Collaborating with Other Educators

Intentional Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are critical for educators and have the power to transform schools. This is an excellent podcast where Dr. Pendleton shares how creating a safe, collaborative space for teachers can boost their skills and drive student success. From gaining buy-in to actionable, high-interest topics, her insights are a game-changer for fostering continuous learning. 💡📈 Their purpose is not just sharing strategies but ensuring those strategies are actionable—able to be implemented immediately or soon after professional development (PD). Why should teachers spend valuable time learning something that doesn’t directly impact their classrooms? 1️⃣ Actionable Learning Builds Momentum When PLCs focus on strategies that can be applied right away, teachers see tangible results. It boosts confidence and reinforces the value of the time spent in collaboration. 2️⃣ Bridging Theory and Practice There’s a significant gap between learning about educational theories and putting them into practice. PLCs that emphasize actionable strategies help bridge this gap. Teachers can collaborate on how to tweak a broad concept into something that works. 3️⃣ Sustained Professional Growth Immediate application of PD strategies also fosters a culture of continuous improvement. Teachers who see small successes are encouraged to experiment and innovate further. This approach aligns with modern educational needs—like adapting to remote learning or integrating SEL strategies—which require quick pivots and practical solutions. By focusing on immediate implementation, intentional PLCs ensure that professional development is not just a theoretical exercise but a transformative experience for educators and students alike. Isn't that the ultimate goal of any learning opportunity? It's all about combining that growth mindset and supportive community to make sure teachers have what they need to succeed! #PLCs #TeacherLeadership #StudentSuccess #EducationMatters #SupportTeachers

Composite Planning (vs solo planning). Leveraging specialisation & scale for better education: ↓ The quality of any lesson plan (or sequence) is limited by the expertise of the planner and the amount of time available for planning. Also, the things we teach are often largely similar across many classrooms and schools. It is for these 3 reasons that—as a profession—we should be thinking hard about 'composite' (rather than solo) approaches to planning. When we set things up in ways that encourage teachers to solo plan, we are essentially pushing ourselves to re-invent the wheel, in a fraction of the time required to create the ideal design, while leaning on our varying levels of expertise. Every driver ends up with a different set of wheels, not all of which are optimal quality, despite costing a lot. Under pressure and lacking support, many teachers end up using poor quality resources found on the internet: https://lnkd.in/enp7zZsx By contrast, composite planning can reduce workload for teachers, and boost learning and equity for students. At its heart are the economics of scale & specialisation: When we collaborate—distributing our time and expertise—we can achieve more. Rough calcs: → 4 teachers sharing out their planning can achieve double the original quality in half the original time → 16 teachers can achieve 4x the quality in a quarter of the time → And so on But, it's not quite so simple: What we teach might be similar between classrooms, but who we teach (and their knowledge) varies a lot. And materials or guides created by someone else still need to be adapted for our own students. This work of 'intellectual preparation' is hugely important (and where our thirst for teacher autonomy should be directed)... fortunately, the economics of composite planning create even more time for it. https://lnkd.in/eMVfndWy Composite planning includes 3 layers: 1/ Group planning at departmental level (including collective decision making, the sharing out of tasks, and quality assurance). 2/ Drawing on high quality resources developed at central level (built with time and expertise, eg. Oak National or great textbooks). 3/ Intellectual preparation at individual level (to adapt and ensure relevant expertise is front of teacher mind). When we put these 3 layer together, we significantly increase our potential for improving student learning/equity and reducing teacher workload. Serious things. 🎓 For more, check out this think piece on the importance of a more composite approach, by Robert Pondiscio: https://lnkd.in/e7zVVqmJ SUMMARY • Effective planning requires lots of expertise and time. • Composite planning (vs solo planning) can be more effective, efficient, and equitable. • Intellectual preparation (adapting a plan for our class) is an essential component of this. 👊

Ai, Learning and Higher Education: 9 practical tips from The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) 👉🏾 Curriculum Design Considerations - Assume Student Use of GenAI: Plan with the expectation that students will use GenAI tools. - Integrate Non-Marked Activities: Include activities that are not graded but provide feedback on AI use. - Ensure Full Engagement: Prevent GenAI from diminishing students' engagement with the curriculum. Prepare students to progress beyond AI-generated solutions. - Teach Critical Analysis: Emphasize the importance of finding primary sources and critically evaluating AI outputs. - Avoid Underspecified Assignments: Do not attempt to outsmart AI by underspecifying tasks, as future models may overcome these tactics. - Coding Course Guidance: Instruct students on problem identification and correction in coding. Highlight alternative solutions and teach high-level engineering concepts by analyzing and improving AI outputs. 👉🏾 Assessment Design Considerations - Process Mapping: Visualize the learning journey with milestones and check-in points to evaluate students’ progress. - Separate Learning from Final Product: Design continuous assessments throughout the term or incorporate documentation of the development process in end-of-course evaluations. - Measure Individual Learning: Use in-class quizzes at various stages of the term to gauge and support individual student progress. Use these assessments to benchmark final grades against the students' learning journeys. Via Mariana Ferrarelli https://lnkd.in/eNy8Z352

Most schools get curriculum training wrong. They spend thousands on new materials and hope a one-day PD does the trick. Here’s what usually happens: Teachers get a thick guide no one has time to read. The opening training is surface-level and rushed. By October, folks are improvising. By January, the curriculum barely resembles what was purchased. This isn’t a teacher problem. It’s a training problem. If you want your curriculum to actually drive results, here’s how to do it right: 1. Start with the Why Don’t assume buy-in. Build it. Teachers need to understand: - Why this curriculum? - What gaps will it help close? - What strengths will it build on? - How will it make the work more effective, not more complicated? 2. Prioritize Execution Over Exposure Sitting through a launch PD isn’t enough. Training should be: Ongoing: part of PLCs, coaching, and planning Practice-based: including rehearsal and feedback Modeled: leaders and coaches need to show what good looks like, which means they need to put themselves in the role of teachers and plan a lesson like a teacher would and then model it 3. Build a Strong Prep Routine No great lesson happens without preparation. Create a shared playbook: - Clear planning protocols - Exemplar lessons and student work - Expectations for lesson internalization 4. Make Collaboration the Default Teachers shouldn’t be planning alone. Schedule weekly co-planning. Pair teachers to internalize together. Review lesson execution with video and feedback. Curriculum is just a tool. Whether it works depends entirely on how you train people to use it.

After my "Broken Conveyor Belt" article sparked discussions about our educational system and how AI is an opportunity for change, I've written this follow-up with three practical strategies educators can implement immediately: transforming assignments into AI-enhanced creative processes, designing assessments that showcase uniquely human contributions, and implementing studio-style portfolio systems. This moves away from simply theoretical concerns to actionable solutions that position AI as a creative tool requiring mastery rather than a threat to be feared. What strategy are you most excited to try in your classroom? #AIinEducation #ActiveLearning #EdTech #GrowthMindset

How Mechanical and Materials Engineers Can Start Using AI in Their Work Artificial Intelligence is no longer limited to computer science, it’s becoming an essential tool across disciplines, including engineering and academic research. For mechanical engineers, materials scientists, and educators, here are some practical ways to begin integrating AI into your workflow: 1. Automated Literature Reviews Tools like Elicit, Connected Papers, and ResearchRabbit use AI to identify relevant studies, suggest related work, and even generate summaries; saving hours of manual searching. 2. Data Analysis and Visualization AI-integrated platforms (e.g., PandasAI, ChatGPT Code Interpreter) can help analyze experimental data such as stress-strain curves, thermal profiles, or SEM image results. This can be particularly useful for high-throughput testing or large datasets. 3. Assistance with Simulations For those working with FEA or thermodynamic modeling (e.g., using COMSOL, ANSYS, or CALPHAD), AI tools can help debug code, suggest boundary conditions, or optimize parameters more efficiently. 4. AI in Teaching and Assessment Educators can use AI to generate quizzes, explain complex topics in simpler terms, and even provide feedback on written assignments. It can also support personalized learning pathways for students. 5. AI for Research Planning GPT-based tools can assist with writing research proposals, identifying potential research gaps, and even outlining experimental plans. 6. Exploring AI-Driven Design Algorithms like genetic algorithms, reinforcement learning, or neural networks can be trained to assist in materials discovery, structural optimization, or predictive modeling. Getting Started: • Choose one task from your current workflow (e.g., paper summary, data cleaning, teaching content creation). • Use a trusted AI tool to assist and not replace the process. • Evaluate and refine your use of the tool based on outcomes. AI is not a replacement for engineering knowledge; it’s a powerful extension of it. If you’re already using AI in your work, what tools have been most helpful to you? #AIinEngineering #MechanicalEngineering #MaterialsScience #AcademicResearch #EdTech #CALPHAD #FEA #PhDLife

Co-teaching or Team Teaching: #One Teach, One Observe 🔹 How to Implement: One teacher leads the instruction while the other observes specific student behaviors, participation, or learning outcomes. Pre-plan what to observe and how to use the data. 🔹 Example: In a Grade 5 science class, Teacher A teaches a lesson on ecosystems while Teacher B observes how ELL students engage with the vocabulary. After class, both reflect on supports needed. #One Teach, One Assist 🔹 How to Implement: One teacher instructs, while the other circulates to help individuals or small groups. Focus support on students with IEPs, ELLs, or those struggling with content. 🔹 Example: During a math lesson on fractions, one teacher delivers the concept while the other supports students who are behind or need translation into their native language. # Station Teaching 🔹 How to Implement: Divide the class into small groups and rotate them between different stations, each led by a teacher or working independently. Plan each station to target different aspects of the same topic. 🔹 Example: In a middle school English lesson on persuasive writing: Station 1: Brainstorming ideas (teacher-led) Station 2: Sentence starters and structure (teacher-led) Station 3: Peer editing (independent) #Parallel Teaching 🔹 How to Implement: Split the class into two groups; each teacher teaches the same material simultaneously. Great for large groups or when you want more participation. 🔹 Example: In a history class, each teacher teaches a group about the causes of World War I. Smaller groups allow more debate and questioning. #Alternative Teaching 🔹 How to Implement: One teacher works with a larger group while the other pulls a smaller group for remediation, enrichment, or assessment. Rotate students across weeks based on needs. 🔹 Example: During a reading comprehension unit, one teacher re-teaches inference skills to struggling readers while the other leads a discussion with the rest of the class on figurative language. #Team Teaching (Tag Team) 🔹 How to Implement: Both teachers actively instruct together, sharing the stage and exchanging ideas during the lesson. Requires high collaboration and mutual respect. 🔹 Example: In a Grade 9 integrated science and math project, both teachers model how to collect data during a science experiment and use statistics to analyze results. #Best Practices for Implementation ✅ Plan Together Regularly Use co-planning time to align objectives, strategies, roles, and assessments. ✅ Define Roles Clearly Decide who leads, who supports, and how transitions will be handled during lessons. ✅ Differentiate Instruction Use collaborative settings to better meet diverse learning needs. ✅ Reflect and Adjust After each lesson, debrief together on what worked and what didn’t. ✅ Maintain Consistent Communication Use tools like shared digital planners, Google Docs, or apps to stay aligned.

Integrated Co-Teaching (ICT) is when a general education teacher and a special education teacher work together in the same classroom to meet the needs of all learners, including students with disabilities. This model promotes equity by ensuring every student has access to grade-level content with appropriate supports. The six co-teaching models allow flexibility in instructional delivery, helping teachers differentiate effectively and create an engaging learning environment. Students benefit from multiple perspectives, more opportunities for individualized support, and interactive, hands-on activities that make learning meaningful. Below are examples of what each co-teaching model looks like in practice: 1. One Teach, One Observe What it looks like: One teacher delivers a lesson while the other observes student engagement, behavior, or skill use. Example: During a math lesson on fractions, one teacher instructs while the other takes notes on which students raise their hands, struggle with answers, or disengage. Later, the data is used to adjust instruction and groupings. 2. One Teach, One Assist What it looks like: One teacher leads whole-class instruction, while the other circulates to support individuals. Example: During a writing assignment, one teacher explains the prompt and models brainstorming. Meanwhile, the co-teacher walks around helping students who need help organizing their thoughts, ensuring no one is left behind. 3. Parallel Teaching What it looks like: The class is split into two groups, and both teachers teach the same content simultaneously. Example: During a reading comprehension lesson, the class is divided. Both teachers work with smaller groups to analyze a text, making sure every student has the chance to participate and engage in discussions. 4. Station Teaching What it looks like: Teachers manage different stations, and students rotate through them. Example: In a science unit on ecosystems, one teacher runs a hands-on station with a terrarium, the other facilitates a reading station with informational texts, and a third station includes independent digital research. Students rotate, experiencing learning in different ways. 5. Alternative Teaching What it looks like: One teacher works with a small group for targeted instruction, while the other leads the rest of the class. Example: During a social studies lesson, one teacher provides extra support to a small group struggling with map skills, while the other teacher leads the rest of the class in analyzing primary source documents. 6. Team Teaching What it looks like: Both teachers lead instruction equally and interactively. Example: In a debate on renewable vs. nonrenewable energy, both teachers take turns modeling arguments, guiding students, and facilitating group discussions. Students see co-teaching in action as a collaborative model. #CoTeachingInAction

You don't just become a high-performing school by wishing—you build it through deliberate, daily actions that transform your entire educational community. Here's what I'm seeing in schools that consistently achieve breakthrough results: 1. They don't just talk about data—they live it. Every meeting starts with student progress metrics, and every decision flows from real insights. 2. Their teachers collaborate like championship teams. No closed classroom doors. No isolated expertise. Pure shared wisdom and collective growth. 3. Their leaders are IN THE HALLWAYS. Not just during evaluations, but every single day, understanding the pulse of their school community. But here's the game-changer: These schools don't just implement strategies—they create environments where excellence becomes the only acceptable standard. Want to level up your school? Start by identifying the top-performing classrooms in your building. What are those teachers doing differently? How are they engaging students? What systems have they mastered? Then—and this is crucial—make those practices your new normal. Not just for one grade level or department, but for your entire educational community. Academic excellence isn't accidental. It's intentional. It's cultural. It's contagious.

Several weeks into Spring 2025, my teacher partner Terry Underwood and I ahve made a breakthrough in my writing classroom: when students design their own assessment outcomes for AI integration, they develop approaches that far exceed our expectations. This insight didn't come from implementing rigid AI policies, but from trusting students to critically investigate AI's role in their writing process. Since January, I've watched this play out in remarkable ways. Rather than prescribing how AI should be used, we established a simple framework: first drafts remain primarily AI-free, creating space for students to develop their authentic voice. But then something fascinating emerged – students began designing sophisticated criteria for how AI might serve as a research companion and revision partner. What struck me most was this: Given the freedom to define success metrics, students naturally gravitated toward nuanced, responsible approaches to AI integration. They're not just asking "Can AI help me write?" but "How can I thoughtfully evaluate and integrate AI tools to enhance my writing process?" Some might say this level of student agency is risky. But consider what we're fostering: 1. Critical evaluation of AI tools - Students develop their own criteria for when and how AI can enhance their writing 2. Authentic writing ownership - By starting with AI-free drafts, students maintain their voice while exploring AI as a collaborative tool 3. Thoughtful technology integration - Integration decisions emerge from student experimentation rather than top-down mandates 4. Research-based experimentation - Students document and analyze their AI interactions, building an evidence base for effective use 5. Student-driven assessment - Success metrics reflect genuine student priorities and writing goals We're not just teaching writing with AI – we're empowering students to define what successful AI integration looks like. The focus isn't on controlling use, but on developing wisdom through guided experimentation and reflection. The real breakthrough comes from this fundamental shift: placing students at the heart of designing frameworks for AI in writing practice. When we trust their capacity for critical thinking and responsible innovation, they show us new possibilities for meaningful AI integration. #WritingPedagogy #StudentAgency #AIWriting #Spring2025 #WritingClassroom Rob Nelson Pat Yongpradit Scott Sommers, PhD Phillip Alcock Thom Markham, Ph.D. Jessica L. Parker, Ed.D. Jessica Maddry, M.EdLT Kimberly Pace Becker, Ph.D. Mike Kentz Rob Nelson Jason Gulya