Earlier in 2009, I had proposed an idea called the C4 Model of Learning, which stood for Collaboration, Communication, and Creativity embedded to make explosive Content. I wanted to create a professional development program that was different than the just-in-time learning model that most teachers are accustomed. I wanted teachers to learn and integrate essential skills instead of specific technologies. In fact, the idea made a lot of sense once I heard Simon Sinek’s talk on Start With Why, before that I am sure that my colleagues thought I was crazy. Teaching teachers how to use a specific tool was at the ‘what’ level, teaching them a skill to integrate and then choose the tool that would best fit that goal would be at the ‘why’ level.

The ISTE NETS for Teachers are, in short, brilliantly written and designed and are built around the ‘why’. Yet, I had to breakdown the indicators to see what the goal of the standard was and then figure out how I could give teachers that skills. For so long I thought it was important to know that 2d. (the indicator that has to do with formative and summative assessments) was only a part of the standard ‘Design and Develop Digital Age Learning Experiences and Assessments’ and what I needed to do was create a class on Digital Age Learning. Boy was I wrong. Once I started reading the indicators closer, I realized that the twenty indicators were in fact connected in a completely different way. Instead of five standards, there was eight different themes. The C4 Model of Learning was built on those themes.

I did the first run through in the 2010-2011 school year and the participants gave great feedback for redesigning the program. They pointed out the holes and where extension activities could take place. In one example, while the original program had pounded formative and summative assessments, teachers felt that there would be value in teaching them how to unpack standards and understand the nouns and verbs contained within. When Tom (a member of the first C4 cohort) started in the fall of 2011, he was able to take that feedback and we completely redesigned that program from the ground up.

In January we got word from ISTE that our program had received alignment at the Mastery level. This is the highest level of recognition that ISTE gives professional development programs. Talk about validation of Tom and I’s work, yet more so the feedback of the first C4 cohort. I highly doubt that this program would have melded into what the Maple Grove Magazine label as joining the elite company of PBS, Intel and Verizon Thinkfinity without that first cohort.

So what is next? Hamline. In the fall of 2011, Tom and I proposed to Hamline a certificate program using the C4 model as our guide. Dreaming big we wanted to share the program with others, we wanted others to think beyond the tools and think about the teaching. In fact when asked after receiving the Seal of Alignment someone asked me, “I know what C4 stands for, yet what does it really stand for?” Having to think about it for a few moments I thought…

Teaching before technology and tools, in practice just like it is in the dictionary.

That is why I think C4 matters, it is about the teaching and not the technology and tools.

The ISTE NETS•T have five standards, each with four performance indicators. Currently, ISTE has given the Osseo program a ‘meets’ (standards) in two indicators (1d. and 2a.) and  three (5a., 2d., and 1b.) are extremely close to meets after the initial review of the product. Since Osseo intended to address more than five indicators, as project lead, I am currently heading up another re-write of the program with two co-developers provided by ISTE. After the re-write the product will go into review to seek alignment for eleven total indicators.

To receive either a ‘meets’ or ‘supports’, the entire indicator must be addressed including the various nuances.  For example, 1a states that teachers promote, support, and model creative and innovative thinking and inventiveness. This means the alignment proposal had to demonstrate nuances such as promote creative thinking, promote innovative thinking, promote creative inventiveness, promote innovative inventiveness, et. al. In short there were over two hundred nuances to be addressed.

The indicators which Osseo had elected not to seek alignment (5b. and 5d.), are indicators that have been described by many on the ISTE NETS•T review team as “trying to teach multivariable calculus.”  Only two of the organizations who have received the Seal of Alignment have addressed these indicators and these programs require a time commitment of two to three years. Osseo intends to only require a time commitment of up to nine months for participants.

The C4 Model of Learning was offered to all teachers in the Osseo system who had a .8 or greater or FTE. These teachers were selected through an application process, which measured individual participant’s ability to communicate and synthesize their ideas as related to the 21st century skills and technology integration. Eighty-two (N=82) applicants accepted their offer to be a part of the learning model that would provide standards-based professional development. Participants ranged in education level with over half of the participants indicating that they had some post-Master work (N= 44, 53.66%), while only a small number of participants (N=11, 13.41%) indicated that they had only received a bachelors degree or had done some post-bachelor work. The mode for years teaching was 5-9 years (N=19, 23.17%), with 0-2 years of teaching (N=2, 2.44%) being the smallest subset. Accepted participants received a $1,000 stipend. In addition to the $1,000, stipend participants could take five credits through Hamline University (St. Paul, Minnesota). All participants also received 85 hours of CEUs; including receiving credit for state mandates of Technology Integration, Differentiation, Literacy, and Positive Behavior Intervention.

So I started to think about my own passion. The one that makes me wear a skin suit and now 16″ blades (I elected to drop an inch with my new boots/blades); however, I can dream about skating  I doubt that I am passionate about that. But passion comes in all shapes and sizes, and seizing upon the idea is more important concept that I took away from the morning.

For example, I love cooking- I do have a passion for cookbooks, my cooktop island, and bright orange Kitchen Aid Mixer. Am I good at cooking? Not really, ask my loving husband and he will beg that I stick with the basics, but I will argue every time that making a Filet Mignon is just too good to pass up.

In a recent blog post I talked about being challenged. As I looked at it more, there is most likely a direct correlation between being challenged and finding your passion. For example this is probably most evident in speedskating, it is a challenge to speedskate. While it looks graceful and easy, there are in fact at least 75 different nuances that you have to master. Then once that is mastered there is an art of fitting a skin suit, which is not easy by any means. You also need to overcome your fears and overcoming the fear of falling but then speedskating is so intertwined with my passion.

This past winter I was featured member in Learning and Leading with Technology and I told during my interview that the ice is the only place in which I feel completely at peace. No worries, since I found my passion I have found peace in many other areas of life as well.