Here's what I thought about the meeting on 9-22!

1) What did you like about today?
I liked the chance that we had to share our concerns as a whole group - I hope the feedback that the non-overwhelmed people gave the overwhelmed ones was helpful; to me it seemed like it was to a certain extent. The atmosphere seemed less tense after the discussion.

2) Did the information presented today make sense? If not, what would have helped?
I think that people could benefit from a better understanding of constructivism. How to get that understanding is another quandary. From the more vocal participants, it sounded to me like they were thinking in pretty black and white terms about constructivism. I don't know if they realize how broad it is. I hope I'm not over-confident about my interpretation of constructivism, but I believe that constructivist teaching looks a lot of different ways.

3) Were the activities today well-planned and meaningful? Be specific.
I think they were meaningful. However, Jenny Seidel and I had a conversation about the teachers' different levels of comfort with technology and how it may be beneficial for us to have some options of activites, like tracks almost, for people's varying needs for explanation about technology. However, if need be, those of us who feel more comfortable with tech could help those who are not.

4) Was the information presented today meaningful? Elaborate if possible.
I didn't really find anything great on United Streaming. I was disappointed, but I haven't given up!
5) What else do you want the planning team to know?
I think my viewpoint is pretty different from a lot of people's in 21st C, since I was taught the value of constructivist teaching during both my undergrad and grad studies. I have a pretty solid interpretation of constructivism and feel comfortable with how broad it is. However, I think a lot of participants in the class could benefit from a list of some characteristics of what a constructivist lesson looks like while being reminded that the list is not a CHECKLIST. I don't think that constructivist teaching should not be interpreted in black and white terms; it looks different depending on how each individual teacher interprets, and presents, it. Maybe people could benefit from more readings that describe how some teachers have approached constructivism.