Synthesizing Education

Isn’t it fascinating how there is more reading material and alternative viewpoints available to students, teachers, administrators, and society in general today than any other time period in the history of the world yet we continue to perpetuate a system of compliance and uniformity instead of questioning and original thought?

Not really. I would surmise that the more sources that have become available are also a product of the replication of data and material rather than the development of new ideas. Just because someone creates content doesn’t necessarily mean that the content is “new”.

We need to continually emphasize to our kids the importance of generating new content that synthesizes and extends upon information already available.

Simply completing a “paper” or “report” that summarizes and reiterates information isn’t good enough. Simply “creating” content isn’t good enough. It has to be original and encompass a wide variety of viewpoints and information.

Until the point at which we start to stress this idea, we are going to be creating content that is continually “more of the same” rather than new and inquisitive.

NOTE: This was a 5 a.m. brain dump so I apologize if it wasn’t exactly clear or specific, but it is a work in progress. As usual, your thoughts and criticism are always appreciated.

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

Recently, I have come across a number of articles that discuss text messaging and questions regarding the “danger” it poses to literacy. Then I was going through my Google Reader and read a post on “A Plethora of Technology” titled “Text Messaging and Literacy” by Barry Bachenheimer where he asks the following:

The key question is:  Does text messaging have a role in learning (particularly in school) to help learning, especially in the area of literacy?

His question deserves a lot of attention from educators, and one word comes to mind when I think of the role of teachers and text-messaging: adaptability.

First, we need to come to grips with the fact that almost all teens are text-messaging. The Pew Research Center states that:

Fully 72% of all teens — or 88% of teen cell phone users — send text messages, up from 51% of in 2006. Among all teens, text messaging has now overtaken every other common form of interaction with their friends. (posted here)

So now that we have the “inevitability factor” out of the way, I think we need to start making some other realizations including this point from recent research:

According to Mr Raval’s small-scale study, which focused on 20 youngsters, children have developed an ability to switch between two forms of language when texting or writing standard English.

Pupils were given a spelling test and conducted two writing exercises designed to replicate situations where they might normally text, such as describing something they had done the previous day, held in formal classroom conditions.

Mr Raval said: “The fear that has been put across in the media is that children don’t understand the need to code switch – that is, switch between standard English grammar for an exam or essay and what is acceptable when you are communicating on a social level. In fact, they are capable of that switch, just as bi- or tri-lingual children might speak English at school and a mother or father tongue at home.”

While the text-experienced children wrote much less than those without mobiles, concision was not necessarily a bad thing, he argued. “Whether that is a positive or negative effect is up for debate. It depends on the situation or the subject studied. A science exam might require brief answers which might not be appropriate in a literature exam.” (posted here)

So perhaps the problem isn’t “how” will text messaging and other forms of social media alter the way students communicate, but rather, “why” we have a need to teach students code-switching and making conscious decisions about when each of these two forms is justified.

This is a HUGE shift in the way that we teach kids. We can’t limit in-class pedagogy to strict adherence to formal language. We need to accept that a new language is being created, and there is responsibility for educators to teach students appropriate times for each genre. Simply ignoring text messaging is a violation of the oath that we take when we become teachers. Education isn’t locked into a specific time period or context where one line of thinking rules supreme, and we shouldn’t be treating our kids language use that way.

Do you write the same way Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence or speak in the fashion of Patrick Henry to the House of Burgesses?

Times change, and it is the responsibility of the educators NOT to neglect these changes, but rather, teach students to adapt so that they may be successful in the future.

Barry has also created a Wiki for his project where you can post information. Please be sure to stop by, drop him a couple of lines on your feelings, and keep this conversation going.

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

If your colleagues/staff reminds you of bobblehead dolls then they are probably teaching students to act like bobblehead dolls. These dolls (people) simply sway their head up and down in a mindless fashion when stimulated by an outside source without ever thinking about their actions or alternatives. Acting as a “cog” in the machine doesn’t foster learning; it prevents it. Teachers are supposed to be modeling critical thinking and advanced cognitive development for students.

If teachers do not think critically then neither will students.

Picture location credit

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

I hope all educators agree that there is a difference between memorizing and learning, and I really hope that ALL educators are striving for learning rather than memorizing.

I think the bigger issue at hand though is many people’s inability to tell the difference between the two and to identify when one or the other is being reinforced through a teacher’s instruction. The video below is part of a six-part series from Big Think that highlights the “Mystery of Memory”.

The four-minute video below is titled, “Can The Brain Really Store Experiences?” where Marcelo Magnasco goes into broad detail and makes connections to the birth of children as well as the first days of school.

After watching this, think about this question. Which of these is more important for kids in school: taking a test on the Revolutionary War or working diligently to save a historical site like the Trenton Barracks?

P.S. The whole series is great and offers a ton of relevant thought. Definitely check it out.

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

I truly enjoy reading the “Idea of The Day” from the New York Times, but today really got me thinking and, eventually, upset and annoyed. It discusses a study by Miller-McCune analyzing the effects of having large amounts of books in homes and its effect on educational achievement.

Here is an excerpt:

“Home library size has a very substantial effect on educational attainment, even adjusting for parents’ education, father’s occupational status and other family background characteristics,” reports the study, recently published in the journal Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. “Growing up in a home with 500 books would propel a child 3.2 years further in education, on average, than would growing up in a similar home with few or no books.

My problem is that this knowledge isn’t new nor are the implications of it some remarkable new level of knowledge. It’s known as the “Matthew Effect”. I think every educator would love for every student to go home and read books for pleasure, but there are other dynamics to consider before we declare that people should start building their libraries at home with the books that public libraries are scrapping en masse.

Here’s the quote from the article:

Of course, ours is a society where even local libraries are scrapping books en masse. Then again, maybe that’s where you go to stock up cheap.
[Miller-McCune]

This same article came out on a day where the Pew Research Center states that “fully 70% of Americans say they have faced one or more job or financially related problem in the past year…”

Two points to consider:

ITEM #1

We need to acknowledge the effect that books and extensive reading have on our kids but also be sensitive to the fact that recessions, like the one we are in, only further stratify socioeconomic classes of Americans. Would it be worthwhile for every student to have a library in his/her house and be surrounded by books? Absolutely, but go ahead and tell the family that is scrapping by that they should purchase discounted books from the local library. Survival is more important.

ITEM #2

There is constant discussion in educational circles about the relevance of books anymore. Should they be replaced with e-books? Are libraries outdated? Should they be replaced with technology labs that all have e-books in them?

Libraries are important and, possibly, one of the most underemphasized aspects of school. They deserve more attention and exposure from Kindergarten all the way to 12^th grade. Those libraries should be comprised of a multitude of media from books to e-readers to laptops and everything in-between. They should be open at all times so that students can be surrounded with knowledge that is both relevant and extemporaneous to the curricula of the district.

If we do not emphasize (notice I didn’t say preserve) our libraries and reading locations, then we are limiting the cognitive development of our students. There is no one genre, medium, or time to engage in reading, and regardless of technological advancements, reading will always be a cornerstone of learning.

This isn’t to say there aren’t other ways to learn or that everyone learns through reading, but it is almost impossible to life a happy and successful life without knowing how to read.

These are the big issues we need to tackle, and we need to consider all implications and repercussions as we do so.

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

Last Thursday I left on a field experience for the Teaching American History Grant that my district participates in with four others. I knew I was taking at least one day off from blogging (Friday), and I figured I could deal with that.

Come Friday night, I had amassed a piling of napkins and scraps of paper with thoughts, questions, and ideas on them from the previous two days. It felt rather liberating to just sit around, think, and not have to summarize on any particular thoughts. So much so that I took off Saturday as well and only worked on my post for Cooperative Catalyst (Start Doing The Minimum…And The Maximum) on Sunday.

So here is my point and the connection to our every day profession working with kids: just because they are “on vacation” doesn’t mean they are on vacation. I think about the fact that I wasn’t posting or writing and am relieved that the act of learning means enough to me that I didn’t stop. I kept reading, thinking, conversing, and questioning. I think that this “unconcious learning” or life-long learning or authentic learning is what every educator strives for, and we all need to come to grips with the fact that it probably doesn’t happen in the classroom.

So it hit me today: at some point, we need to stop emphasizing learning as an act and start emphasizing learning as an unconscious process. Always ask your kids what “cool” things they learn when they aren’t in front of you, and when they give you some factoid from class ask them for something more relevant. Ask them to bring in articles and things that interest them that have absolutely nothing to do with the day-to-day operations from school.

We can’t be satisfied until the point that kids love learning so much that they perform the task willingly….even when they aren’t thinking about it.

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

I’m reading “Collapse” by Jared Diamond, and I am amazed by the complexity of the issues he is discussing yet the clarity he maintains in doing so. In fact, I would argue that utilizing Diamond’s framework to dissect world civilizations is more advanced than any curriculum framework I’ve ever seen AND more engaging to think about.

He lists five factors that contribute to the “collapse” of civilizations:

1. Environmental damage
2. Climate change
3. Hostile neighbors
4. Friendly trade partners
5. Societal responses to its problems

The five factors above can be used to teach an entire curriculum in any historical discipline. Surely, there are frameworks such as this that exist for every discipline if we go in search of them. The degree of complexity and in-depth learning that would result from using such frameworks would, I believe, increase retention and passion of students for topics of study. In addition, it would provide an increased opportunity for interdisciplinary collaboration by allowing for teachers to compare frameworks and assess overlap.

I don’t believe that kids lack of knowledge is “dumbing down” the curriculum or the use of standardized tests is (though it isn’t helping). I contend that there are several factors contributing to this perception, and one of which is described above.

Cut the irrelevant factoids from the curriculum and focus on what kids really need to know.

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

I read an article today that appeared on Popular Science titled, “Obama Wants to Know What 21st Century Technological Challenges You’d Like Tackled First”. Sounds like a great deal right? Go ahead and submit an idea to the White House when you submit your taxes on April 15th. This isn’t something new though. The original call went out February 15th (according to the article), and The Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP) was even kind enough to include some examples of what they were looking for:

The eight OSTP challenges were: finishing a complete DNA sequencing of every cancer, producing solar cells as cheap as paint, developing a lightweight bulletproof vest that can stop an armor-piercing round, designing education software as effective as a teacher and as engaging as a video game, inventing a prosthesis so advanced that a someone who lost their hands could play the piano, assembling a computer that can process a million trillion calculations per second, and building an automatic, real-time translator for the world’s major languages.

How does everyone feel about this? I understand it’s an example, but does anyone else see a problem with our government tossing out this suggestion?

So here’s my “I’m going to give Obama & co. the benefit of the doubt” point. If the goal is to provide students and teachers with another means of developing skills in students as an augmentation to the functions that teachers traditionally serve then I am all for it. Programs like “Read 180″ provide another opportunity for teachers to expand on the instruction they provide to students. In addition, adaptive technologies for students with disabilities have been available for some time and, from what special education teachers tell me, provide a great service to their students.

So…how far are you willing to read between the lines here (if at all)?

My feeling: I’m OK with them throwing this out and even trying to accomplish the feat so long as they realize that the social and emotional functions that a teacher serves will never be replaced by a machine. As with everything else, I look at it [optimistically] as an opportunity for us to expand our teacher tool sets and provide students with another service  and angle to meet the needs of all learners.

Am I too optimistic?

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

An article was tweeted today by Dr. Kevin D. Washburn  (author of  “The Architecture of Learning“) from “Scientific Blogging” that discusses why informed people make poor choices.

Consider this excerpt:

Despite understanding the long term benefits of eating healthy and exercising,  people often forgo these potential gains for the immediate satisfaction of a big mac and a night of cable TV.

This has a lot to do with the development of the “Need It Now Generation” of which more and more of society is becoming a part of every day, but the researchers expand on this idea with the following comments:

In a real-life scenario, a student who stayed home to study and then learned he had missed a fun party would be less likely to study next time in a similar situation — even if that option provides more long-term benefits.

So perhaps it isn’t the fact that your kids are lazy or apathetic that they don’t study for your exam the next day. They simply have recurring proof that their efforts to do well the first time didn’t provide them with enough real-time data to make the same decision next time. One would think that having constant access to online gradebooks would provide a stronger incentive and evidence to study, but that isn’t the case.

The article above describes scientific proof that explains why students actually unlearn to study. We can’t find fault with them not studying unless we are consciously making decisions every day that emphasize long-term rewards over instant gratification. Again, this comes down to an individual’s ability to control their “spotlight” of concentration.

People base their decisions upon what is in their best interest at that given point in time. That’s why people cheat on their spouse, that’s why they eat Big Macs, and that’s why kids don’t study.

So my question becomes: how can we provide students with constant proof that the fruits of their studying and learning will vastly exceed the joy and happiness they receive from experiences of instant gratification? We know how important studying is and learning is because we have had the oppurtunity to live through it and observe its first-hand importance. Kids have not.

This is not a suggestive tone towards providing students with bribery to do well in school. Quite the opposite. One thing that I am taking away from this article is that, I think, the characteristics described by the authors are learned behaviors. This means that we need to develop ways to provide students with strategies that promote the benefits of long-term rewards.

I’m a big believer that anything behavioral can be altered if the appropriate conditions are set. My answer to the question above: spend more time talking with your students about the rewards of patience, self-regulation, and long term advantages. Teach them to visualize these ideals and understand that life doesn’t always provide us with immediate answers. Will it work? I have no idea, but it’s better than yelling and screaming at them everytime they don’t study.

All I am coming away with right now is a scientific explanation of why some kids don’t study. Until the point at which I give up Big Macs, I can’t fault them.

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

This TED video was sent to me by Sarah Joy Albrecht (@mrsalbrecht) this morning, and I am simply memorized by the way in which 12-year old Adora Svitak clearly articulates her vision of how adults can learn from kids. I particularly like her emphasis on trust and the development of “childish thinking” versus the restrictive attitude that most adults emphasize. She also conveys the (true) belief that teachers underestimate the potential of kids.

It’s interesting to hear the difference in what she experienced as a kid and found “fun” as opposed to what most people believe about the need for “kids to be kids”. Maybe instead of deciding what is fun for kids, we should let them experience a wide variety of items and let THEM decide what is fun? A novel idea, I know.

By the way. At 12 years old, she is able to create, and utilize Prezi. Why aren’t you?

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