Action Group for Excellent Teacher Award 2005

On January 18, after the staff meeting, 14 English teachers in my department joined a meeting coordinated by Celia, who volunteered to be the leader of an actino group that would take part in Excellent Teacher Award 2005.

For all these years, I've been trying to promote the idea of sharing. However, to be honest, I did't really try hard in my own school because I was discouraged away by the lukewarm reaction from some of my colleagues to my initial efforts about 4 years ago. And the silent majority gave me this feeling that I shouldn't have done something so different from what they were doing. Ever since, I've been keeping a low profile at school, no matter how active or enthusiastic I have been in learning, teaching, and of course, sharing.

So, I should have felt thrilled when almost one-third of the teachers in my department decided to work together "as a team" to take part in the cotest. To be frank, I didn't feel excited at all. On the contrary, on the very same morning, I told Rainbow that I might not join the team, which kind of upset her to some point. "How could you think so?" she protested, "You should feel happy that people are teaming up. And after all, you were the first ones who supported this plan for the contest." Well, I knew exactly what she meant. However, I've got my own points.

First of all, our Chinese department is the first group of teachers who received the first-year award about two years ago. I have always believed that the teachers in their department worked more collaboratively. Contrary to this belief, it just so happened that the other day when Rainbow and I had a meeting with two Chinese teachers, they made some complaints about how little the teachers share in their department! I was so surprised and disappointed to know about the fact. They are supposed to be the model team. Or at least, ever since they got the award, there should have been changes inside the department--some elements that make the teachers work more closely. But they do not!!!

Secondly, I can foresee that there will be some problems in our action group. Rainbow and I questioned everyone's motive of joining the group. The "big money" (600 thousand NT dollars) is an issue we have to take into consideration. And if we don't deal with it carefully, there will be disputes if we win. Moreover, while we hardly exchange our ideas in our workplace, how can we expect enough trust and harmony in the group. What made me very uncomfortable in the meeting was a young teacher sitting at the end of the table. She was the very one who criticized the website created by Rainbow and me. She has her own bias about the meanings of sharing, which really surprised me given her young age and novice experiences. It made me a bit sick on thinking of working with her.

While everyone seemed to agree to my proposal that "since we are supposed to show the judges that we work as a team, we really need to work as a team," I was still worried that some of us would just hold their personal and negative opinions against this idea. And then, it might not be able to work as I expect: an action group that takes the form of "community of practice (CoP)." It is true that we have the three characteristics that a CoP needs: people, profession, and domain. What the bottom line, according to my opinion, is the "heart." The question is, "Does everyone have a 'heart'?"