Category Archives: Student Access

Posted on

“Are We Fixing the Wrong Things?” By Yong Zhao

Will has another post about driving change – so since I’m at it, another blast from the past (May 20, 2006 to be exact):

From “Are We Fixing the Wrong Things?” By Yong Zhao, – University Distinguished Professor of Education and Director of the U.S. – China Center for Research on Educational Excellence, Michigan State University:

“Creativity, and not standardization, may be the driving force behind an effective education system.”

Just 8 years ago 2 school principals and 2 superintendents from Singapore visited my class. They sat in the back while I introduced a math lesson on sorting, data collecting and graphing M&M’s by color (AIMS activity). As the students got to work in groups of four, the visitors in the back came to their feet and started talking and pointing. Next came the video cameras and a few quick clarifying questions. 50 Minutes later the students went home and for the next 90 minutes I was barraged by questions about the observed lesson. Next they wondered how they could get their teachers to teach that way.
I stopped them at one point and told them I was a bit confused by their interest in how things were done at my school. I reminded them that just the week before their country had, for the second year in-a-row, scored the highest in the world on the TIMMS and my school was rated as “Inadequate” per our ITBS scores. Shouldn’t I be asking them questions? They laughed and explained that their students were good at testing but not at being creative. “America invents almost everything,” they explained, all we’re good at is taking those ideas and making them cheaper. We want our students to invent and create like that.”

That’s why this section of Yong’s article smacked me in the face:

“Whereas U.S. schools are now encouraged, even forced, to chase after test scores, China, Singapore, South Korea, and Japan, all named as major competitors, have started education reforms aimed at fostering more creativity and innovative thinking among their citizens. China, for example, has taken drastic measures to reform its curriculum. As the United States raised the status of standardized testing to a record high in 2001 with No Child Left Behind, the Chinese Ministry of Education issued an executive order to significantly minimize the consequences of testing (2002). As the United States pushes for more centralized curriculum standards, China is abandoning its one nation—one syllabus tradition. As the United States moves toward a required program of study for high schools, China is working hard to implement a flexible system with more electives and choices for students. As the United States calls for more homework and more study time, China has launched a battle to reduce such burdens on its students.”

And this:

Sim Wong Hoo, founder and CEO of Singapore-based Creative Technology, pointed out this very fact.

“The advantage is we come from a very conscientious culture. You tell our people what to do, they’ll follow the rules, they’ll do it. The downside is they are not as creative. We fixed that by having a U.S.-based R&D team that’s doing more advanced research.” (Levy, 2005)

I mean is this the best example (or worst, depending on how you look at it) of the grass being greener on the other side of the fence? While the decision makers here suffer horrendous test score envy, the countries we are the most envious of are trying their best to be us. Who’s winning? Certainly not our students.

There are several other articles available on Challenging The Status Quo on the ASCD web site.
I guess we were right: Learning should be messy!

Posted on

Let’s Re-Visit-“Working, Breathing, Reproducible, Intriguing Models”

I haven’t posted in awhile – been one of those convergences of report cards, parent conferences, inservices, family activities, etc. I have several posts in the works – might even get to one today or tomorrow. In the meantime I feel the urge to bring back one of my most popular posts in reply to Will Richardson’s recent post. Here it is:

Students blogging, creating content, manipulating text, graphics and video, designing and producing projects and all that technology and Web 2.0 has to offer – Wow! It’s so obvious what dynamic, mind stretching and engaging platforms technology, problem-based and project-based learning are!!! Or is it so obvious?

Who gets the most excited and visionary about this stuff? – Probably anyone that might actually be reading this post. I’ll bet few if anyone that isn’t already doing “Messy” learning is checking out this or any other blogs that teach, preach or discuss it. We hear about “The New Story,” or “The Read/Write Web in the Classroom,” but who else but the choir reads, hears or cares about any of it?

The gurus trip around the country and the world physically and virtually to spread the word, but who goes to these conferences or subscribes to these podcasts (or even knows what a podcast is?)? The masses of teachers and administrators looking to be enlightened? No! (well maybe a few, but VERY few) The early adopters that see and saw the implications straightforward are the few and the brave. So the questions have been asked and numerous and various answers have been proposed about how to change how school is done and how using these “New Tools” fit into that scheme and how do we get the message out?

Do the gurus continue to guru? (How do you guru? – don’t ask,  just try to follow along) Yes, that is certainly part of the equation. Do we continue to blog about it? Absolutely! The conversation is the point! What is missing are the models – the working, breathing, reproducible, intriguing models. We need ongoing models of all the power of what this looks like or we get nowhere.

Yeah I know there are examples out there – but my staff and my administrators and my congressman and senator and school board probably aren’t jetting out to Maine to observe Bob Sprankle’s class or any other of the teachers and students doing this kind of school.

YOU IDIOT!!! – You’re thinking or maybe yelling at your monitor – you and your staff can go to Bob Sprankle’s class or any of a list of teachers using blogs and video and web 2.0 applications via the web!!!! Yes, yes I know – cool down – I know that. I can pull up one of Bob’s productions – for example his class made a recent vodcast about how they produce their podcasts – way cool – I GET IT!

BUT – (notice I made it a big but) I GET IT! I could run around my school and district showing teachers and administrators Bob’s kids’ vodcast and I might even get a few people excited – “ but most WON’T GET IT! You can’t just show most people – you have to show them and explain it to them and then answer their questions and then show it to them again and then explain it to them again and then show them how this relates to things they already do – takes the place of this and makes it even better and does this and this and this! I’m telling you they will think the vodcast was kinda cool- would be an interesting thing for their kids to do once if they had the equipment and the time and someone to show them how to do it. But they won’t get it until they experience you doing it and getting them to do it- several times – and talk about it and have them notice their students’ reaction and learning and how they talk about it and how excited their parents get about it. Wes Fryer talks about Face 2 Face – that’s it! that’s what I’m talking about.

So where is everyone that does this? Are there whole schools that do this? Districts? Where’s the list? – we should all post it and send it around – where will people see this that is as easy and as accessible as possible? Is there DATA that goes with any of these teachers or schools or districts that do this? (yeah, I don’t need the DATA but some will require the DATA). Maybe there’s downloadable video of some of this – I know where some is – where’s a lot more? Better yet, are their teachers – “Old School” teachers that have come to this that can speak about what their experience has taught them? I think that would be a powerful “New Story.”

We need working, breathing, reproducible, intriguing models available in many places for many to see and experience to leverage the gurus and the online examples. Should we build the clearinghouse – any volunteers?
Learning is messy!

Posted on

Tech Integration On The Run

9 Promethean ActivBoards will be installed in classrooms at my school next week. This will bring us up to 11 classrooms that have them installed (out of about 26 classrooms) – the teacher next door, who like me already has one installed, is concerned because in many of these classrooms the installation of the ActivBoard will cover-up the regular whiteboard in the room – this is because there is asbestos in the brick classroom wall – so to install the boards without having to call out a hazmat team they screw it into the existing whiteboard. So why the concern? He is afraid we will be running around doing “just-in-time” training for teachers that are going to be thrust in one day from using markers to using software and hardware with minimal training.

They have had some training – but it was 2 months ago when the boards were originally supposed to be installed. We are having once-a-month training the rest of the year, but that won’t begin for a few weeks – so it should be interesting. Fortunately, the teachers involved are enthusiastic about teaching with the boards and integrating technology into their teaching and 2 of us have been using them since the beginning of school and are comfortable with tech. We have teachers in grades 1 through 6 involved and we are being researched as a focus group by the local university. I have my running shoes ready – I’ll keep you posted.

Posted on

What’s Happened To Meaningful, Instructive, Constructive, Respectful Discussion?

I have been a contributor to a discussion about the role of teachers, styles of teaching and accountability on another blogger’s blog this past week. It is unfortunate that the discussion became just another example of how discourse has become contentious and too often therefore meaningless and non-productive.

In this case a few that contributed comments late in the discussion misrepresented themselves as just wanting clarification on sentiments that were voiced. These contributors never identified themselves as having an agenda or the fact that they support a specific program for teaching. The comments they posted became condescending and shrill. Eventually the blogger was fed up with their use of his blog to push their agenda and attitudes and he attempted to cut them off. Next they used their blog to name call, bully and smear – and encouraged others to do the same.

This so obviously mirrors what is going on, mainly in politics, but increasingly also into daily discourse on many subjects these days about not having real discussion – but instead a tendency to attack and bully if someone doesn’t agree or shift their opinion to yours. This has dark implications in my opinion for fruitful discussion about important topics – for me as a teacher of course, discussion that could lead to meaningful changes and attitudes about what it means to teach and learn.

This brings me back to Stephen Downes post – Sameness – that I posted about awhile back.

“It seems to me that one thing educational theory has been unable to address is the possibility of multiple theoretical perspectives, the possibility that there is no one taxonomy, set of standards, methodology, etc., that will define The Way to do education.

Certainly, any approach to learning theory that suggests that an experiment can be conducted in (say) a double-blind model in order to test hypotheses in terms of (say) achievement of learning outcomes in my view demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the enquiry.

We need to move beyond consensus, beyond sameness.”

Learning is messy.

Posted on

Effective Utilization of the Activboard “Ruler Tool”

As I prepped my “into” for the “Titanic” story in our reader, I had an idea of how to demonstrate to my fourth graders the properties of icebergs. Specifically that nine-tenths of an iceberg is underwater. I had noted that my students knew very little about measurement – and I was dying to use the cool “ruler tool” on my new Activboard whiteboard.

Monday I handed out a plastic cup of water and an ice cube to each group. Next I had them measure the length and width of their ice cube (per my whiteboard demonstration). Then I had them drop their ice cube in the cup and measure how much of the cube was above water (am I good or what?).

Now, here is where you have to understand my thinking. You see, the ice cubes had only been out of the freezer for about 5 minutes, and they only needed to be in the water for about 30 seconds, and ice cubes in a drink last for minutes … so no problem. I did warn the students that they would have to measure quickly, so I wandered around watching students line their rulers up with the surface of the water – “to get a good accurate measurement.”

Not 20 seconds went by before the first defeatist comment was uttered. “Mr. Crosby, it’s hard to see to measure,” a quitter exclaimed. “I know, I know, but you can do it,” I encouraged (Plus, come on, I demo-ed this with the “ruler tool” on the Activboard – you can’t do better than that! … Can you?)

My first clue that there was a problem was when a student fished out a sliver of ice the size of a fingernail clipping and tried to measure it while he held it between his fingers – and it disappeared! The next clue was the group that exclaimed, “We can’t find our ice anymore!” as they scanned the iceberg free water in their cup. (Did I mention I used the “ruler tool” to demonstrate this?)

At this point I busted up. I busted up laughing because not only did I miscalculate how long the ice would last, but the kids were trying so hard to do a good job, and some seemed afraid they had done something wrong – the forlorn looks on their faces told the story.

Fortunately, I had several extra pieces of ice (Hey, I’m not a total screw up!) and we successfully measured one and used it as “The class measurement.” We did the math and came out with the fraction 2/20 which reduces to 1/10 of the cube that stuck above the surface – which is just what part of an iceberg floats above the surface of the water.

So, when the picture of the iceberg came up during the story, the kids were able to imagine how much was underwater.

Learning is messy!

Posted on

Report: Technology in Schools: What the Research Says

DSC00001.JPG

I have used this blog on several occasions, and others in the edblogosphere have used their blogs to ask where the examples and research are that support integrating tech into the school curriculum? I have my own experience to tell me that tech along with project-based, problem-based approaches is valuable. In my opinion especially for “At-Risk” students, a strong field trip program along with the arts and physical education to build the schema so lacking otherwise should also be part of the curriculum. But, where is the support for that approach outside of those of us that have embraced it on our own? There has been for quite awhile research available that supports tech integration, but mainly in writing and a few other areas. Now comes a “study of studies,” that shows promise for tech as a valuable educational tool.

The report – Technology in Schools: What the Research Says
discusses many valuable approaches including: Social networking, Gaming Interactive Whiteboards, PDA’s, and 1:1 learning initiatives. When discussing social networking the report states:

“Educators are finding that reflective dialog augments learning. Social networking accelerates learning and is facilitated by technology. Students are highly motivated to communicate via technology be it text messaging, email, instant messaging, talking, or videoconferencing. Social networking via technology can connect students to a broad range of interactivity that sharpens and extends thinking and piques intellectual curiosity.”

About Gaming:

“The power behind games is in the concentrated attention of the user to an environment that continuously reinforces knowledge, scaffolds learning, provides leveled, appropriate challenges, and provides context to the learning of content.”

This report is not about saying that tech is the magic bullet – it makes the point that:

“Researchers find that extracting the full learning return from a technology investment requires much more than the mere introduction of technology with software and web resources aligned with the curriculum. It requires the triangulation of content, sound principles of learning, and high-quality teaching—all of which must be aligned with assessment and accountability.”

And:

“…it is an enabling force behind globalization, knowledge work, and entrepreneurship, and thus students must understand the role it plays in transforming political, social, cultural, civic, and economic systems around the world.”

Technology in Schools: What the Research Says – is downloadable as an 18 page PDF file including 2 pages of research citations.

Posted on

Newsflash! You Can Go Back In Time, I just Did!

We attended Back-To-School Night at my oldest daughter’s high school last night. She is in the pre – IB program so all her classes are basically advanced placement type classes. It was interesting to say the least in light of the recent spate of posts in the edblogosphere about the turtle-pace of change in how school is done. We spent 10 minutes in each of her teachers’ classes to hear about what they would be doing and their expectations.

Out of 6 classrooms 4 had whiteboards (non-digital) but 2 classrooms, including the room where Formal Geometry is taught, had blackboards and they all had 20 year old overhead projectors. The geometry teacher lamented that she is almost out of the colored chalk she bought, and she is hoping she can get whiteboards installed “…maybe this year!” because the chalk is cracking the skin on her hands and markers have more vibrant colors. So here is a high school math teacher in 2006 excited about POSSIBLY getting a whiteboard installed in her room so she can use markers! To her that is a technological advance. The biology teacher did have a 19 inch TV hooked up to his new desktop computer so he can show Powerpoint presentations and video from his computer which he proudly demonstrated for us. (This demonstrates the fallout of Nevada always being 49th or 50th in per pupil funding in the country).

Ian Jukes tells about his father returning to his high school for his 50th reunion and finding it hadn’t changed – he even found a desk with his initials carved in it – he would have been at home here.

This school is very diverse which we really appreciate, but it also concerns me. Our daughter has wireless access with a laptop at home and parents that have a fair amount of tech savvy. But many of the students have zero access. The one theme that ran through the night was that the school invested in new desktop computers and PDAs so that teachers can keep their “Edline” accounts updated so parents have access to how their child is doing – which is great for us. But what about the students that have parents that have no tech savvy, no tech access? Many of these parents have no significant school experience so that even if they did have access to this constantly updated information about their child’s progress, they don’t have the parenting skills, general knowledge or resources to use the information to really help their kids.

The teachers were not seemingly concerned about the lack of access to technology (or the lack of knowledge about educational technology) and they feel they have a great program – and my sense was that all the teachers we met seemed very competent overall. But I couldn’t help but feel that this lack of knowledge of educational technology and the implications of that are like someone who has cancer, but doesn’t have symptoms yet.

Posted on

Society May Be Willing To Invest In Children If They Are Seen As An Immediate Value To Society

We of the edbloggosphere have bemoaned the snail’s pace progress in educational change. One of the issues I believe is that kids are perceived by society as only having the potential to contribute to society sometime in the future. If kids were appreciated for what they can contribute now, and that “contribution” was valued by society, perhaps society would be more willing to “invest” more substantially in them at an earlier age. One of the transformative aspects of technology is that it allows students to produce finished products that others have access to and can use: Other students, other members of the local community and members of the global community.

Too often I’m afraid, kids are seen as sponges sucking up resources while at the same time being responsible for being noisy, tagging, rude, shoplifting, littering … you get the idea. Let’s get kids on the news because they are doing uplifting, valuable things.

I try to have my students participate in at least one project a year that is tied to standards, but also provides a service or function for the community at large. We have made a web page for a non-profit animal park (if you want to pull at peoples’ heartstrings what could be better? A project involving little kids and defenseless animals, many of which are cute), made curriculum based videos downloadable on the internet, made a public service announcement about diversity and a video about bullying and getting along, and more.

Each of these projects has been huge curriculum and learning wise – research, writing, learning about technology by using it, talking to experts in emails and in person as guest speakers … you can fill in the rest.

But one easily overlooked aspect of these projects is that they live and breathe. All of our video projects are still downloadable on the web, and they are downloaded on average 30 times per month. Our “Don’t Laugh At Me” video is downloaded hundreds of times per month off our web site and it is also available on Apple Computer’s web site.

Past students come back to visit me from time to time and they always mention how they still watch the video they were part of (I had a former student who is 19 now come see me this week, he is the first person in his family EVER to graduate 6th grade, he has now graduated high school and has been accepted at a culinary school which will be paid for by the restaurant where he works. The first thing he mentioned was the Animal Ark web page he worked on, which unfortunately was recently taken down, mostly because after 7 years Animal Ark has their own professionally made site).

So the educational value for students is obvious, but what if student work filled some of the many needs of society. What if the taxes we pay that go to education had a payback (besides a well educated public, like that isn’t enough, right?) for society? If kids were seen as contributors to society NOW, perhaps taxpayers would be more willing to invest in them NOW.

To me it makes sense anyhow. Learning by doing real work, not work that gets tossed or put in a drawer, but work that is utilized by its producers and the world at large just seems totally appropriate. Hard work is used instead of tossed. Needs are met. Kids are given productive things to do that use what they’ve learned and contribute to their learning. Think of it as “The Peace Corp for kids.” Imagine kids being able to show up for their college interview or a job interview with a portfolio of the projects they’ve worked on over the years.

What better way to showcase our students and the power of project-based, problem-based learning, supported by technology and Web 2.0 applications than community service projects?

So teachers and students, look around locally and globally and find inspiration for projects (using tech or not, but I bet they usually will) that fit what you are supposed to be learning in science and social studies and whatever, and make the world a better place while bettering yourself and your students at the same time.

That is the best “Messy Learning” I can imagine.

Posted on

A Little More Ranting

After experiences and conversations of late I felt this needed to be restated:

The key with technology use in education is that IT NOT be about teaching technology. That is one of the big hurdles people have to get over. I believe that when you feel inadequate about using tech (or even just not comfortable with it), hearing someone say that it is not about teaching tech as a subject, but teaching tech as a tool doesn’t mean a lot. The same goes for project-based, problem based learning – I perk right up to listen when someone mentions it – but probably 80% of the time when they describe a project they did with their class it really isn’t a project but more akin to a report or simple research project where they used the computers in the lab to do a small part of the research or print out some pictures – which at least is a start and I always encourage it enthusiastically – but it is not a project that is really anything different than you could do with a lot of old National Geographics as your fodder for photos and a pair of scissors (were you taught as a child that National Geographics were sacred and not to be cut up like I was? Well … then you can use a scanner instead of scissors).

In addition, when teachers don’t understand that tech’s power as a tool is what is importatnt for our students, they see tech as an add-on curriculum and their attitude is understandably negative.

Another big hurdle to clear is the notion that technology is an option or that, “The kids will be fine, I don’t get all this tech stuff, but the kids do.” Wrong – there is plenty that students need to learn about tech even if for some it is more about effective, appropriate and ethical use of a powerful tool. And just because they are “connected” 24/7 and can set the features on any cell phone doesn’t mean they know how to use tech effectively as a learning/sharing knowledge tool. A pre-schooler can use a pencil to have fun scribbling and drawing and maybe even the early stages of writing letters and words, but they aren’t prepared to use it as a learning/sharing knowledge tool beyond the very basic. AND not all kids have access to many tools outside of cell phones, which seem to be the one piece of hardware that transcends socioeconomic groups.

Wes Fryer sums it up nicely:

“We are talking about pioneers of digital teaching using blended learning methodologies from a growing menu of tools– selecting those which are appropriate to the content, audience, and task at hand. A tall order to be sure, but one we must collaboratively strive to fill for our students– who are in the final analysis our customers, rather than the “products” of our educational institutions.”