I like the ideas of EdCamps. Collaboration between teachers in order to learn about and seek to address concerns or topics that are pressing. Through a simple, democratic process, co-workers are able to construct ideas and programs to improve teaching methods, cross curricular content, student care, and more. I think that, given the opportunity, programs similar in structure to EdCamps should be a method by which most professional development happens at schools. I don’t, however, think that professional development should be the domain of EdCamps themselves as presented to us in class.
When we look at the structure of an EdCamp we see that teachers are a part of the conversation, but so are administrator from the school, district, and ministry in equal measure. In addition to these workers and administrators, we occasionally see community members like students involved, but it is unclear if other community members like care workers, parents, etc… are connected to the program. I actually think this is a good thing as there are plenty of ways for community involvement in schooling, but staff and students should have their own space without input from parents and other community members in order to freely build their school practice. For this reason, I am troubled by the inclusion of administration from various levels.
On the face of it, administrators from school, district, and ministry levels will have similar goals for educational development. What remains unspoken however is the distinct differences in workplace power that administrators have versus teachers. EdCamps, by virtue of including the various levels of administration, are going to implicitly reproduce that power dynamic. This does not mean that they are bad spaces, nor does it mean that good and meaningful collaborative projects will not occur as clearly there are shared interests in student care and experience. What it does mean however, is that the political horizon of possibility is dramatically narrowed by the presence of the more powerful employing class. Can we really collaborate towards an anti-colonial education if we must include members of the colonial ministry in our collaboration and treat their position and institutional interests as equally valid?
Revolutionary Syndicalism is a (often anarchist orientated) form of unionism that rejects electoral politics and institutional reform as effective methods of political change. It also rejects centralized, top-down, bureaucratic unions as limiting workers power and favours federated, decentralized, and grass roots organization and direct action (both of which may look like anything from organizing community events and petitions to directly blocking evictions or starting wildcat strikes) by workers directly in their field and communities as a more powerful and meaningful form of political and social change.
If we want to see the goals of EdCamp style organizing and professional development expand, then we need to take a tip from the syndicalists and put our energies into structures that are not bound by the constraints of colonial institutions. EdCamps have their place certainly, but the goals they espouse may be more powerful and implemented more directly if we refocus on these projects as a part of the greater political and social struggles that teachers, students, and non-administration co-workers, such as custodial workers, face. Centering our shared material and social struggles, we can contest the top-down mandated pedagogies, curriculums, or projects that hinder our collective liberations. With this parallel structure to the idea of EdCamps, EdCamps themselves benefit. No longer being the only place of conversation for teachers and community, our collaboration with administration is no longer on the same totally unequal political footing.
I certainly do not pretend to have an answer as to the perfect model for developing professionally and responsibly adding to our teaching practice, but if we limit ourselves to the bounds of the colonial institutions we operate within then we are failing in our job as teachers to students who are most targeted and harmed by them.