A composition of other people's thoughts and ideas... with a theme.

How to Bring our Schools Out of the 20th Century by Claudia Wallis, Sonja Steptoe, Time Magazine cover story Dec. 18, 2006

"For the past five years, the national conversation on education has focused on reading scores, math tests and closing the "achievement gap" between social classes. This is not a story about that conversation. This is a story about the big public conversation the nation is not having about education, the one that will ultimately determine not merely whether some fraction of our children get "left behind" but also whether an entire generation of kids will fail to make the grade in the global economy because they can't think their way through abstract problems, work in teams, distinguish good information from bad or speak a language other than English." 

- - - - - 

An Alien in an Alien World by David Warlick,

"I wonder how many natural mathematicians, engineers, artists, composers, story tellers and innovators we are wasting, when we measure our schools almost exclusively on their ability to produce good test takers.

How many natural born leaders are we squandering as we teach them to listen, watch, follow direction, regurgitate facts, to sit down and shut up.  How many leaders are we losing when we teach them to be taught — in stead of teaching them to teach.

How alien are our classrooms?"

- - - - -

Do schools today kill creativity?

 

Sir Ken Robinson makes an entertaining (and profoundly moving) case for creating an education system that nurtures creativity, rather than undermining it.

"Truthfully what happens is that, as children grow up, we start to educate them progressively from the waste up. And then we focus on their heads, and slightly to one side..."

“My contention is that all kids have tremendous talents and we squander them, pretty ruthlessly.”

- - - - -

The eternal question... Why? by Kris, a 15 year old I had the pleasure of teaching.

Here it is from a student who will be a lifelong learner, dare I say... despite her schooling. She is the one that sent me the time article above, which got me thinking about compiling this post.

"To the adult readers out there: this is how public education is contributing to your child’s success.  We list the qualities we have in one column, the qualities we don’t in another, and write about how the qualities we have will make us nice, successful white collar workers someday, coupled with a post-secondary education and a Graduation Portfolio with bureacratically-documented evidence (signed in triplicate) of us kissing the toes of their shiny black shoes.

Of course, like every student who hopes of one day becoming a successful, white collar worker, the answer I intend to put down is a lot less sarcastic and a lot more Ministry-friendly.  There is satisfaction in lashing out at public education on a blog, and there is self-preservation in doing exactly what they tell you on the work you hand in.  I have a hunch the Ministry won’t like it, but I still wonder, as I hope others will: “Why?”

- - - - -

Adopt and Adept by Marc Prensky

"...technology adoption... It's typically a four-step process:

1. Dabbling.
2. Doing old things in old ways.
3. Doing old things in new ways.
4. Doing new things in new ways.

 ...Some people will no doubt worry that, with all this experimentation, our children's education will be hurt. "When will we have time for the curriculum," they will ask, "and for all the standardized testing being mandated?" If we really offered our children some great future-oriented content (such as, for example, that they could learn about nanotechnology, bioethics, genetic medicine, and neuroscience in neat interactive ways from real experts), and they could develop their skills in programming, knowledge filtering, using their connectivity, and maximizing their hardware, and that they could do so with cutting-edge, powerful, miniaturized, customizable, and one-to-one technology, I bet they would complete the "standard" curriculum in half the time it now takes, with high test scores all around. To get everyone to the good stuff, the faster kids would work with and pull up the ones who were behind.

In other words, if we truly offer our kids an Edutopia worth having, I believe our students will work as hard as they can to get there.

So, let's not just adopt technology into our schools. Let's adapt it, push it, pull it, iterate with it, experiment with it, test it, and redo it, until we reach the point where we and our kids truly feel we've done our very best. Then, let's push it and pull it some more. And let's do it quickly, so the twenty-second century doesn't catch us by surprise with too much of our work undone.

A big effort? Absolutely. But our kids deserve no less."

- - - - -

Animal School- by R.Z. Greenwald... Curriculum: Running, Flying, Climbing, and Swimming 

 

Schools do not make accommodations for individual talents and learning styles. A slide show of a story I read a long time ago... still priceless!

- - - - -

Creativity Killer: Discouraging creativity in children, © Leslie Owen Wilson, 1997, 2004

"It is perhaps ironic that within our culture we insist that we place such value on creativity and then blatantly try to steal it away from children in the contexts of their educational experiences and their upbringing. As a culture we need to finally decide what we really want for our children and then carefully design and monitor experiences which provide those things we value."

This has links to 3 versions of The Little Boy by Helen Buckley.

- - - - -

Why does engineering/math/science education in the US suck? by Kathy Sierra 

- - - - -

Where do we go from here? We can keep looking at Kathy Sierra for the answer! 

 

- - - - -

I started this blog with a post titled, The purpose of a system is what it does, and I started this post with a 'Time' (or perhaps 'Timeless') article that states in the second paragraph,

"American schools aren't exactly frozen in time, but considering the pace of change in other areas of life, our public schools tend to feel like throwbacks. Kids spend much of the day as their great-grandparents once did: sitting in rows, listening to teachers lecture, scribbling notes by hand, reading from textbooks that are out of date by the time they are printed. A yawning chasm (with an emphasis on yawning) separates the world inside the schoolhouse from the world outside."

Incremental changes will not take us where we need to be. Standardized testing, outdated curriculum and unwired classrooms won't get us there. Teachers using a white Smart Board to simply replace the green chalk board, which replaced the blackboard, won't get us there. 

What profound change is needed? I don't think one teacher at a time can do it. What is going to get us over the Big Frickin' Wall?

Note my "Articulate Thinkers" post, Jan. 29/07, based on an e-mail 'conversation' I had almost three years ago... 

- - - - -

Dec. 18. It has been a while since I looked at Christopher D. Sessums' Weblog. He just added me to his friends list here on eduspaces and I visited his blog again. I found his post with this apple commercial... which pays tribute to the misfits/the crazies/ the 'Round Pegs in the Square Holes'. It reminded me of the main reason I wrote this post, which I alluded to, but didn't really mention. Many of the Square/Round Peg Students (that don't fit into our other-shaped schools) are the future thinkers/dreamers/innovators that are going to meaningfully change our world. We need to recognize their future value... We have an obligation to nurture them, and to develop their enthusiasm for learning. It isn't just about not stifling creativity or not making schools so alien... it is about creating an environment where every child can thrive...  Not making the misfits fit, but rather helping them create a space that fits them.    [I think that the technology is now available to make this easier!]

Jan. 8th. Kris directs me to this Story from the Front-Lines. (A teacher's frustration with pegs and holes.)

And I'm demoralized, as I'm now having to tell kids, "A paragraph is an idea – unless your teacher tells you it's five to seven sentences, and then that's what it is."

Jan. 16th. I found this in the inaugural post of madamespider, yet another example of a student's frustration...

"Let me just say this: I hate school with a passion. You’ll never find someone who loves education more than I do, don’t get me wrong, but as far as I’m concerned, school is not education. I believe one should learn because they want to and understand the value of knowledge, not have it shoved down their throats by the school board or government or whoever."

...and here again, in reaction to this post, is madamespider,

"Looking back on the talks and ’specialists’ they tried to send me to within the school, I now realize that they were treating me as if I had a behavior problem or learning disability. Like I needed their support to do better. That’s not what I needed. I needed something to make it matter to me. That’s what I still need."

- - - - -

Feb. 3rd, 07 Here is a quote from Bruce Springsteen,

"I wasn't quite suited for the educational system. One problem with the way the educational system is set up is that it only recognizes a certain type of intelligence, and it's incredibly restrictive -- very, very restrictive. There's so many types of intelligence, and people who would be at their best outside of that structure [get lost]. Most of the schools, they're aiming to build you up and get you into the machine."

I found this on 'The Genius in All of Us' blog by David Shenk... this is an interesting blog to explore further!

- - - - - 

Will Richardson's post Teacher Bloggers Not Blogging (Says Me) looks at the David Warlick article in EDTECH titled  Blog Rules. Yet another reference I have found recently to Principal Dr. Tim Tyson and Mabry Middle.

Will says:

"Blogs are powerful communication tools. Blogs are powerful publishing tools. But blogging (the verb) is still much more than that to me. Blogging, as in reading and thinking and reflecting and then writing, is connecting and learning, neither of which are discussed in the article. (And maybe they weren’t meant to be, I know) I’m not knocking what Tim or his teachers are doing, I think it’s great. But I’m just asking the question: how are his teachers modeling the use of blogs to learn not just to teach?"

I have been looking beyond just blogs and considering the use of technology 'to learn not just to teach' quite a bit recently. Is it a natural progression to use technology to teach first then to learn, as we integrate new technology? Or is this just a lack of training and professional development? I've heard more than a few people call the new Smart Boards nothing more than glorified blackboards recently, (I have yet to actually even see one of these, much less know how teachers/students are using them, so I am really just making note of what others have told me). The fact is that technology such as this needs the user to be trained. How can we implement new things in new ways if we lack the knowledge or training to do so? Also, I think teachers must model what they expect, or at least find appropriate models for students to follow. A blog that replaces a daily diary may be useful, but does it expose a student to the potential a blog has as a reflective, synthesizing, learning space?

On the topic of blogs, I have been thinking about what this blog means to me. I write it as if I have an audience, but I write it for me, not the audience. It is sort of a cathartic expression of my thoughts on education; A place to synthesize ideas and reflect on new areas of exploration. I am surprised just how often I look back at my entries, reread them and follow the links. It has also been an experimental playground where I have learned a bit about html, and figured out how to add tools, such as the meebo messenger, the ClustrMap, as well as the flikr and bubbleshare photo windows. This blog isn't about my practice as an educator but it certainly affects my practice. It is a learning tool.

I am developing some ideas about using wikis and blogs in my Science class next month. As I develop the plan, I need to ask myself:

'Am I adding technology to my teaching or providing students with new learning and new ways to learn?'

'Am I creating an environment where students will express, synthesize, and reflect on their (and each other's) learning, or am I creating a new way to report out?' (A glorified poster board). 

'Am I encouraging students to be lifelong learners?'

What else should I be asking myself?

- - - - -

A side note: The curriculum does not come up in my line of questioning... it seems almost insignificant in this meta conversation. Does it matter what the content is, or isn't the process far more important?

- - - - -

It is now a few hours later and well into the night. Wandering from blog to blog, I found myself on John Connell's. From one of his posts a few days ago, subjectdiscipline2.0- join the debate: "...for too many too often, ” the talk is of new ways of learning but all that happens is the old framework is polished and added to.”"

Once again, technology to learn, not just to teach!

From my comment on his blog:'I think that if we want students to be lifelong learners, and we want them to take ownership of their own learning to any extent, then subject discipline must be, at the very least, ‘loosened’ up.'

...This is another topic that has been buzzing around my head recently. It actually goes back to David Warlick's idea of 'Derailing Education' and taking 'side trips' that I discussed in another post. 

Going back to Time, (See Square Peg, Round Hole)
Wesley Fryer’s ‘Moving at the speed of creativity’, refers to the Time cover story, How to Bring Our Schools Out of the 20th Century, in his post, 21st Century Education reform.
In reference to this quote in the Time article: 

In a comment I posted on Wesley’s blog, I pay this compliment, “A great summary that SYNTHESIZES and ADDS MEANING.” Then I suggest, “I would add those two to your sentence: “It’s not just about SEARCHING, it’s about FINDING and VALIDATING.”
…and that is exactly what Wesley has done with his post, he synthesizes what the article says, but he goes further… he draws from other sources, and new meaning is added. For example, Wesley disagrees (as do I) with the article's suggestion of greater rigor and standardized testing. He links us to his podcast #79 titled, ‘Reject Rigor: Embrace Differentiation, Flexibility, and High Expectations’.

That’s a poster quote right there…

But there is a dichotomy here: Our ‘educational language’ around standardization and accountability juxtaposed with differentiation and flexibility… we seem to have two mutually exclusive camps, yet there seems to be a move to embrace both. To embrace both is to accomplish neither.

As this post quickly becomes a tribute to Wesley Fryer, (the newest addition to my Netvibes feed-reader), I think I will quote him one more time. From: 'Apprenticeship learning and critical thinking':

“Learners are not in school so they can take tests, be tested, and be translated metaphorically into statistics that are aggregated into charts and graphs used by politicians to secure their elective offices. Learners are in school to LEARN, and the confusion which abounds regarding the proper role of assessments today is a key part of educational reforms our nation desperately needs.”
“We do NOT need more testing, more rigorous testing, and/or more end-of-course examinations in our schools. Testing has never “saved” and will never “save us” from the challenges which face us in the educational environment. Only high quality, professional, caring, passionate teachers can provide what our students deserve and in many cases desperately need: A differentiated, challenging environment of customized learning that involves regular dialog and authentic assessment…”

The challenge now is recognizing that this fundamentally changes a teacher’s practice… we are on a new road, but I don’t see a roadmap being developed. I think we lack the perspective to make the map. Current assessment strategies limit our vision. Current subject-disciplines also limit possibilities and compartmentalize assessment using a different paradigm than is needed.

We need to be adept at creating flexible, differentiated learning environments.

We need to be computer literate, and also be able to teach a new kind of literacy. (Warlick)

We need to challenge students by asking questions, guiding their learning, and helping them to develop their own personal learning environments.

We need to teach students to synthesize information and add new meaning.

We must change what we do. (And we need visionary leaders to lead the way!)

- - - - -
Having said what we need to do… I am contemplating ‘What we are” (as teachers). I think my next post will be a tribute to teachers, but not the kind you would expect after a post like this...

- - - - -

I'm back, not even an hour after posting this! Several times I came across the  Revised Bloom's Taxonomy, first here and here on Wesley's blog, then back on Netvibes where I picked up Cool Cat Teacher's del.icio.us post... which led me to an article by none other than Wesley Fryer once again!

Well, third time's a charm. It clicked that my use of 'Add new Meaning' in this post was an attempt to describe the CREATION of new knowledge as seen on the revised taxonomy above. I am wondering what happened to Synthesis? Is this part of Evaluation?

In a final dedication to Wesley Fryer, I will end with this quote from the TechLearning article:

"We need visionary educational leadership that understands and effectively communicates the importance of emphasizing student CREATIVITY and the creation of original (and remixed) knowledge products."

Thanks Wesley!

- - - - -

Sunday March 11th, 2007

This is great: Cognitive Taxonomy Circle

I found this at Jeff Utecht's U Tech Tips, his source is this American Psychological Association blog post. 

This is a tribute to educators. It is written in admiration of a special breed of dedicated educators that are 'gifted'. It is a salute to teachers who have transcended the skills taught in teacher's college and have truly mastered the 'art' of teaching.

We all know the type, the teacher(s) we speak of well into adulthood; the ones to whom we hold a special gratitude or admiration; the ones who have helped us to 'sculpt' our character or 'define' our endearing qualities.

To these educators I say thank you!

And now... As I explore the many issues of what it means to be an educator today... As I investigate what it means to be literate in a technological world starkly different than the one I grew up in... As I examine the nuances of incorporating new ways to teach and learn... I am reminded that technology provides new tools, new methods, and new approaches to teaching and learning, but that being a good teacher involves so much more.

I am honoured to know many good educators: Some embrace technology, incorporate it seamlessly into what they do; Some 'dabble', trying new things and blending old with new, (adding to their technological 'utility belts' so to speak); And some are technophobes, scarcely leaving their screensaver lest to check e-mail or Google an uncertain term. Across this entire spectrum I know truly wonderful educators.

I can think of more than one teacher who is technologically inept, yet I would love for my children to be taught by them. I also want teachers who can teach my children to be technologically adept, and bravely prepared for the world of tomorrow. In both cases I want my child to be inspired, challenged, cared for, accepted... appreciated.

And so to those of you who meaningfully care for and appreciate your students; to those of you who engage students, and encourage them to be lifelong learners; to those of you who challenge them to be more than they believe they can be; to those of you that students return to see, years after you taught them... I again say thanks!

Sincerely,
Dave.

Think Good Thoughts,
Say Good Words,
Do Good Deeds.

- - - - -

addendum: It is with deliberate intent that this post was written void of any hyperlinks.