books, tech, lessons from a librarian

Tag: pedagogy

Connecting the Dots: Is there room for creativity in professional development?

connect the dots header image

Dot-to-dot puzzles. My kid loves them. Always has. Now in sixth grade, his favorites still start off 1-2-3, but now they’re cranked up to 11. Extreme puzzles like this one:   extreme dot to dot of a giraffe
This giraffe puzzle (sorry to spoil the surprise… it’s a giraffe) has over 1300 dots to connect, but the concept is still the same as the first puzzles he completed as a toddler. Find the beginning dot, and then follow the pre-determined path until the image becomes more clear and complete. Reach the final dot and you’re done. Move onto the next puzzle.

Dot-to-dot puzzles are the antithesis of the creative process. Worse than coloring books even… it’s not even about staying inside the lines, you’re literally drawing the line. Nothing in life is as simple as connecting the dots. Nothing in education that prepares our students for life as a grown-up is as simple as finding the starting spot, drawing a straight line from one prescribed dot to the next, and continuing until you reach the end.

In reading and researching the final ISTE Coaching Standard in EDTC 6106 at Seattle Pacific University, I was given this guiding question to explore: What does the ideal technology rich professional learning program look like? During my exploration the question & answers I decided on were:

Q: How can we integrate creativity into a technology rich professional learning program?

A: Have teachers follow the LAUNCH design process in their learning. Celebrate innovation. Allow for reflection and open communication. Make the collaborative process necessary for success.

So why focus specifically on creativity? Returning to the original analogy, in my 15+ years in education much of what I’ve seen in professional development programs has been a dot-to-dot puzzle. It’s been a prescribed process, with a predetermined product expected. Straying from the order will result in more than a few raised eyebrows and even redirection. Engagement is driven not by innovation but by strict adherence to connecting dots, one after another. The problem is we’re tasked with helping our students to develop the learning and innovation skills that by consensus have been agreed to be critical to success in the 21st Century: Creativity and Innovation; Critical Thinking and Problem Solving; Communication and Collaboration (http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework). How can we hope to achieve success in developing those skills if our own professional learning doesn’t reflect the same values?

I was recently reading a book and came across this quote by educator Bo Adams (It’s About Learning https://itsaboutlearning.org/bo-adams/):bo adams quote

LAUNCH book coverThe book is LAUNCH: Using design thinking to boost creativity and bring out the maker in every student by John Spencer and A.J. Juliani. Spencer and Juliani have created a design framework that is applicable and incredibly useful for today’s education, for students and teachers alike. The LAUNCH acronym stands for:

Look, Listen, Learn
Ask Tons of Questions
Understand the Process or Problem
Navigate Ideas
Create a Prototype
Highlight and Fix
& launch your work to an audience.

Here’s a video introduction to the LAUNCH design thinking framework:

What I especially love is how the focus is on design and creativity, rather than specific technology “stuff” that may or may not be available to all educators or their students. Allowing for personalization in the learning and design process means that the there is considerable freedom in taking a different approach to find solutions. Juliani and Spencer’s Launch website is filled with great ideas, as are both individual author’s blogs and Twitter feeds.

Related Resources
John Spencer: http://www.spencerauthor.com/
A.J. Juliani: http://ajjuliani.com/
The LAUNCH Cycle: http://thelaunchcycle.com/
The Global Day of Design: http://globaldayofdesign.com/ (coming up soon! — 5/2/2017)

In my opinion “creativity” is the key to success for 21st Century citizens for at least 3 of the 4-Cs in the P21 Framework (http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework). [1] Critical Thinking — higher level skills inherently require creative approaches; [2] Collaboration — going beyond mere collegiality requires creative thinking. Creative thinkers find new ways to collaborate and new partners to collaborate with; and [3] Creativity.

By injecting a requirement of creativity into a technology rich professional learning program, it keeps the focus not on consumption but on creation. It is easy to be distracted by shiny new apps and flashy tech doo-dads, but requiring creativity in the learning means that higher level thinking skills are essential to success. A lot of adults have forgotten what it means to innovate and create for fear of failure. Allowing for failure in the process would be great practice for educators as they begin the process of bringing project-based learning into their classrooms.

The TPACK framework is largely the work of Professors Koehler and Mishra and the Deep-Play Research Group at Michigan State University. This infographic by Mark Anderson (Twitter @ICTEvangelist) provides a great overview on the subject:

TPACK framework(Anderson 2013)

Related Resources:
Punya Mishra, Ph.D.: http://www.punyamishra.com/
Example of Mishra’s work: Mehta, R., & Mishra, P. (2016). Downtime as a Key to Novelty Generation: Understanding the Neuroscience of Creativity with Dr. Rex Jung. TechTrends, 60(6), 528-531. doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0119-3. Retrieved from http://www.punyamishra.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Jung-Interview-Mehta-Mishra-techtrends.pdf
The Deep-Play Research Group at Michigan State University: http://deep-play.com/

So returning to the question, how can we integrate creativity into a technology rich professional learning program? I think the key is understanding that creativity must be a part of the planning, implementation, and product of the educational process, but it shouldn’t be the only focus. TPACK centers on this idea of a balanced approach. When all of the circles (Technology, Content, and Pedagogy) are intersecting, and when creativity is called upon, there you’ll find the sweet spot of learning. The TPACK model reminds me of an early dot-filled infographic from the 1971 Ted Williams book The Science of Hitting. In his mind, arguably the greatest hitter in Major League Baseball history imagined this graphic in each at bat:

Ted Williams batting zone infographic

“My first rule of hitting was to get a good ball to hit. I learned down to percentage points where those good balls were. The box shows my particular preferences, from what I considered my “happy zone” – where I could hit .400 or better – to the low outside corner – where the most I could hope to bat was .230. Only when the situation demands it should a hitter go for the low-percentage pitch.” (Ted Williams)

Williams’s “happy zone” was at the intersection of vision, reach, muscle memory, training, bat angle and speed, and knowing himself as a hitter. His innovation as a baseball player made him a Hall of Famer, and yet his quote acknowledges that there are times to shift your approach “when the situation demands”. One of TPACK’s strength is that it can help educators from losing focus. The targeted learning should be at the intersection of how you teach, what you teach, and what you use. Focus on only one or two of the three and you’ll miss out on the “happy zone”.

The Dot book cover by Peter H. ReynoldsFinally, I couldn’t wrap up this dot-focused post without mentioning one of my all-time favorite picture books. The Dot by Peter H. Reynolds is profoundly simple. Vashti is convinced she is not an artist, that she’s not creative. “I just CAN’T draw!” A simple art project (“draw a dot”) transforms Vashti’s life when she realizes there is room for exploration and her spirit and voice. The fear of failure is replaced with pride and ownership, and the book’s ending finds Vashti empowered to pass on her learning to others. Vashti’s development and success was aided by a teacher who provided the necessary tools, a framework that allowed for exploration, and the chance to share her learning with others. My hope is that someday soon it will be more common to find technology rich professional learning that allows for creative growth and innovation. Are we ready to LAUNCH? 3.2.1…


Anderson, M. (2013, May 28). Technological, pedagogical and content knowledge [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://ictevangelist.com/technological-pedagogical-and-content-knowledge/

Fryer, W. (2009, June 13). Moving at the speed of creativity | Blending professional development to focus on content, technology and pedagogy [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2009/06/13/blending-professional-development-to-focus-on-content-technology-and-pedagogy/

Juliani, A. J., & Spencer, J. (2016). The Launch Cycle – Bring out the maker in every student. Retrieved from http://thelaunchcycle.com/

Kay, K. (2011, September 29). Becoming a 21st Century school or district: Use the 4Cs to build professional capacity (Step 4 of 7) | Edutopia [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/21st-century-professional-development-key-kay

Mehta, R., & Mishra, P. (2016). Downtime as a Key to Novelty Generation: Understanding the Neuroscience of Creativity with Dr. Rex Jung. TechTrends, 60(6), 528-531. doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0119-3. Retrieved from http://www.punyamishra.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Jung-Interview-Mehta-Mishra-techtrends.pdf

Mishra, P. (n.d.). Punya Mishra’s Web – Living at the junction of education, creativity, design & technology. Retrieved March 5, 2017, from http://www.punyamishra.com/

Mishra, P., & The Deep-Play Research Group. (2012). Rethinking technology & creativity in the 21st Century: Crayons are the future. TechTrends, 56(5), 13-16. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0594-0. Retrieved from http://www.punyamishra.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Mishra-crayons-techtrends1.pdf

Niess, M., & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2015). Creativity, digitality, and teacher professional development: Unifying theory, research, and practice. In Handbook of research on teacher education in the digital age (pp. 691-721). Retrieved from http://www.punyamishra.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Creativity-Digitality-and-Teacher-Professional-Development-Unifying-Theory-Research-and-Practice.pdf

Pearman, D. (2016, April 9). Are we putting the cart before the horse? | Innovative pedagogy [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://innovativepedagogy.wordpress.com/2016/04/09/are-we-putting-the-cart-before-the-horse/

Spencer, J. (2016, February 15). Curious about design thinking? Here’s a framework you can use in any classroom with any age group [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.spencerauthor.com/2016/02/curious-about-design-thinking-heres.html/

Andragogy, Pedagogy, Heutagogy… Holy Goji Berries! My Brain is Full.

exploring “andragogy” and the work of Malcolm S. Knowles
Head map


I debate with myself. A lot. At times this seemingly unending stream of thoughts leads to unease and pinch of insomnia. I like to feel at peace with my thoughts, but I’ve really struggled with my latest unit of study. Andragogy, pedagogy, professional development and learning, adult educational theory, and how all of those pieces fit together… Throw them all together in a bowl with an extra dash of fatigue and you’ve got a recipe for confusion. What started out as a relatively simple blog post has morphed into a complex and interrelated tangle of educational theory and experiences. You know when you carefully pack away your Christmas lights at the end of the season and then go to unpack them the next year?

tangled Christmas lights

Yeah. I think that’s roughly what the neurons in my brain currently resemble. With that in mind, literally, I thought I’d open up my journal…

Tuesday, January 17

Andragogyandragogy definition

As opposed to pedagogy, the study of how teaching children. Got it. Google?…

Wikipedia entry on Malcolm S. Knowles

The adult learning theory of Malcolm S. Knowles

I should make an infographic explaining Knowles’ theories. Nevermind, someone else already did a better job than I could have…

Knowles andragogy infographic

Knowles’ Six Principles of Adult Learning

  1. Adult Learners are Motivated and Self-Directed
  2. Adult Learners Bring Life Experience and Knowledge
  3. Adult Learners are Goal Oriented
  4. Adult Learners are Relevancy Oriented
  5. Adult Learners are Practical
  6. Adult Learners Like to be Respected

This blog post is going to be easy…

So, to sum up: Adults learn differently than kids. It can’t be that simple, is it?

Wednesday, January 18

I think I’ve got a triggering event that will work for the topic:

What role do adult learning principles play in planning educational technology professional development?

Vague enough that I can put my own spin on the topic, without having to do too much extra reading this week (I am still trying to catch up from being sick at the beginning of the quarter)…  So how does andragogy fit in with professional development? Edutopia here I come… Holy cow. So many resources. Where to start? Discomfort, Growth, and Innovation Ha! Pretty much sums up how I’m feeling right now. “School leaders and coaches must foster a culture that celebrates the discomfort inevitably resulting from change. And that requires three key strategies: 1) Empathize 2) Model 3) Celebrate.” That represents a massive shift in culture. It’s not an easy fix, especially when thinking of the layers of tradition in professional development.

Thursday, January 19

I haven’t even scratched the surface, but something’s bugging me… Much of what I’m reading about andragogy focuses on differences between adult learners and young learners. And nearly everything leads to Malcolm S. Knowles. Hasn’t anyone taken up his mantle? And have his theories been proven? How? Anytime I come across a theory that’s so closely tied to one individual, I always become a bit of a skeptic. Does andragogy appear in Snopes? Nope.

And what about the fact that our world is very different from that of Knowles? Take a look at this article Malcolm wrote about buying his first computer (I accessed it online at my local library http://www.sno-isle.org/research/). The guy literally wrote a letter to Steve Jobs and the microcomputer industry because he was having a hard time installing and using word processing software. And Apple sent an Apple employee to his home for a day to try and help him through the technical difficulties. Unsuccessfully. Yesterday my kid installed a spelling game app on his iPad. With no help from me. He’s 7. There was no instruction manual. My 9 year old is working on a book report. He started the project at school; everything’s saved in the cloud; his learning is extended from his classroom to our kitchen computer; and now he’s writing an email to his teacher to apologize for the fact that his work will be late because he should have started this project a week ago.

Friday, January 20

So are there other models, related to andragogy? Or principles that don’t lead directly to Knowles’ work? I swear, ANY Google result for “andragogy” is roughly ½ a degree of separation from good ol’ Malcolm. Interesting and slightly related fact: Malcolm Knowles is separated by only four degrees from Kevin Bacon on Wikipedia. Pike’s Five Laws of Learning. I’ve seen that mentioned a few times.  Hmmm, let’s take a look:

Law 1: Adults are Babies with Big Bodies
Law 2: People Don’t Argue with Their Own Data
Law 3: Learning is Directly Proportional to the Amount of Fun You Have
Law 4: Learning has not Taken Place Until Behavior has Changed
Law 5: When You Can Transfer Learning to Someone Else, You’ve Confirmed Competence

Here’s another site on understanding adult learners that blends Knowles and Pike. But really, all of this stuff applies to kids and adults alike. Yeah, learning should be fun, we should keep the learner’s experience in mind, yada yada yada… this is leading nowhere. Are we shortchanging our kids by sticking to pedagogical models of yesteryear? Are they really that different than us grown-ups when it comes to learning?   

Sunday, January 22

Reading the Seattle Times with a cup of coffee (the first of many today). What a great opinion piece on school funding by the 2016 Washington State Teacher of the Year, Nathan Gibbs-Bowling. Co-founder of Teachers United… Let’s take a look… What’s this? “House Bill 1345, which defines professional learning for teachers in the state of Washington, was signed into law by Governor Jay Inslee on March 31, 2016. […] Teachers United worked with our legislators to recommend policy and craft the language of the bill.” We have a House Bill that defines professional learning? And when did “professional development” become “professional learning” and is there even a difference? Great, now I’ve got to go find what the bill actually says. Adopting a definition and standards of professional learning (HB 1345: 2015-16). And why haven’t I heard a thing about this legislation? They all sound like great ideas, but is this just another unfunded mandate from our legislature? And how can I leverage this document to push for more effective professional development for myself and my colleagues?

Monday, January 23

Searched by .pdf filetype on Google. I always forget about trying that. Here’s an interesting resource by Marcia Cross looking at andragogy and pedagogy. Oh my goodness, yes! “Unfortunately, andragogy usually is cited in education texts as the way adults learn. Knowles himself concedes that four of andragogy’s five key assumptions apply equally to adults and children. The sole difference is that children have fewer experiences and pre-established beliefs than adults and thus have less to relate.” I think this is a lot of what’s been throwing me for a loop. On one hand we’re saying adults learn differently, PD needs to be different, even state law says so. And yet, in much of my experience, it’s not changing. Stand and deliver doesn’t work; “one and done” trainings aren’t a sustainable or effective model and yet they persist. Why? And is it really a continuum of learning, from pedagogy to andragogy? I know I’ve seen kids that are more andragogical learners (especially in regards to technology) than some educators I’ve worked with over the past fifteen years…

Tuesday, January 24

What really separates pedagogy and andragogy? Kids from adult learners? Time and experience. So is that it? Seems a bit short for a blog post. Gotta keep reading.

Wednesday, January 25

Youngest kid is sick. I don’t want to get sick again. Wash hands, rinse, repeat. Please don’t get sick.

Thursday, January 26

Now I’m sick. So much nose blowing. Ugh.

Friday, January 27

I thought I’d revisit a book I purchased last year to try and give my brain a vacation from “andragogy”. I grown to appreciate the writing of Alfie Kohn. I greatly respect educators who ask questions. Not questioning just to be difficult or different, but questioning to truly seek out answers to complex issues. So let’s relax with a book…

Alfie Kohn - Feel Bad Education book cover

Well, so much for relaxing. Reading Kohn’s “‘Well, duh!’ — Obvious Truths We Shouldn’t Be Ignoring”, I’m thinking to myself: “Pretty much all of these apply to all learners, not just kids, so what the heck is andragogy?”

  1. Much of the material that students are required to memorize is soon forgotten
  2. Just knowing a lot of facts doesn’t mean that one is smart
  3. If kids have different talents, interests, and ways of learning, it’s probably not ideal to teach all of them the same things — or in the same way
  4. Students are more likely to learn what they find interesting
  5. Students are less interested in whatever they’re forced to do and more enthusiastic when they have some say.
  6. Just because X raises standardized test scores, doesn’t mean X should be done
  7. Students are more likely to succeed in a place where they feel known and cared about
  8. We want children to develop in many ways, not just academically
  9. Just because a lesson (or book, or class, or test) is harder, doesn’t mean it’s better
  10. Kids aren’t just short adults
  11. Education policies that benefit (or appeal to) large corporations aren’t necessarily good for children
  12. Substance matters more than labels

Wait, Alfie Kohn is bad for me? Willingham seems like a great guy, too. Well, crap. Now I don’t know what to think.

Saturday, January 28

Seriously? Ebsco just went down for maintenance… 😐

Okay, why can I not get this blog post started? I agree with nearly all of the andragogical ideas regarding improving professional learning for educators. What’s nagging at me? I think it’s the unease of the efficacy of Knowles’ andragogy model in relation to our student expectations. We’re asking them to do things that they’re not ready for developmentally. Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching, the basis for our Washington State TPEP model of teacher observation and development. In order to step up into the category of “distinguished”, learning must shift into student control and direction. How can these elementary kids possibly be self-directed and motivated when those are the very andragogical skills that develop through experience and age? I understand that scaffolding those experiences can assist with the progression, but are they really ready for that model of freedom at such a young age? Today’s kindergarten work is yesterday’s 1st and 2nd grade curriculum. So has andragogy been pushed into lower grades as well? Creativity and play and social skills have been pushed aside to better prepare for rote skills. There are so many disconnects, I don’t know where to begin…

Sunday, January 29

This blog post is not writing itself. I still have no idea what I’m writing about…

Sometimes I'll start a sentence

Wait, “heutagogy”… I thought I’d already read about all of the -gogies? This article looks at the idea of shifting from the self-directed learning of andragogy and into self-determined and autonomous learning of heutagogy.

progression of learning model(Blaschke 2012, 60)

Is this learning progression a more accurate model for today’s learners?


Monday, January 30

I don’t know. All of that reading, all of that thinking, and I still don’t know. In fact, I know I’ve got more unanswered questions now than when I first began this unit.

I’m including a list of references that I’ve explored these past couple of weeks. It’s a ridiculously long list for the trivial blog post that emerged, and it’s not even complete. I especially enjoyed reading many of the magazine articles by Knowles himself (many in Training & Development Journal), to gain a better understanding of his voice and his thinking. I wonder how he would react today to the near canonization of his theory of adult learning, and also how he would view the students of today, especially keeping in mind the changing nature of our technology? Would Knowles agree with Knowles from the 1960s, 70s, and 80s?

I just realized I haven’t even answered my triggering question. One of my deepest struggles during this time of introspection and exploration has been running all of this theory of andragogy through the filter of my own district’s professional development. And knowing that it may get worse before it gets better. We need instructional coaches. We need professional learning based on a foundation of trust built on relationships. We need to escape the culture of learning that is focused squarely on SBA test results rather than the skills and creativity of our staff. Our professional development model needs to shift, as does our teaching, but I just don’t know how to be a change agent for that necessary shift in the face of high-stakes testing. And that is a hard mental pill for me to swallow.

So what can I do? For now, I can take comfort in the simple focus of these words from Knowles in an October 1989 Training & Development Journal column “Learning to Be Authentic”:

knowles quote

I can focus on just being myself, especially when working with colleagues towards professional learning. I think that is truly the key to bringing about change… Realizing that every learner brings their story to the table, and I bring mine. 

(I hope you have enjoyed this journey into my thinking process from these past couple weeks. Please note that I omitted many random thoughts that occurred throughout this time, especially an abnormally large number of Bugs Bunny cartoons that seemed to be on repeat in my head… the operatic “Kill the Wabbit!” was quite popular this week, for some reason. If there are any dream interpreters out there, I don’t want to know what it means.) -JH


Australian Catholic University. (2015, December 16). Knowles’ six principles of adult learning. Retrieved from http://www.acu.edu.au/798038

Bretzmann, J. (2015). Personalized PD: Flipping your professional development. New Berlin, WI: The Bretzmann Group.

Benjes-Small, C., & Archer, A. (2014, January 13). Tales of the undead… learning theories: The learning pyramid [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://acrlog.org/2014/01/13/tales-of-the-undead-learning-theories-the-learning-pyramid

Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 56-71. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ979639.pdf

Carpenter, J. (2016). Teachers at the wheel. Educational Leadership, 73(8), 30-35. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may16/vol73/num08/Teachers-at-the-Wheel.aspx

Conner, M. (n.d.). Introduction to andragogy + pedagogy. Retrieved from http://marciaconner.com/resources/andragogy-pedagogy/

Edmunds, C., Lowe, K., Murray, M., & Seymour, A. (2002). Ultimate adult learning. In The ultimate educator: Achieving maximum learning through training and instruction. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/educator/welcome.html

Gardner, H., & Davis, K. (2013). Conclusion: Beyond the app generation. In The app generation: How today’s youth navigate identity, intimacy, and imagination in a digital world (pp. 155-197). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Henschke, J. (2011). Considerations regarding the future of andragogy. Adult Learning, 22(1), 34-37. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/104515951102200109

Knowles, M. S. (1976). Separating the Amateurs from the Pros in Training. Training & Development Journal, 30(9), 16.

Knowles, M. S. (1983). Malcolm Knowles Finds A Worm in His Apple. Training & Development Journal, 37(5), 12.

Knowles, M. (1989, October). Learning to be authentic. Training & Development Journal, 43(10), 42.

Kohn, A. (1993). Choices for children: Why and how to let students decide. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(1). Retrieved from http://www.alfiekohn.org/article/choices-children/

Kohn, A. (2011). “Well, duh!”: Obvious truths that we shouldn’t be ignoring. In Feel-bad education: And other contrarian essays on children and schooling (pp. 1-17). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (n.d.). Massachusetts standards for professional development (HQPD). Retrieved January 28, 2017, from http://www.doe.mass.edu/pd/standards.html

Pappas, C. (2013, May 9). The adult learning theory (andragogy) of Malcolm Knowles – eLearning Industry. Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/the-adult-learning-theory-andragogy-of-malcolm-knowles (accompanying infographic: http://elearninginfographics.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Adult-Learning-Theory-Andragogy-Infographic.jpg)

Phillips, P. (2017, January 4). Personalizing professional development for teachers, by teachers. EdSurge News. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-01-04-personalizing-professional-development-for-teachers-by-teachers

Pike, R. (2013, June 3). Creative training techniques 101: The basics [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.bobpikegroup.com/blog/78

Siko, J. P., & Hess, A. N. (2014). Win-win professional development: Providing meaningful professional development while meeting the needs of all stakeholders. TechTrends, 58(6), 99-108. doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0809-7

Strickland, C. A. (2009). What is high-quality professional development for differentiating instruction. In Professional development for differentiating instruction: An ASCD action tool. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109042/chapters/What_Is_High-Quality_Professional_Development_for_Differentiating_Instruction.aspx

Swanson, K. (2014). EdCamp: Teachers take back professional development. Educational Leadership, 71(8), 36-40. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may14/vol71/num08/Edcamp@-Teachers-Take-Back-Professional-Development.aspx

Washington State Legislature. (2016). Adopting a definition and standards of professional learning (HB 1345: 2015-16). Retrieved from http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1345&Year=2015

© 2018 JustinHaney.org

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑