The Edcamp movement has been around for a few years. It is a widely known professional-development format that was spawned from social media educator connections. Most connected educators are familiar with it, but most educators are not connected — hence a need for explanation and definition. I know that the model is based on BarCamp in Philadelphia. I have no idea about BarCamp. I know the image I have in my head, but that has nothing to do with education.
I am familiar with the unconference aspect, which is the driving organizing premise of Edcamp. There is no set schedule of sessions provided to participants as they arrive at the venue. There is usually a breakfast spread and a huge amount of coffee in a gathering area to start the day. Participants see a blank schedule displayed for sessions. Session times and rooms are clearly seen, with no descriptions. Session descriptions are created right then, by participants. All sessions are discussion driven. Although some people come with prepared materials to share, those materials might or might not be the focus of a session. Blank cards are available to participants who have a specific topic they want addressed. Each person writes that topic on a card to establish it as a session. Usually, the person proposing the session heads up the discussion. It is amazing how the establishment of one topic spurs the establishment of a related topic, or something on the other side of the education spectrum. The establishment of topics gets people talking about and exploring subjects that they might not have heard of before Edcamp.
The selection of topics stimulates discussion and questioning amid participants to determine where they will go, what they will attend and what they should expect. There is another element to the Edcamp model that is often not seen in other PD formats. Participants are encouraged to quickly assess the relevance of a session. If they do not find personal value in a particular session, they are encouraged to move on to another. When selecting a session to attend, participants need to consider backup alternatives. That is called “The Rule of Two Feet.” My best description of this is that it is a face-to-face, real-time, social media discussion. It is the application of a digital culture in a real-world situation. All sessions are open discussions that are patient with, and respectful of, all participants.
Edcamps are free to participants, but it takes a Saturday commitment to participate. That means educators in attendance are there because they want to be there. We must ask: If this is so popular and inspiring, why aren’t all schools employing this PD model? To answer that, I have to go back to a session for administrators at the last annual ISTE conference. Some founders of Edcamp presented a great session to educate administrators who might not be connected educators. The intent was to explore the possibility of using Edcamp as a source for PD from within the system. Edcamp is almost solely organized by passionate educators working outside the system. There was one question coming from admins repeatedly: “How do we control it?” The answer was clear. You don’t control it! Edcamp’s success is based on trust and respect, as well as a personal drive for professional development. It is the educator’s personalization that some of these administrators did not seem to get. Their questions seemed to indicate that they did not trust the ability of educators to properly determine what they needed in PD.
The Edcamp movement continues to advance with the passionate support of connected individuals. Hopefully, we will begin to hear from progressive-thinking administrators more interested in real education reform than in controlling what and how teachers are developed. Administrators’ control should be second to educators’ development. Edcamp should not be the sole method of PD, but it should be considered a serious addition to tools that develop educators. In our fast-changing, technology-driven culture, we need educators to be continually learning so they provide a relevant education to students. To be better educators, we need to be better learners.
This is a great post Tom. Makes a lot of excellent points. I especially like your view on administrators. Luckily my new head is on board with these ideas.
This is a great idea. I’ve participated in things like this before, but had forgotten. I might try to get this going at the next PD day at my school.
Great post, Tom. I appreciate your candor on the administrative need to control professional learning…remarkably similar to teacher reluctance to release control of learning to students. If we want students to own learning, we have to model by allowing teachers to own their learning. Edcamp is a valuable tool to move us in this direction, if only we can get more administrators to attend so they can experience it firsthand. 🙂
Our district has been using this model for two years. We are small (under 750 students) district in NW CT that has pushed to integrate technology using the EdCamp model. We offered EdCamp free to other districts this past summer. I wrote about this on my blog:
“First our administration, a dedicated superintendent and cooperative principals, with the blessings of our regional school board, concentrated efforts to increase the hardware necessary to meet the needs in delivering 21st Century instruction. Then, the technology specialists in the elementary schools and library media specialist at the high school joined forces to create a super-technology team. They have organized professional development in our district on the ED Camp model, which is described on the Ed Camp wiki website as “a free (or very cheap), democratic, participant-driven professional development for teachers.” This model allows teachers to post sessions they will host on a grid that designates time and session locations.
During this past school year, our district has utilized the Ed Camp model to allow any teacher who would like to share their expertise or simply discuss a problem with fellow staff or faculty members; we have also included students who have expertise in some software to offer sessions in this model.
If our administration was worried about this, they now have evidence that teachers not only learned something new, but that many teachers worked harder during the Ed Camp model of professional development than ever before.
Teachers exceeded our expectations in creating sessions, even creating an extra column when they ran out of rooms….Concurrent sessions were held throughout the day by our teachers on the following topics:
Google Maps, Macs, Digital Storytelling with StoryBird/Photostory, Edmodo, Screencasting, Livebinders, Photoshop, Fakebook, Photo editing, blogging, Twitter, World Book, Windows Movie Maker, Quia, Quizlet, Apps, Lexia, , Discovery Education, SuccessNet, Kidblog, Skype, Literature Videoconferencing, and Prezi.”
There were many surprises within the faculty as to the level of expertise some teachers had developed because of a particular interest or demand. Our Region 6 Ed Camp model of professional development brought new appreciation and respect to the many faculty members and students who shared their expertise. The teachers and administrators with the help of a team of technology specialists in Region 6 have the exercised the power, found the teacher to teacher model a great professional development experience, and received excellent usable training at very minimal cost.”
full post at http://wp.me/p1FPEO-nk
[…] What makes Edcamp popular with teachers?. […]
[…] What makes Edcamp popular with teachers? (tomwhitby.wordpress.com) […]
So glad this conversation expanded to admin. at ISTE. Control control control. We don’t (or shouldn’t) teach our students by what some WON’T do, we need to teach them with the thought that ALL or as many that want to- will! The same needs to be for teachers. PD shouldn’t be controlled because maybe a handful will avoid it, not contribute, etc. Let it happen! Let the passionate ones in the “class” move forward without being held back by others.
[…] […]
At last, somebody finally, clearly explained to me what an educamp is; and now I know why I need to get to one. Thanks.
I wonder if the success of edcamps is related to the sorts of teachers who would be attracted to the idea (and willing to give up a Saturday) to do it. Does the self-selection of motivated teachers affect the success? Does that then present a challenge in creating a edcamp on a school site?