Synthesizing Education

When you were a kid and you wanted to make friends, how did you go about it? Whichever way you went, your pool of potential friendships was automatically restricted to those that you came in physical contact with. No one jumped on the phone every day with a friend, chatted up for a while, and never had a face-to-face encounter with him/her. When you did make friends, you certainly had disagreements simply because the restrictions of those you met did not guarantee finding friends with similar interests and opinions on all topics. Hence, you learned to compromise and consider alternative views while developing an ability to backup your argument with evidence that would convince your friend otherwise. If you were wrong, you found out. If you couldn’t compromise to some extent you certainly didn’t have a lot of friends.

Here is my point: those days may be over to a large extent as kids are now capable of creating relationships with people that they may never meet in person. Twitter, Facebook, and other social networking sites allow for kids to develop friendships with individuals they never meet, which has a number of positive and negative implications on the way society will develop and how people will interact in the future. Of course they will continue to cultivate relationships outside of the virtual world, but the reality is that they don’t have to be as strong because as soon as a student goes home he/she can jump on the internet and come in contact with people of very similar views and ideas. If they start to disagree too much with each other they can simply “unfollow” or “unfriend” the person and not have to deal with an alternative viewpoint.

My contention is that developing these types of relationships is one reason for why students spend so much time online and are glued to a computer. More importantly,  they no longer feel a need to work diligently with each other to solve discrepancies in opinions simply because they have an endless supply of candidates that will agree with their point of view with no effort whatsoever.

Two questions:

1. Is there any merit to this line of thinking?
2. If so, does this hamper their ability to think critically about topics and offer an alternative viewpoint when confronted with debates in the classroom and life?

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

There are some things that kids can only experience in high school, and it is important we afford these experiences to students as an option regardless of the small percentage that we believe it actually effects. Those of you that follow me regularly are aware that I am a big advocate for high schools that differentiate themselves to individual learners. It is important that we continue to afford kids a place to participate in Model UN, be a member of the yearbook staff, compete in the academic decathlon, and be active as student-athletes.

If a student wants to graduate high school in three years then they should have the opportunity to do so. If that same student wants to continue to participate in some school-related function, he/she should still be able to do so while starting a post-secondary education. We must maintain the vision that K-12 education should be some of the happiest and most influential years in a person’s life. Part of that is understanding what is offered in that setting that kids don’t get anywhere else.

The prom might be important to someone.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

I sincerely hope that no one thinks that students know they are “digital natives”.  In fact, they may not be simply because schools have done such a great job of NOT allowing them to develop that skill set. The reality is that the true potential of being a digital native is completely untapped in schools under the current model and structure.  We reference digital natives and just assume that their abilities to be comfortable in using technology will happen simply with a wave of the hand and a student’s own intuition. It doesn’t work this way. You need to practice to be good at something the same way that Michael Jordan had to practice to be great at basketball and Mozart to compose music.

Kids are great at using cell phones, iTouches, and other handheld devices specifically because they have them at their fingertips at all times. Educators who take these devices are doing a great job of showing how their old (and antiquated) values of education are in contrast with the reality of the world kids currently live in. Here’s a crazy idea: instead of taking the device away, find a way to incorporate it into classroom discussion and TEACH the kids how to use it appropriately. I am fairly certain that THAT lesson is more important than the extra worksheet they’re working on or the movie from 1983.

In my mind, being a digital native only holds value if you are surrounded by the technology and offered opportunities to develop that knowledge base. Do you really think that a student who attends a 1:1 school is not exponentially more proficient in utilizing technology applications than the student who uses technology once a week?

Start being logical. Stop taking devices away.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Warning: This post may come across rather brash if you use any of these sayings. It’s no problem. Just stop using them.

Educators and the educational system are really good at using rhetoric to the point of where everyone starts to just tune it out. Still, some believe that they are being rather effective even if what they are saying makes absolutely no sense to begin with or makes them look plain dumb. Here are some examples.

“Who Wants to Leave A Child Behind?”- Just plain dumb. I heard this for the first time as a first-year teacher during a conference. Evidently, some think that using this statement creates “buy-in” because they are poking fun at NCLB and trying to appeal to our emotional side. What the same people don’t realize is that everyone sees through this like a screen door, and it has no effect on getting us to be more interested in whatever you are selling. If you use this, maybe YOU should be left behind.

“How long into the 21st Century will it be before we realize it’s here?”- This strikes a particular nerve with me. Yes, I know that some people are so wise that they need to point out that we are in the 21st century. Should we then start preparing for the 22nd century? I promise you, the 21st century didn’t sneak up on anyone. This one kind of reminds me of the idiot who always pulls out the “see you next year” joke on December 31st.

The Grand Prize Goes To:

“We’re preparing kids for jobs that don’t exist yet.”- No kidding. Do you think that education has ever NOT been preparing kids for jobs that don’t exist yet? I mean it would be pretty funny if we were training people to use Gutenberg’s Printing Press and all, but something tells me we all know better. In addition, just using the statement diminishes the value of what kids learn in school because if we are preparing them for jobs that don’t exist, how the hell do we know that what we are doing will even be relevant? Because we put them on a computer?

I really mean for this post to come across in good fun (though I know some won’t take it that way). At some point, education needs to stop talking about these concepts and begin to move on them. Nothing that I posted above should have been Earth-shattering or revolutionary in 1990 nonetheless 2010, and since people started using them there has been minimal change to the structure and curriculum of school.

We can talk all we want, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to come true.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Call me cynical, but there is something unbelievably funny to me about the fact that people scream about celebrating individual differences among kids yet we want every one of them to be in a specific grade by a specific year and pass the same test at the exact same time. Doesn’t this make you laugh as well? Seriously. Think about how idiotic that sounds when considering good old common sense and logic.

We have politicians, parents, and educators all talking about differentiation and the ability for students to grow at their own pace, but we put every possible parameter in place to try and ensure that they all get to the same goal at the same exact time. Then, if they don’t, we chastise them and talk about how they need “remediation” while including the added stigma that everyone else has moved on to the next grade and they haven’t. What if “staying back” really meant that you just needed a little more time to ensure understanding of a concept rather than label you as “dumb” or “slow”?

If we truly believe in differentiation and the idea that all students have different needs (emotional, social & academic) and abilities then we need to start considering ways to remove the constraints that prevent deviation from the traditional system. This means stop assuming that every kid who is “x” years old must be in “x” grade. Stop thinking that a marking period is the same length of time for every student. Start using the same passion as when you talk about how “standardized testing assumes every kid is a widget” and start applying that to the day to day activities of school.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Part of the problem with the discussion of “parental involvement” is that when educators and parents discuss the concept they are talking about different things. When a parent hears about the need for “parental involvement” in his or her child’s school, the amount of anxiety and apprehension must be devastating. Imagine you are the single parent working two jobs and you hear a teacher or administrator call on parents for stronger involvement in their child’s education. It’s even worse when you don’t understand the differences between what the educators are asking for and your own perceptions.

This occurs when their son or daughter is at an early age and only deteriorates and becomes more frustrating as the child progresses through school.

Parents: They hear the phrase “parental involvement” and they think about coming in to help out around the classroom, showing up for class celebrations and conferences. In short, parents always maintain this perception that in order to be involved in a child’s education, he or she has to physically be in the school building. That’s why it is so frustrating for them when they hear about “boosting parental involvement” and “getting parents more active in their child’s education”.

Educators: Educators want more parental involvement and for parents to be actively involved in a child’s education. To an educator, this means:

• making sure that the child has a light to sit under as they work on homework
• urging the child to share what they did in school and discussing what he/she learned
• making sure that the child eats breakfast before coming to school and packs a healthy lunch or has the ability to get one
• Articulating the importance of education and its value in the child’s future
• Checking in with a brief e-mail to see how the child is doing in school

The key is that parents often perceive their involvement in school to be a physical presence. Most educators cringe when they even consider this possibility. As educators, we need to be extremely clear when we throw around terms like “parental involvement” to ensure that everyone is talking about the same thing.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

One of the problems with the development of project and problem-based learning is that students are given too much structure in how to complete these types of activities. It is amusing to me how we talk about how much we care about student success and preparing them for the future, but we also provide them with a step-by-step explanation of what is required to produce a “quality” product. Perhaps students would be better served if simply said to them: “Here’s the problem. Have at it.” Instead, we provide them with a six page assignment sheet complete with rubric and talking points so that they basically have the answer in front of them.

Maybe we have gone so far overboard with these overly structured assignments that kids never learn the ability to function and think critically without a detailed explanation and process to do so? Project/problem Based Learning is NOT the problem; teachers and administrators who overly structure assignments are.

 I can remember when I was in high school, and I had an English teacher who used to say things like: “Write me a five-paragraph essay on the book”. Then he used to tell us about how when we went to college we would be faced with these types of assignments all the time and how we needed to start to construct our own thoughts without tons of guidance and explanation. When I got to college I only had one professor who did this, but I was definitely ready for it. Now we provide kids with every possible crutch and explanation because “kids need to know what is expected of them at all times.”

Maybe we need to start convincing people that the short term pain they feel of not earning an “A” on the assignment or having to devise the project themselves will be superseded by the long term gain of being able to think without someone holding their hand?

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

By my non-expert opinion, the bar is about 23.4 miles high off the ground (when you consider all the garbage we pile under it). Educators are always talking about “raising the bar” in education and emphasizing “high standards” for students partially because it is sacrilegious to NOT say such things. Perhaps we are just focusing so much on “raising the bar” that we never take the time to see if we are actually teaching effectively enough to reach the bar.

I am just waiting for the day when we all say, “The bar is high enough!”  On that same day I plan on hearing a campaign speech from a politician that he or she is “going to raise taxes to record highs”.

Have you ever heard phrases like “when pigs fly” or “when hell freezes over”? Pick one.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

I am currently reading The Dumbest Generation by Mark Bauerlein and, even though I find him to have faulty research (like using NAEP scores) and that he overstates his point (which means he knows no one is listening), I still consider where he is coming from. His second chapter discusses bibliophiles and the diminishing value of books among kids. The thoughts below are mine, but they were spurred by his discussion.

Think about this question:

“Are you reading that book for school or for pleasure?”

I am willing to bet that you have heard this question exactly or some variation of it during your time in schools. I bet a lot of us have even asked students this specific question before. Does it make any sense? Of course it does! I am sure that we were all good students when we were in school and jumped up and down with excitement when we were given “Great Expectations” to read, right? I know I didn’t.

Is there any reason why we should continue to perpetuate this question and line of thinking by giving kids books to read that they are inherently disconnected with and disdain? In this day and age, I would venture to say that more students are reading the “Spark Notes” version than the actual book.

Technology has provided kids with an opportunity to find ways around reading these mainstays in schools, and I am not just referring to books from English class either. The reality is that if the internet had existed in its current form twenty years ago those kids would have been doing the same thing. Of course Cliff Notes and the like have existed for some time now, but the internet just provides students easier access to different types of study guides and work-arounds.

How about working to make what kids read in school more relevant and engaging? Shouldn’t kids be reading for pleasure regardless of if it is assigned by a teacher or not? Maybe we could do something really crazy and give them a choice of books to read?

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Here is an article by Thomas Friedman from the January 10, 2010 New York Times. Its title is It’s All About The Schools, and he discusses the role that the West has in improving school systems in Yemen. Below are some notable excerpts:

“They spoke fondly of U.S. schools that were based on merit, taught them to think freely and prepared them with the skills to thrive.”

“…we should help Yemen build 50 new modern schools that teach science and math and critical thinking — to boys and girls.”

“…Yemen was an easy target. Uncritically accepting of the “truths” of Wahabism became the core curriculum in many Yemeni schools, Haddad added, and “it destroyed the opportunity to build the basic skills necessary to train the right labor force — skills like problem-solving, communication, critical thinking, debate, organization and teamwork.”

Friedman goes on to make several other points including the ability for Soviet Marxism to produce radicals AND some first-rate intellectuals. The skills and traits that are emphasized above are some of the main components of the American education system that we need to capitalize on in order to produce quality students. The United States is a country that was founded, in some part, on the ability to think freely and express ideas. Individuals like Thomas Jefferson believed that education was the key to good government. The education he was talking about was drastically different, but it was appropriate for the context in which he lived. We too must look at the education we are providing students and assess if it is appropriate for the time and place in which we live.

It is also important to note the undertone of the article: in addition to promoting academics, schools should be working diligently to produce quality citizens that contribute positively to a society. We can never lose sight of that.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.