Category Archives: Education

Posted on

Change – Start a Ripple

Miguel Guhlin in his post Pearls On A String, approaches the issue of initiating education reform by advocating for change in each one of us as opposed to trying to – “effect change across complex organizations.” I agree. At this point I’d be thrilled to help elicit change in even a few teachers.

This really is how change gets started. The “ripple effect.” Try something you are passionate about. If it works, and works consistently others will be drawn to your work.

For new ideas to really be valuable they need to have some level of transference. Can others be successful using your technique (even if they have to tweak it to match their style)? If it works for you – truly works for you but others can’t reproduce your result, that doesn’t mean it isn’t valuable – it’s just not going to work for others or lead to change in others. But if it does work for others and they start doing it and are successful, you’ve made a difference for that group. If the group is successful then there’s the possibility that others will be drawn in and maybe, just maybe it will grow from there.

It seems that in today’s education climate you tend to have those that “follow-the-program” either because they embrace it or because they can cruise that way or are just too tired of bucking the system. So if you can make headway in a new way you’ll get some of those to come along. At least in my little corner of NCLB-land I’m seeing a little light that just might allow me to again try some things instead of having to completely stifle them not just because I’d “get in trouble” but the onus has been that your principal and school and other teachers could all get caught up negatively in your experiment.

So I’m with Miguel. I’ll do what I can to change things and see what kind of ripple I can get started.

Posted on

Your Child’s Dream Best School Day – What Does It Look Like? What Should It Be?

There is much rumination in the edblogosphere about what education and schools should look like in this way or that. Kids should be blogging, using web 2.0 applications (Wikis, podcasts, Flickr, the flavor-of-the-week app), in conjuction with project-based, problem-based learning. The reality in the elementary classroom however is not a blank slate that you can manipulate any way you want.

But let’s say it was a blank slate – and not only is it a blank slate, but YOUR child is in this class. What would you want your child to be doing in this classroom? They can’t just sit and blog all day. This is an elementary school classroom – what things would you want to hear your child saying they were doing in that classroom? Remember, there are usually mandatory minutes that must be spent on reading, language and math (and yes the other subjects too, but take my word, somehow the minutes of science, social studies, art, PE, etc. are not watched over in quite the same way).

So, what’s your child’s (or grandcild’s) ultimate learning day look like? I’d love to hear your ideas. If you are reading this you probably have some opinions, probably strong opinions about this, but have you ever thought about or planned a whole “typical” day? Here’s your challenge. Take your thoughts and biases and ideas and opinions and learning and experience and conversations and put them all together. Make it a comment here, or make it a post on your blog.

Don’t make this a minute by minute, long, drawn out thing (unless you want to), just a rough outline of what a great learning day would include.

I think this would help many people get a handle on what is being advocated on ed blogs, and give us all a chance to put our plan where our advocacy is. Any takers?
Learning is messy!

Posted on

Messy Learning Examples

I mentioned in an earlier post that some of the most important learning that happens isn’t part of your lesson plan because you can’t account for everything that MIGHT happen during a project. Here are some recent examples from our most recent video project.

One group needed some pictures of what living stickleback fish look like (the fossils we found were of extinct fish). The group searched the net and found some good examples and were just going to use them. From that a copyright discussion ensued – so we ended up emailing photographers to get permission. Since the pictures the students wanted to use were all from university web sites that got the professors interested in what the students were doing and they want copies of the video.

At one point the transition scenes with titles had no sound associated with them, and the students felt that was fine. They thought it was fine until about the third time they watched it – then it was boring and they decided they needed to do voiceovers on at least some of them – so we did.

Of course in their excitement to have a video on the internet each group wanted their scene to be as long as possible – but 5 out of 7 groups ended up deciding to edit their scenes considerably to make them more understandable and less boring.

Students were very reluctant to do the voiceover work (with a few exceptions, there are hams in every group) it was embarrassing or scary… and you might make a mistake… oh my gosh! After a few brave souls did theirs … and made mistakes … and they weren’t laughing stocks, it became more and more acceptable. In fact my students with the least English experience were some of the most likely to “volunteer” from their group. This is great because then the whole group gets involved helping them learn to pronounce the words correctly and clearly.

One of the “messy” learning pieces that came out was students wanting to re-write script pieces because “the wording is so important.” They would come to this on their own, especially when they would do final practicing before doing a voiceover. Is it OK if we re-write this part Mr. Crosby, we think we can make it better.” Great stuff! Like you’re going to say “No guys – don’t want you to think about improving your work on your own – let’s just use it as is.”

Learning is messy!

Posted on

No Time For… _________________ ?

Wes Fryer’s post “No Time For Technology In High Schools” follows up other tirades he has made about no time for recess and other areas now deemed “less important.” He states:

NO TIME. No time for projects, no time for fun activities, no time for in-depth learning because there is too much curriculum to cover.

He goes on to say that the major problem is the quantity of standards needing to be met.

I vehemently agree. So how did we get there?

If Wes was having this conversation with a supporter of NCLB he would be told rather abruptly that teachers and administrators were involved in writing and adopting the standards at each state – so go cry to them. And they would be right… sort of. Teachers were involved – but which teachers and how and why did they make the decisions they made? I know at the elementary level in my state the teachers that were picked for each subject were teachers that were award winning teachers for the subject they were chosen to work on. But ask those teachers about their typical classroom day and here is what you will generally find. They give more time to that subject.

I took over a class from an award winning elementary teacher who was a great math teacher – she told me that she was glad I was getting her class because I was stronger at language arts than she was. She was wrong. When I talked to the students she had them doing great language arts activities – but the typical day they described had a constant math focus.

They started the day with a math problem “sponge” activity, then corrected math homework and did a quick review for students that didn’t do well, while others did math explorations. But that wasn’t math class – that came later in the day. She also would do oral math drill during transition times during the day, and would spend more time occasionally doing large math explorations as a project outside of their usual math time. Now this is great math teaching and I don’t fault her for it except – guess what the great elementary language arts teachers do? Science teachers? – get it? Pretty much all of them give that subject extra time and attention. So they can get through more curriculum and they are more successful at covering more material. Math (or whichever subject) is their life so they don’t see a standard they don’t think is important.

Now I’m generalizing here a bit, but that is one way we get over exuberant standards. Then how do you argue with those standards without being labeled as someone who wants to “dumb down” the standards? I constantly hear parents question why their son or daughter needs to know how to do this or that, but they won’t question the standards for various reasons.

I agree with Wes, we need to revisit the standards. Not to “dumb them down,” but to make them relevant and meaningful. Then we might have time for the important things.

Learning is messy!

Posted on

Some of the Messy Parts of learning – Or What We Did After Testing

ground.bmp Diatoms, 3500x magnification, taken with scanning electron microscope, University of Nevada, Reno – by John Kevin McCormack

When I was first exposed to the idea of having students do project work, I remember the presenters saying that it was the process that was important, not the product. I agree, the process is huge to what students get from learning through doing. It’s so huge that your plan for the project can’t hold, can’t hope to preconceive all the kinds of learning that will happen. In fact when you get to the end of a project the more learning that happened in ways you didn’t expect the more jazzed and fulfilled the students and you are. I call it “The Glow.” When you step back from doing or making something that comes out particularly well and you are beaming and can feel your face kind of heat up – that’s “The Glow.”

I’ve found that educators that embrace project-based, problem-based learning the first time they see it – get it because they see the learning and the implications for learning right away. Those that have to be sold repeatedly on its merits don’t see all the pieces without a guide.

To make our recent science video (Stickleback Fossils) there were many, many pieces.

How much background information about fossils do you teach directly, and how much do you leave for discovery? I would much rather students discover, but discovery often takes more time, and time was not what we had. It took seven months to make our video according to the calendar, but that was because we were “On-hold” much of the time to do the “mandatory” pieces we are required to do. Thankfully we do seem to be moving away slightly from the reading groups and math groups all-the-time approach, so next year I’m hoping to get to project work on a more consistent basis. So we did some intense book learning for several days about the “Who, what, where, when, and why,” of fossils.

Next we brainstormed and discussed what the important parts that should be in our video if the goal was that it teach others about fossils, but also specifically about the fossils we found. After that we broke down our thinking into 7 scenes that needed to be produced, and brainstormed ideas as individuals, groups and whole class on what each scene could look like – I do this because students seem to buy into the project better if they have a “feel” for how the whole thing will look AND it exposes them to thinking about what they are supposed to be learning about in one more way – and it gives you another chance as a teacher to observe and fill-in, correct and expand on student thinking and understanding of the content.

I randomly assigned each group of students in class a scene and gave them the class brainstorm on chart paper. They can choose to use one of the ideas the class came up with or come up with a new idea if they’d like to – what I find is they usually use one of the ideas or tweak one of the ideas already generated. Now they do the research, storyboarding, script writing, prop gathering and making, location scouting and everything else required for their scene. While this is happening I wander around the room observing and listening and answering questions and clarifying and keeping a few on track. In a case like this where we had to fast-track things a bit I did jump in more than I like to and helped some groups pick suitable materials for making something instead of having them do the trial and error part – which is too bad – that’s one of the great messy parts of this kind of learning.

Now I want to come back to my first sentence about the process being important and not the product. I’m going to disagree with that statement. The process is very important and can be worthwhile learning on its own. But to me the quality of the final product, the polish, the struggle to get the product as close to its highest potential as possible is also very important. What message are we giving to students if their process is great but we always walk away with an attitude that teaches that the product would have been great, but we don’t have the time to get it there. I disagree – lots of times getting there finds the problems and is the greatest challenge to overcome. The sound on our video is sub-par. We knew it and I would have loved to have the students help figure out how to get it more consistent. We tweaked it well enough in the short time we had (we recorded over half the voiceovers the last three days of school). The transitions between scenes aren’t terrible, but they could be better. If my students were back this week we would be looking at those things and figuring them out. Isn’t that “Real World” production? That’s polish and making something as good as it can be, or as good as it can be with your current resources and knowledge and it’s a step I believe we too often leave out.

In the end though I believe the students met their major goal of producing a video that would become a resource for them and others around the world to learn about fossils and geologic processes. Watch it and let me know what you think.

Learning is messy!

Posted on

So As Parents and Educators We Monitor and Teach Ethical, Appropriate, Safe Use

The following was written in response to Will Richardson’s request for a message to parents about safe and appropriate technology use:

Paper and pencils can be used to draw inappropriate, hate filled, pictures messages and ideas – and you could poke someone’s eye out. They could even be used to lure your child into a dangerous situation. Should we (and could we if we tried?) cut off access to keep our children safe? No, because they are everywhere and too valuable in so many ways, so as parents and educators we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

Over 200,000 children are injured using playground equipment each year, some are killed. Should we (and could we if we tried?) cut access to playground equipment to keep our children safe? No, because they’re eventually going to find play equipment and playing is too valuable an experience, so as parents and educators we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

50,000 people die or are injured in swimming accidents each year. Should we (and could we if we tried?) cut access to swimming to keep our children safe? No, because pools and lakes and ponds are everywhere and it would be dangerous if they fell in and it is too valuable and healthy a skill, so as parents and educators we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

30,000 people are killed and thousands more injured in auto crashes each year. Should we (and could we if we tried?) cut access to cars and driving to keep our children safe? No, cars are everywhere and driving is too valuable, so as parents and educators we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

Phones are used for criminal activities, even luring kids away from home. Should we (and could we if we tried?) cut off access to phones to keep our children safe? No, phones are everywhere and they are too valuable, so as parents and educators we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

There are some churches and religions out there that don’t have the same beliefs as yours – and some even preach ideas that you would consider blasphemous and hateful. Should we (and could we if we tried?) cut off access to religion to keep our children safe? No, religion is everywhere and it is too valuable, so as parents and educators we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

There are applications of technology that can expose your child to inappropriate, hate filled, pictures, messages and ideas. Technology and the internet are everywhere. Do we cut off access? (and could we if we tried?) Or are these applications too valuable? As parents and educators maybe it would be better if we monitor and teach ethical, appropriate, safe use.

Otherwise who will teach them about these things and where will they learn about them?

Learning is messy!

Posted on

Stickleback Fossil Video

sticklebackfossil1.jpeg

My class finished our latest video project on the last day of school (Wednesday). We were under such a time crunch that groups were literally doing voiceover work the last day as we also moved my stuff to the room I’ll be in next year. We started the project in November, so I guess you could say it took seven months to do – but actual class time was probably 3 weeks of 1 to 2 hours each day.

I like the entire class to be involved in projects like this and one way to do that is to divide the video up into the different scenes that are required and then assign each group in your class a different scene they are responsible for – like doing a “jigsaw” activity. This way each group “specializes” in their scene, but when the whole thing comes together everyone learns from everyone else’s pieces. We all see each others’ parts many times to critique or check for word pronouciation (over half my students speak another language so word pronounciation is difficult and practiced a ton)  so we really learn the content material well.

A little background information:

The stickleback fish fossils we found are 9 to 15 million years old – we took 90 students on the trip and every student found multiple fossils (some students had 15 or 20 and we only “fished” for the fossils for a little over an hour). We researched on the net and asked questions and got permission to use photos from experts at Stanford, the Universities of Wisconsin – Whitewater and Nevada – Reno. Watch for the cool props students made from plaster, clay, fish bones and other materials.

I’ll discuss the “Messy” and not so messy parts of this project in future posts and why this is important work for students to be involved in. They worked hard and were really impressed that their work won’t just be thrown away or sit in a drawer somewhere, but will be available for people all over the world to see and learn from. What an exciting time we live in.

Learning is messy!

Posted on

A “Must Read” – The Class of 2015

You must check out the post The Class of 2015 on Mark Ahlness’s edtechblog. He has his third graders’ blog postings about the reality of not having their blogs to write to once they leave his classroom. Have a hanky handy. Too bad Will didn’t have this for his presentation to 49 superintendents.
Learning is messy!

Posted on

An Education Summit Meeting For Change!!!

Possibly the most recurring theme that makes the rounds of the edbloggosphere is why the nation, states, school districts, schools and teachers have not been more open to change. Change in how schools do school, embrace technology and project-based, problem-based learning among other possibilities. Is it because things are going so well?

Doug over at Borderland picked up on a post by Clarence Fisher about a “grid” that would apply to classroom change. I threw in my response and Doug replied, but the gem is Marco Polo’s reply. I think he frames the issue magnificently:

a) you have to get agreement or consensus from so many different people, and b) so many of those people never meet or talk to each other.

And

The changes suggested may make perfect pedagogic and psychological sense, but be rejected because parents, teachers and other stakeholders are concerned that the changes may make the school appear “wacky”, and therefore seriously impact the employment chances of students who attend.

I know business people that feel things need to change – as well as some parents, administrators, teachers and obviously the edtech “gurus” who are also spreading that notion ad naseum, – but when does that diverse group ever get together and hash this out? We should probably add some enlightened politicos (is that an oxymoron?) in the mix too. Did I leave an important group out? Students – DUH! Anyone else?

So we’re talking about an Education Summit Meeting for Change! Any ideas? How do we pull this off? I might even talk my wife into letting me pay my way to something like this!

OK – so who’s going to organize and invite and make this happen? I would … but … umm … my plate is full this summer. But I’ll be there, promise! (Was that too obvious a dodge?)

Learning, AND CHANGE, are messy! Too messy?

Posted on

CELL-EXLL, SFA, GLAD Are Too Much and Not Enough

Since a few years before NCLB really raised it’s head, standardized testing was already a fact of life for “Title 1” schools (law for “Improving The Academic Achievement Of The Disadvantaged”) and we started to have mandatory “Research-based literacy programs” thrown at us. In my area the big programs have been CELL/ExLL (Comprehensive Early Literacy Learning and Extended Literacy Learning), SFA (Success for All), and GLAD (Guided Language Acquisition Design)

These programs focus on literacy and English language skills for students that are behind. One positive outcome of how these programs were implemented was that a lot of money and time were spent to train teachers in implementing and utilizing them. Training models included 5 or more days of initial training, ongoing observation in classrooms where the program had already been implemented, and ongoing peer coaching/mentoring. Before, whenever we were given a new program to implement we were given fly-by-night training and support and then to everyone’s surprise the new program failed to live up to its lofty expectations – not the case with these programs – time and money were invested heavily.

So have our test scores gone up as a result? At first yes, but they have not even remotely kept pace with NCLB’s requirements with too few exceptions. Schools, teachers and students have worked hard, the programs were implemented well overall, but we have hit somewhat of a wall as far as raising test scores (and note I’m not even questioning here whether test scores and especially the kind of test scores we are pursuing are the end all we should be held accountable for anyhow).

So why have these programs and the hard work put into them failed to be the savior of our schools? For lots of reasons, and I’m not going to suggest I know all the reasons – but I will suggest what I feel are some of the most telling and worrisome ones.

Number one is that the way teachers are trained to implement these programs makes them WAY too time consuming. Teaching kids to be literate has to be a top priority for sure, but these programs take up the entire day to the exclusion of REAL science and social studies and art and the list goes on. Proponents of these programs will argue that you “integrate” those subjects into the program. Students read about those subjects as the reading material students use to learn to reflect on and write about and discuss – and by reciting poetry and shared reading and looking at pictures of those subjects students learn the science and social studies and whatever. I agree, to a small degree. Integrating those subjects into the literacy program makes nothing but sense – unfortunately it is not close to enough.

For reading and learning to really be accessible and meaningful students have to possess the schema necessary to make sense of what they read and learn about. In my experience, and in my opinion students need real experience like that gleaned from field trips, experiments, projects, art, sports programs, recess and PE – the very things programs like those mentioned above often cut from the curriculum (none of these programs cut these vital pieces by design – it just usually happens – although many Success For All schools either completely cut field trips or schedule one or two a year because of how the program works). The program designers would say you can still do those things – hence the problem. During my own training in these programs I would raise my hand and bring up that we had just seen a “typical” day’s schedule that a model teacher presented and I didn’t see REAL projects and other hands-on minds-on pieces. And every time – every single time the answer was the same – “Oh…you can or could do those things.” NOTE – not you SHOULD do them – you COULD do them. And every single example they presented NEVER included any active learning project, art, etc. – so the message given and received – NOT IMPORTANT!

My point here is that THOSE SCHEMA MAKING PIECES ARE AS IMPORTANT AND NECESSARY A PART OF LEARNING TO READ AND LEARN AS ANY THERE ARE because without them you might as well be reading word lists instead of a book. How long would you last reading a list of words the length of a book?

Learning to read without having those experiences is like learning to fish in your swimming pool – you can cast and bait your hook and reel in a lure and row a rubber raft around a little and maybe even fall in (not that that has happened to me mind you…) but you don’t really catch fish and you don’t spend time in a natural setting or deal with weather or rough water or smelly bait or catching a bunch of fish or none or any other actual aspects of fishing – good, bad or otherwise. In other words you totally miss out on the experience. Too many of the students that attend schools that use these programs have already missed the experience, that’s a big part of why they are behind – they need the experience to make meaning and to get excited about what they read and write about.

Again, these programs are solid programs, I’m not questioning their merits. It’s just that they are not enough and the way they are used now they take ALL the time necessary to get to the hands-on experiences. Not totally on purpose, but that’s what happens. They would be stronger programs if they included much more room for field trips and REAL projects that might go over the scheduled time (oh my!).

Learning has to be messy!