok, I won't go that far, but I did go to kindergarten for 3 years which most (at least non-Europeans) have gone through. I guess it is the same as preschool but kids in Belgium do go to school from the age of 3, which I believe to be a very good system. Less money of day care and more learning and social interactions for the children. But whether or not you send your kids to kindergarten is not the point here.
I grew up in Belgium and went to school there as well. K-12 or as we say it in Belgium, elementary K-6 and secondary 1-6. I jumped around a little bit in schools, I started off doing languages but later ended up in arts school with a desire to learn more about architecture. Which is an interest but it ended up nothing more than that. My passion, as it turns out could be found in education, more specifically teaching PE (or LO in dutch). How did I find out? After high school, I decided to go into psychology as I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life. During that year, I realized that I liked going to school but not in the program I was in. I only had classes a few times a week and for the rest of the time I worked in a bar. I guess nobody told me that I should be studying at that time, not working. But in the end I did learn about Freud, my only class I actually passed that year. During the exams I was reflecting on my year and knew I was not on the right path. It was my friend who told me I should become a teacher. After all, I was a ski instructor and camp leader and loved that. So after that year I signed up to the teachers' college in Gent in the program of Physical Education. A three year, integrated education program, very intense but worthwhile, even besides my growing fear of gymnastics.
Yes, if you see me perform some gymnastic ground moves here in North America, they all think I was pretty good but unfortunately the gymnastic standards in Belgium were very high and I did fail gymnastics every year even though I worked hard at it. There comes the ultimate debate between effort and performance or a combination. My mark was solely based on performance and therefore I failed. However, that did not hold me back. I may have not been able to do a perfect cartwheel of the high beam but I did know how to teach it! My love for teaching was not inhibited by the pressure I endures at school.
After three years, I graduated with distinction which is like 70 %. Again, the bar is much higher in Belgium as it is extremely difficult to get 80's or 90's. Receiving a 60 or 70 was like "YES!, I don't have to take this class again!" If we did not have so many classes I guess we would have more time to study. But we did go to school just like a high school student. In class from 8:30 until 5pm! We also received both theory and practical sessions plus teaching practicum each year. I can write a lot about my three years there and maybe one day I will but overall, it was intense yet worthwhile and it provided me with a solid base for teaching PE.
Not that that stopped me from pursuing different dreams after graduation. You would think I'd go straight into teaching school but no, I wanted to chase a few dreams before embarking on teaching first. Experiencing the world, traveling and meeting people was something I always dreamed about and so I decided to go on a cruise. Well, that is if I had money! But I did not, so I decided to work on one. Which I did, I ended up working for 6 months at Disney Cruise lines. I worked as a youth counselor with 3-6 year olds and babysitting 0-3 year olds. It was fun for the first 4 months, than i got tired and after 6 months I was done. Returned home to begin chasing a new dream: becoming a paid ski instructor!
I found several jobs on the Internet and applied. I received jobs from Vermont and Aspen and choose to go to Aspen. I taught skiing for two full seasons there. Mainly at a group call powder pandas, 3-5 year olds. Elementary children seemed to be my passion.
Maybe later I will fill you in on more about these two positions but this is suppose to be just an outline of what I have done before returning to education.
After Aspen, I went out to Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada where I started at the university of Manitoba. In Manitoba, the government expects teachers to have at least 4 to 5 years of education so I went back to school and received a BPE. All in all I now have two BPE's I guess. A bit strange but I did what I had to do.
What did I learn at the U of M? English! Well, still learning each day... I also learned terminology in PE in English, which was extremely valuable. And it is there that I became really interested in teacher education. I mean that while I went to school there, I learned the subjects but started to critically evaluate the education system, especially in terms of PE and health.
After my two years, I decided I wanted to still this thirst for knowledge by attending the graduate program but I later changed my mind as I thought I would be a hypocrite if I would study teacher education without ever really being a school PE teacher. Yes, I have taught many PE lessons, but mainly in summer camps and private so public schools are different.
I decided to teach and ended up teaching every subject in the book. I taught Math, English, Science, Social Studies, French, leadership, PE (K-10), Outdoor education,...
I taught in 4 different schools and 2 different school divisions as I thought it would be good to have a diverse experience. No two schools are alike and the same goes for school divisions!
I really started to think about the differences between schools, school divisions and the education systems as they apply to different countries. The main focus point of my interest was the need to know why there is such a big difference between PETE (physical education teacher education) programs in Belgium and in Canada. And not just why but who prepares teachers for what? And in general, are we really preparing teachers how to teach PE? If so, great, why is that not internationally known or if not, what can we do to create a better preparation program?
Many questions which started the need to begin a masters program at the University of Manitoba.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
First time
Alright, I decided to create this blog for several reasons. Let us start with the beginning. Being a graduate student is not an easy task. Actually, choosing to become a graduate was the easy part but there is a lot more to it than that. While going through my Masters' program, I felt as if I was on a rollercoaster with many ups and downs and thought to myself, I should have kept a diary because it may be a useful gift to someone who is about to embark on his or her journey as a graduate student.
Yet again, would I really want to tell someone about what I have been through? Would it scare them off? Or would it encourage them to begin graduate work? Or would it limit their experiences throughout this process of being a graduate student?
Many questions and I am sure they have many answers but as I come to a split in the road, ending a masters and beginning a doctorate, I decided to use this blog to not only tell you about my experiences going through my Masters' program but also allow you to walk with me through my doctorate program. Now what would be more fun than that?
Enjoy!
Yet again, would I really want to tell someone about what I have been through? Would it scare them off? Or would it encourage them to begin graduate work? Or would it limit their experiences throughout this process of being a graduate student?
Many questions and I am sure they have many answers but as I come to a split in the road, ending a masters and beginning a doctorate, I decided to use this blog to not only tell you about my experiences going through my Masters' program but also allow you to walk with me through my doctorate program. Now what would be more fun than that?
Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
