I’ve been reading two books lately, Brain Rules – 12 Principles for
Surviving and Thriving at Work, Home, and School, by John Medina and inGenius
- A Crash Course On Creativity by Tina Seeling. I recommend them both. Oddly enough, they’ve gotten me thinking
about faculty meetings. Not, lest you jump to conclusions, as hotspots of creativity. As a
veteran teacher, I’ve sat through more of them than I care to count. Mostly at one school, but not entirely. A few thoughts come to mind. The first is that faculty meetings seem
to be structured and run the way many classrooms are. The organization and the
presentation are about as original as what goes on hour after hour, day after
day, in many, many schools. The
“sage on the stage” is the principal, division head, or whatever other titled
person is leading the event. The faculty
is arranged in orderly rows. The
leader is the adult/teacher, the faculty is the youth/students. Everyone slides neatly into his or her
role. The faculty is talked at,
given all the “vital” information, anecdotes, and instruction they require. In
short (or long), a lecture. Question and answer, or “discussion” follows,
linearly, hands rising for recognition like needy fifth graders. Everyone plays
their role: class clowns clown,
good students ask for a review of the facts, head nodders nod, people with off
the wall ideas get looks of scorn, emoters emote, note takes take notes, note
passers pass notes, the devil’s advocates advocate, the peacemakers pacify,
some whisperers pretend engagement, the tired strain to stay awake or nod off, poor
listeners ask questions that have already been asked, and everyone sighs deeply
when the long-winded drone on.
Eyes are on the clock. For years I have been at a loss for words as to
how so many smart people can convene at a meeting and collectively become so
dumb. Little, if anything is
changed, except by administrative fiat. Herewith, a stab at wrestling with this conundrum, inspired
afresh by Medina and Seeling. I claim no particular originality. These thoughts have to have occurred to
many of my colleagues sitting in a meeting at one time or another – when they were supposed to be paying
attention!
Medina’s first chapter is titled “Exercise”. What if people were encouraged to move
around a bit, before, during or after meetings? Watch the leaders at the front of the room. They get to stand, roam, gesture, and move about
as they see fit to help deliver their message. The people who need the oxygen to help stimulate their
attention and thinking, are asked, even required, to sit still. As noted above, faculty meetings are
much like classrooms. How much time do faculty get, or are encouraged to take
to exercise during a meeting? During
the day? Assuming, of course, they
are permitted to leave the building. What if a meeting began with five minutes
of dancing? Simple yoga? A chance to just stretch and breathe?
Medina rightly points out we don’t pay attention to boring
things. “Before the first
quarter-hour is over in a typical presentation, people usually have checked out.” I can’t remember how many years ago I checked out on topics
like dress code, gum chewing, attendance taking. Vital pedagogical issues, to
be sure, but too much information on these or any issue leads a brain straight
to the check out counter.
I’m NO fan of PowerPoint presentations, especially those
that are simply cue cards for a speaker. That said, a few pictures might save time and get a
message across. Got a dress code?
A few pictures of violators might illustrate the point quickly. A couple of shots of gum under desks,
squashed into rugs, tacked on a wall, might be a more forceful reminder to
address that issue. It could even become a community response by asking
students to generate a dozen or so gross shots of “gum pollution” to share with
faculty. A public service project
for a photography class perhaps. Use music, use food, use a prize – some hook
to help presenters to make their point (if they must) short and to the point,
and then move on. In a not so subtle way I’m encouraging leaders here to
consider TEACHING, not as a task their underlings do, but as something they can
do to model for those they collaborate (?) with. Including recognizing that we
learn with more than just our ears and putting that knowledge into practice.
When do faculty meetings occur? At the end of the school day when Medina describes what he
calls “the nap zone”? Not just a cute name, but a time identified by sleep
research. Medina couldn’t be more
explicit when he says, “If you are a public speaker, you already know it is
darn near fatal to give a talk in the midafternoon.” Or perhaps your school schedules meetings before the regular
school day, bringing grumpy, underslept faculty to the gathering, before they
head off to encounter grumpy, underslept adolescents. Sleep, healthy sleep, especially for adolescents, is an
issue worth discussing at...a faculty meeting? Now there’s a dilemma worth
tackling. When do you schedule the
sleep issue meeting?
It’s also worth asking how stress intersects with faculty
lives. Medina suggests that
individually, the worst kind of stress is the feeling that you have no control
over a problem – you are helpless. I refer back to my point at the
beginning. Classrooms and faculty
meetings can be indistinguishable.
Especially in the current testing environment where teachers and
students are being asked, no forced, to teach, learn, and regurgitate on terms
dictated by others, up to and including our president. It’s worth
questioning whether a meeting will add or reduce the stress in any teacher’s
life. Or any student’s life? How
can a meeting add to rather than reduce a teacher’s sense of professionalism?
I fell asleep recently (in my own bed, not at a faculty
meeting) musing on a suggestion of Tina Seelig’s, “ask questions that start
with ‘why’”. Children do
this all the time. How many times
did my children ask me, “Why?” Why
is this meeting necessary? Why is
it necessary to present information in this way? Why now? Why
will this meeting make school life better? The point of asking why, of “reframing” as Seelig calls it
is because, “’why’ questions provide an incredibly useful tool for expanding
the landscape of solutions for a problem.
Of course, this presumes that the point of a meeting is indeed to engage
a faculty in solving problems, finding solutions, creating new ideas. Just like they do in their classrooms.
Or not.