You & Your Students Matter

After reading the article shown above (during my lunch hour), I find it readily apparent that the issues affecting education are much broader and far-reaching than the current situation we are facing in Oklahoma. (I'm sure this is not a surprise to anyone). This article does an excellent job to highlight the myriad issues facing educators today. Even when we have an educator (Arne Duncan) running the show from the Top, it seems that the situation continues to get worse.

So what are educators and education advocates to do? How do we change the system? What recourse do classroom teachers have? How can administrators encourage teachers to stay and keep up the good fight?

I certainly don't have the answers, but I want to send a note of encouragement to my educator friends:

• Keep working to build deep relationships with your students. That matters. That's counts. 
• You may be the only stable person in your students' lives. 
• Your classroom may be the only safe place students have right now.
• Your students are people. They are more than a number. More than a score. More than a statistic. 
• You are more than a formula
• You matter. 
• You have influence. 
• You can make a difference, even on the days when you feel like you aren't.

Often attributed to Albert Einstein, others credit noted psychologist William Bruce Cameron with the following quote:

Not everything that can be counted counts.Not everything that counts can be counted.

The love you show toward your students is literally immeasurable.

John 15:12 “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you…”

The case for the elimination of high-stakes testing

Our legislature in Oklahoma is considering eliminating the EOI Tests. To be clear, this would not get rid of ALL tests, just the end-of-instruction exams (EOI). Currently, there is SO MUCH legislation, i.e. Big Government, that teachers are not allowed to be professionals. By that I mean the government is telling teachers (like me) that the 4 years of educator preparation we did in college, does not qualify us to assess whether or not our students have learned the standards adequately. What if I have a master’s degree in curriculum and instruction? Nope. “We still don’t trust you to judge whether or not your students learned what they should in your class.” Okay. How about a doctorate? Nope. We, as legislators (NOT EDUCATORS) feel as though our system will be a better judge of your students’ learning. High-stakes testing is simply another way for the government to dictate what I can and can’t do (as a teacher). It always makes me laugh when the very people who are against big government are the same ones who want to legislate students and teachers to death with unfunded mandates for any number of issues in education.

Additionally, these tests effectively cease all instruction in Oklahoma schools by the first week of April. So we are using the last 8 weeks of school just for testing. While this may sound absurd (it is) and incomprehensible, when you have half of your class pulled out for 3 days in a row to test on an EOI for one subject (remember there are 7 of these exams for each student) and then they need to use your computers to administer those tests during the next week, and then the other half of your class is pulled out the following week, you have lost 3 weeks of instruction and that only accounts for 2 tests out of 7. Fortunately, I was able to work around that because I taught a non-testable subject, but the strategies I employed to continue instruction would not work for everyone, so what ends up happening is no instruction.

If we are testing for about 8 weeks, out of 180 instructional days in the school year, we are taking 40 of them (5 days x 8 weeks) - which accounts for almost 25 PERCENT of all the instructional days we have - to administer high stakes tests.

In Oklahoma, the mandate is that students must pass 4 of the 7 EOI tests to get a diploma, meaning if they only pass 3 tests, instead of a diploma, those students get a certificate of completion. This dooms that student to a minimum wage job. To be able to live and pay your bills in Oklahoma City, you must make approximately $13.00/hr. So these students will be making about ½ of what they need to make to just to live minimally. Where is that other ½, needed to augment their earned wage, going to come from? It comes from government assistance, e.g. food stamps, welfare, etc. If our education system fails these students - students who may already be predisposed to failure in education because of the low socio-economic level they have grown up in - what then is the choice for them to make a living? Get that minimum wage job and take government assistance, thereby placing their children in the same cycle of poverty? It is possible that could be the only option they have.

We are better than this. As someone who trains teachers, I remind teachers (and myself) that teaching practice can ALWAYS be improved. If we don't improve our schools (and I'm saying that ONE way to do that is to eliminate high-stakes testing), we are condemning ourselves to a continuation of generational poverty - meaning we spend more and more of our taxes to augment the income of people who live below the poverty line.

I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said, “Those who can, teach. Those who can’t, pass laws about teaching.” That’s pretty much sums up my feeling about my state’s leaders.

Abundant Learning: 4 Newish Ideas in Education with Will Richardson

Why are we here at ISTE? Is it to be a better teacher or a better learner? If its not the latter, it's probably for the wrong reason. We all are likely living at the most change-filled moment in education and we must be willing to re-think our educational methods through a different lens or we will be preparing students for a world that no longer exists. 

Margaret Wheatley says "We can't be creative if we aren't willing to be confused. Change always begins with confusion." What am I confused about? I think I'm confused about student motivation. I'm disturbed by a distinct lack of motivation in students. I need to work hard at engaging students and figuring out what I can do to move them to a more intense level of learning. How we get students to embrace the act of learning. More importantly, how do we engage students in designing their own learning AND how do we work on the systems in place to ALLOW that to even happen? This latter question is hard for K-12 and a bit easier for the more autonomous nature of higher education. 

The problem with education is that we are the product of the current system but that system is not relevant to today's students. Students understand the education game. What do I do to be able to "check the box?" 

How do students learn to play (actual) games? They have PLNs and resources that they find/construct on their own! Traditional learning teaches students facts "just in case" but today's learning teaches students how to find information "just in time" and be able to connect that information with other information.  

Think about today's world, who needs a reporter? Reporters are now news aggregators. EVERYONE is a reporter. YouTube is the channel. Even the media markets are beginning to use YouTube. The world is changing. We are now able to print leather and suspect that in the next two years we will be able to print food. We have no idea what's coming. Learning is leaving the institution and is moving into the hands of the learners. Students CAN learn anything, anytime, anywhere - if they are disposed to doing so and have the skills and literacies to do so. 

I think I need to read Mr Richardson's book, "Why School?"

We don't necessarily need to be better. We need to be DIFFERENT. Example, the USS United States (fastest ship to cross the Atlantic in its day) vs the DeHavilland Comet (jet aircraft cut Atlantic crossing to about 10 hours). The ship was better than other ships. But the airplane was different, not just better. 

What is self organized learning? What is networked learning? 

We need to be able to let our kids meet and learn with strangers on the Internet. Think about that. They need to be put into situations that allow (encourage/require) them to connect with people who are not bound by geographical limitations. It's the world we live in. That is what a global market looks like. What if your doctor wasn't/isn't an unlearner/relearner? That's what we need to instill in our students. Make a safe place for students to risk and FAIL. 

The epitome of the honors student is one who is terrified of failure. Students should be encouraged and allowed to fail. 

Check into dual lingo. This site teaches a language and translates the web at the same time. 

Think about the meta-idea of twitter and how that applies to students. It's not a place, an institution, a repository of knowledge. It is a place to make connections with others who have similar interests. This is the analogy of education. Students are learners who need to connect with others to achieve a common goal. This could be worded better, but I think you get the idea. Maybe instead it's a way to connect to team members to solve a problem. To connect to people who are DIFFERENT than they are. Bottom line, it's a medium for connection. 

What is design thinking? Check out designthinkingforeducators.com Discovery. Interpretation. Ideation. Experimentation. Evolution. It's a process that students of through. It's a bit like a pared-down version of the scientific method! The key is that the questions don't have answers. Key component. 

What is the Maker Movement? Good grief I freaking love this guy. We are moving back to the industrial arts classroom and a bit of the cottage manufacturing industry. Students make something as they learn the knowledge. It's a huge shift to students creating artifacts. The skills students learn are the basics of what every student should know.  

I need a 3-D printer. That's my next thing. They are <$2k. I've got to get another Arduino! I may need a Pi as well. 

Guiding question: How do I integrate this into my pre-service science education classes? Small things. Small steps. I can't change it all at once. 

Creating an online syllabus

I'm working on a class to get a certification for online learning - course design. As a result, I'm working on an online class and I needed to create/tweak a syllabus. I've been studying some different resources for online syllabi:

1. The Syllabus


2. Creating an Effective Online Syllabus


3. Online Course Design: 13 Strategies for Teaching in a Web-based Environment


4. Developing Your Online Syllabus

I've collected my thoughts while looking at best practices for creating an online syllabus:

One of the interesting differences between K-12 and higher ed is the importance of a syllabus. I think this mostly has to do with 3 factors: (1) the amount of time you have students on a weekly basis, (2) the fact that you only have higher ed students for half of the year and (3) students in higher ed also have more responsiblity to do independent learning as far as the content of the course goes.

In K-12, students get a lot more handholding than they do in higher ed. We need to give explicit information concerning the text (students have to find their own text, it’s not provided), students need to know where to go for help (tutoring, disability services, etc. - they don’t have a guidance counselor or special ed case worker to guide them) and the list could go on.
Inviting a colleague to see your syllabus is an interesting thought. Usually, this doesn’t happen on our campus unless there’s a problem, i.e. grade appeal. Having recently been in K-12, there isn’t the culture of sharing that is (more) expected in higher ed. Many (even on my higher ed campus) are unwilling share and show what they are doing. Without getting too philosophical, I think this is what’s wrong with education. We’ve cultured an atmosphere of secrecy instead of a collegial peer learning network. I definitely see the value in encouraging peer review on syllabi. If for no other reason than to get another set of eyes on it to “keep the university out of trouble”. For instance, if I forgot to include our disability statement, that could be a real problem in many cases.

As an adjunct instructor in Physical Geography, I really appreciate the analogy of the syllabus as a road map. Not only to see where we are going, but what kinds of challenges/experiences will the learner encounter along the way? Do I have to buy my own gas or is there a built-in system of help available?

I know many students have a problem with organization. Most classes use the first day of school as a day to cover the syllabus. This probably seems like drudgery to many students. What kind of strategy can we use to increase the usefullness of the syllabus and recapture that first day of class? Here’s my idea: why not create a screencast of the instructor going over the syllabus and require students to watch that and take a quiz over it? Just a thought. We need to sell this syllabus as a tool, rather than a requirement. I do really like the idea of giving a schedule to show explicit scaffolding of concepts so students can understand, I need to learn A before I can get to B. It’s a process of sequenced steps, not a bunch of individual activities. It’s got to be sold as an overview, not simply a list.

For students, the contract is likely the most important piece. They want to know “how they are going to get (earn - hopefully) their A (B, C, D, whatever). Explicit instructions on how to earn what points for what activity. Certainly the expectations from the instructor may be the most significant piece in this section. What can they expect time-wise from me? Do I keep up on grading? Do I start and end class on time? If I am contacted, what expectation is there for a response? What is the best way to contact me?

 

What's Coming in Ed Tech

I have some very strong feelings about what is coming down the road for us in education. Here are my thoughts:

 

Future Trends & Issues in Education Technology on Prezi

The Problem with Problem Based Learning

Prompt #5 - “Discuss ill-structured vs well-structured problems.  Refer to Jonassen's (2000) article”

The Problem with Problem-Based Learning -
by Jody Bowie

---

Jonassen (2000) quotes Gagnéa (1980) as saying “the central point of education is to teach people to think, to use their rational powers, to become better problem solvers” (p.85). This statement resonates with me and follows my own philosophy of education. In fact, this idea is the basis of the parent discipline of the natural sciences: Physics (formerly, Natural Philosophy), which provided a natural fit for me as a teacher (or has the fact that I taught physics shaped my philosophy of education? Maybe this will require further reflection/research.) The greats like Newton and Galileo worked toward an understanding of observable phenomena. They worked within/on ill-structured problems. These phenomena had been observed, e.g. acceleration, gravity, etc., but not explained. These problems (and the way in which these men solved the problems) are still the basis for entry-level science classes of today. Science classes are taught within the historical context of the Journey of the Pillars of Problem Solving.

Background

---

Problems are an “unknown entity” (2000, p. 65) solved via a “goal-oriented sequence of cognitive actions” (Anderson, 1987, p.250). These problems vary in complexity, domain, and structure. Hopefully, they are presented in varying levels based on age/developmental appropriateness.  Our main focus will be on structure because while Jonassen argues that among the charateristics of problems “... they are neither independent nor equivalent” (p. 66), the structure of the problem is dependent on the other areas, i.e. complexity and abstractedness.

Well-structured problems are formal, domain-specific, have a very well defined initial state, and have a clear solution. Because there is often a single solution nature of well-structured problems, these are relatively easy to assess. They can be assessed in a “mass-gradable” format, e.g. multiple-choice. There is a clear solution to these problems and (hopefully) the teacher knows or, at least, has access to, this solution/answer. Occasionally, there is only one path to the solution and all students draw on the same intellectual skills/processes to arrive at the “destination”. If you can find the answer to your problem in the back of a book (or on Google), you are working on a well-structured problem.

Ill-structured problems are more broad, often cross-disciplinary, may or may not have a well-defined initial state, and do not have a clear, single solution. These problems are much more difficult to assess and may be graded via a “component/skill rubric,” i.e. a rubric with specific components of a concept or skills that need to be assessed individually. These problems might cover a number of skills/ideas and often incorporate seemingly unrelated ideas. However, when students begin to consider the implications (economic, cultural, morality, civil-rights) of their particular solution, these “unrelated ideas” become very relevant. Ill-structured problems have numerous answers (or none) and will likely give students the opportunity to arrive at solutions in through a number of paths (strategies).

To address Cates’ question of “I am also curious as to how everyone feels about the new Core Standards and if it will be easier, or more realistic to incorporate ill-structured problems into classroom instruction?” I’m not sure whether or not it will be “more realistic or easier” but if PAARC is making assessments with ill-structured problems, you can be that teachers had better be exposing students to this type of assessment. Otherwise students’ performance on the assessments will be a disaster. I don’t mean to sound like we should “teach to the test.” However, if our objective is to increase students’ ability to problem solve (authentically) and the assessments are designed as such, our instruction should be driven in those tests. Isn’t that how the objective or learning outcome/assessment relationship is supposed to work? This ties directly to Jonassen’s assertion that two very strong predictors of success in problem-solving is students’ familiarity with problem type and their domain knowledge. If students have sufficient domain knowledge and have some familiarity with the problem type, they will be able to be successful in solving the problem. The reciprocal of this is that successful problem solving should be an indicator within the domain specified by the problem. Students can show mastery (or at least knowledge) of a domain or concept within that domain.

Issues

---

Based on the title of this post, there should be problem. So where/what is it, you ask? It lies in the planning on the part of the teacher. Teachers (no surprise) are the key to students’ ability to problem solve. (If the rest of this writing sounds like I “know it all,” I do not mean it that way. I’m learning so much about what I did wrong in my classes of the past and I’m doing my best to apply that to my current teaching load.) If teachers rely only on the practice problems in the book, Scantron (or self-grading tests), and pre-made test banks, we will keep getting what we have always gotten, or worse, as shown in the results of the 2009 PISA.Teachers must target their instruction to the needs of the students. How can pre-made materials, test banks, powerpoints, possibly know what your students need to learn, based on their current level of knowledge/skill? I keep thinking over and over in my head as I write, “Set the bar based on the abilities of your current students. Set that bar high. If some make it over, great. Hopefully, everyone else jumped as high as possible.” The fact remains, the bar needs to be adjusted according this current group of students. Likely, that will involve keeping up with current research within a discipline, reframing knowledge within that domain in current cultural and socio-economic lenses. Not only will this allow teachers the ability to always have new problems for students to solve, they will model one of the intended outcomes of PBL: living as a lifelong-learner.

As we discussed during Week 6, many adaptive, stand-alone technologies are emerging in education. These technologies give students a pre-test, identify their weaknesses, and differentiate autonomous instruction to meet the students at their point of need. These technologies assess based on factual information, skill attainment, and/or some analysis. These assessments are based on problems that have a specific answer, likely based on the fact that we have not yet written an algorithm allowing a computer to assess ill-structured problems, due to the nature of those problems. My point here is that many lower-level thinking processes, facts, and skills can be replaced (to some extent) by a program (adaptive technology). This leaves the teacher in the role of lab monitor. While I am not implying that fear of losing our jobs should drive us to enrich our students learning experience through authentic problem-solving experiences, job security is a side-benefit! Assessment of ill-structured problems, at least currently, can only be done by a human, capable of considering all aspects of a students solution and the way in which they arrived at that solution.

Solution

---

Teachers must continue their learning to be enabled to engage students in ill-structured problems, while still engaging in authentic assessment of students’ problem-solving skills, ability to think critically, and domain knowledge (concept-specific). As a part of this, students should also be assessed on their ability to make cross-disciplinary connections. This can be done easily if other disciplines are brought into the process. For example, Michelle and I are going to be a part of paired class next semester, in which she will teach writing/research (skill) and I will teach technology (skill), through the lens of American History (the context). Finally, these problems should be student-directed. Students should be able to construct their own relevancy/motivation by being allowed to choose a topic that both fits the context of the class and is something in which they are interested. Jonassen suggests that students “...think harder and process more deeply when they are interested...” and “...have high-self efficacy” (p.73) Allowing students to select their own problems enables them to choose those in which they are (or can be) interested and believe they have the ability to solve.



References

---

1. Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive psychology and its implications. San Francisco: Freeman.


2. Gagnéa, R.M. (1980). Learnable aspects of problem solving. Educational Psychologist, 15(2), 84-92.


3. Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research & Development, 48(4), 63-85.


4. Plekhanov, A. (2011). PISA Results: How does quality of education compare across the EBRD’s countries of operation? Retrieved from http://www.ebrdblog.com/wordpress/2011/03/pisa-results-how-does-quality-of-education-compare-across-the-ebrds-countries-of-operation/

my name is jody and I am a constructionist

In chapter 1 of the book “Situating Constructionism,” (Papert & Harel, 1991), the authors drove my thoughts to students and what kind of instruction they were receiving in our classroom. I began to wonder, “Were my students programmers of their own education or were they programmees of my idea of what their education should be?” For that matter, which one should they be? While I would love to say they started at a point and began to drive their own instruction based on what they learned, I will admit there was a significant component of each semester in which I was the “driver of the train” and all of my students were on simply passengers. Isaac Newton once said, “I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” My hope is to become the kind of teacher who will allow every student to find the smoothest shells and prettiest pebbles. (I purposely rearranged the quote to include alliteration; clearly he was not a writer!)

Papert & Harel (1991) allude to an experiment (done by Harel) which gives “statistically hard evidence that constructionist activity—which integrates math with art and design and where the children make the software—enhances the effectiveness of instruction given by a teacher in the same topic.” This gives me a bit of heartburn because I do not know what factors they gauge the “effectiveness of instruction.” The context would indicate student’s engagement as the primary factor. However, can we allow that to be the only factor? Is that even what the author meant? Maybe I am just grasping at straws, but I really need a bit more information.

One of my favorite quotes of the chapter:

“The presence of computers begins to go beyond first impact when it alters the nature of the learning process; for example, if it shifts the balance between transfer of knowledge to students (whether via book, teacher, or tutorial program is essentially irrelevant) and the production of knowledge by students.” Papert & Harel (1991) (emphasis added)

Now they are simply pandering to me. This is the one of my core beliefs about education reform. Teachers have to begin to move from a class of knowledge transfer to knowledge production;  an effective means to do that is through the integration of technology. Wikis are a great example of this kind of reform. iBooks Author will also allow students to publish their artifacts for a much broader audience; one that is beyond the four walls of their classroom. I appreciate that Papert & Harel mentioned computational thinking as a mindset. I wrote a blog post about computational thinking in another class. It is encouraging when reformists make the same kinds of connections to other disciplines, since they expect students to do the same.

The most significant piece of the discussion of Logo and “microworlds” (Sawyer, et. al) was the fact that it was born of one idea, from one person. He saw a radical new way for students to learn and built it into an entire movement in education.

These “learning places” are not quite autonomous, but I get the impression they really are virtual locations/ communities where students can drive their own learning, find their own relevance, create mashups of different subjects, and create thoughts and ideas which previously did not exist. Students walk away from “school” (I don’t think they ever really stop learning if we are doing it right) with an artifact, a picture of what they have learned, something far more valuable than a grade, to show others the kind of thinking he or she is capable of doing.

This artifact component of constructionist learning really resonates within my framework of education. If I see a student’s grades, I can certainly make an inference about the kind of success they might be able to have in a class. However, if that same student brings me a computer simulation they have written, or a kinetic sculpture they have created to show a mathematical principle, or some other original creation, I am able to make my own assessment of their learning and skills. If I see on their transcript that they have all A’s, what does that really mean? In an era of grade inflation, when many students (and parents) expect that he or she will have A’s in every class, what do student’s grades really imply? If we truly want to evaluate a student, we need to see that the student is capable of producing at a certain level. We would like to know that he or she can master, or have already mastered, a specific skill. The student needs to show he or she can make connections between other subjects (this one is near and dear to my heart). I imagine you can see that I am a proponent of some kind of portfolio for students. A place for students to “put” these artifacts, which show what they have learned over time. How can a student’s learning/growth truly be measured if there is not some baseline with which it can be compared? While I do not have the answer to the “where & how” question of portfolios, I do know if my own kids were not let high school early college, I would create a portfolio and start putting their student work on it. Likely, it would be a wiki and the student would have edit rights.

Last year I got to witness the U.K. version of Project-Based-Learning (PBL). I had a day to observe at OldMacher Academy in Aberdeen, Scotland. I attended a science class with some 6th or 7th grade U.S. equivalent students. They were working within a PBL context and their driving question was something like “How can we send a person to another planet?” Honestly, I had a bit of issue with the question, simply because it was one that had already been answered. However, I suspect it was appropriate for this age group. Their driving question had many different areas in which they needed to learn content: Newtonian mechanics, planetary astronomy, chemistry, ethics (we can go, but should we?), human biology, relationships, and the list could go on and on. In reality, I have no doubt a driving question such as this one could take an entire year for students to answer. Even then, there would still be “meat left on the bone”. It has such a far-reaching context, I’m not sure it could even be answered in a single school year.

While I was observing the students at OldMacher, I saw 7th graders (or 8th) engaged in the learning process, asking questions, and making discoveries that were relevant to the topic at hand. I did not observe students who were bored or misbehaving. I do not mean to imply that PBL makes teaching/learning all roses, stars, and unicorns. The teacher was was working even harder than the students. She had no time to visit with me because she was busy asking her own guiding questions and giving gentle nudges, in context, as needed.

No doubt, I had an effect on the class as well. After all, the observer effect is one of the basic tenets in physics. As you observe an object, you change it’s state, simply by observing it. It is entirely possible students were on their behavior because I was in the room. Nevertheless, students, by all appearances, were learning and doing so with some independence and self-direction.

My point in all of this can really be summed up in one sentence: If the Constructionist candidate were running for the Office of Education Reform, I would vote for him or her. Not only would I vote for the candidate, I would knock on doors to campaign for this person. I would tell my friends about the merits of this view of education (I kind of already do this). I would volunteer to work in the campaign. I would do whatever I could to get the Constructionist candidate elected. After the reading last week and this week, I find that I am not a constructivist; instead, I need to register to vote as a constructionist.

The Demonization of Wikipedia

[caption id="" align="alignleft" width="269" caption="Wikipedia isn't quite as bad as everyone makes it out to be."][/caption]

No doubt you have been on Wikipedia or at least seen it at the top of your search results. As a teacher, I did not allow students to use Wikipedia as a primary source, but I did encourage them to use the site. There are many uses and contrary to what most teachers say, it does not need to be avoided. Wikipedia has been demonized in education. Whether or not that has a good reason is open for debate, but the mindset needs to be changed.

Two years ago, I spent about six weeks working with a couple of physics researchers at Oklahoma State. When Dr. Rizatdinova wanted me to learn something, she always pulled up Wikipedia first. Was this ignorance? Or does she recognize that Wikipedia is, on average, more accurate than print sources? I suspect it is the latter. She has a PhD in High Energy Physics from Moscow University, so I can only imagine she has a pretty clear understanding of how to find correct information on the internet.

Back in 2009, I had a realization: Putnam City High School did not have a Wikipedia page. I thought to myself, "How can this be?" At that point, I realized I had two choices, I could continue to be a consumer of knowledge (and allow my students to do so) or I could model for my students what being a producer of knowledge looks like. I chose the latter. I did a minimal amount of research about the history of Putnam City High School and started a Wikipedia page. This was one of only two edits I made to the page. I only mention that because it has some (not a lot) of information on it, most of which was put there by others. There are actually people who enjoy building pages and some of them found our page! My second edit was to correct the mascot. I could have noticed the error and pointed it out to others, further casting the site in a bad light. However, I decided it would be better to make the page better.

A couple of weeks after I created the page, I went back to the page and there was a note at the top saying, "This page does not meet Wikipedia's quality standards, you can help by adding citations and information." What? They have "quality standards"? They actually want you to add citations? To show where your information comes from? That sounds a lot like the kind of thing we teach students when writing papers. I suspect Wikipedia could be used as a tool to teach writing, instead of being talked about like the plague.

Over the last two weeks, I have talked (probably too much) about Wikipedia over the course of some professional development I have done about technology. One was at Deer Creek Schools and the other at Yukon Public Schools. I spent some time talking about how students should no longer look at the web as a place to simply get information. They should also look at it as a place to construct their own knowledge base and add to the overall knowledge about a topic. This is (at least part of) the purpose of Wikipedia.

Oklahoma recently adopted the English/Language Arts and Mathematics Common Core State Standards. These standards mandate that students should "Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate..." Wikipedia would be a fantastic place to do that. By the way, this was cut and pasted from the grade 3-5 standards.

Imagine starting a Wikipedia page for your school (neither Yukon nor Deer Creek have pages for any of their schools at the time of this writing). You could have students develop interview questions, contact members of the community, video the interviews, post them to the school district's webpage, and then link to the video interviews as primary sources for your Wikipedia article(s). Would students think differently about their writing if they had that kind of ownership? Would they write differently with that kind of audience?

I recognize that Wikipedia can be used incorrectly. As teachers, should we continue letting students use it incorrectly? Or should we be proactive in our approach? I hope you will reconsider how you present Wikipedia to your students. Like most things on the web, it can be used to learn something.

I challenged the teachers from both Yukon and Deer Creed to build Wikipedia pages for their schools. I'll be interested to see if they pick up the gauntlet. What about you? Does your district have a page? Does your school? Is there some other way to integrate Wikipedia into your teaching? I would love to hear your ideas.

**I posted this today because Wikipedia is blacked out to protest the US Government's efforts to censor information on the internet through SOPA and PIPA. Both of these bills (like most) have a good intent. The controversy comes in from the way in which they are doing the "policing".**

Here we go again

I have no idea if anyone actually gets anything out of what I'm writing, but it's time to start learning again, which means writing/reflection. I've taken about 6 months off from school, but I'm back in class taking it to the next level. This time it's Trends and Issues in Educational Technology.

For class, I've been reading The Cambridge Handbook of The Learning Sciences (R. Keith Sawyer, Ed. 2005). I've just started, but the first part of the book is fantastic!

It begins with a bit of educational history, starting with the early years of Public Education in America and the concept of instructionism. While I write this, my computer says that instuctionism is not a word, but you are all familiar with the concept because it's how you were taught in school. There was a lot of wrote memorization and factual learning, but not a lot of critical thinking or application. It did a good job of preparing students for the "industrialized economy of the early 20th century" (Sawyer, 2005). However, in today's knowledge economy, this won't work any longer. Students cannot continue to be taught fact after fact. They cannot continue to be taught the same way they were 100 years ago, because the world is not the same place as it was 100 years ago.  We have to teach students how to think. Thinking is a skill. In order to teach it, students must be put in the position of practicing that skill. The only way they will get better is to practice.

Before picking up this book (on my new Kindle), I'd never heard of the Learning Sciences. I guess I had a vague understanding of what they were/are, but didn't know them by that name. However, beginning in the 1970's and ending in the 1990's, scientists and researchers began to word towards a consensus on the way in which students need to learn to be successful in today's society. Those are:

• It is important for students to gain a deep conceptual understanding. Many of you can probably recite Newton's 2nd law of Motion, but could you apply it to a situation?


• In addition to teaching better, some focus needs to be on students learning better. Great teachers are so important, but if the student (or teacher) doesn't have some grasp on how they learn, it may not do much good. Passive learning is no longer acceptable. Students must take control of their learning and begin to construct their own body of knowledge. (I know, Piaget has been saying this since the 60's!)


• Schools must create an environment where learning can occur. Facts are okay, but teachers and schools need to put students in situations that encourage thinking deeply about concepts and there must be some real world application.


• Successful learning comes as a result of building on the learner's prior knowledge.  Again, no passive learning. Students come in with prior understanding (or misunderstanding) and often only learn enough to pass a test, but their learning in no way affects the way in which they interact with their world.


• Reflection is important. That's why I write here. It's not so anyone can read. It's so I can process. This blog is a place for me to actively analyze my state of knowledge. What did I know before and what do I know now? How are those different? How will what I've learned impact me? Will it? If not, why not?

**bold sections: The Cambridge Handbook of The Learning Sciences, (R. Keith Sawyer, Ed. 2005).

Next week, I'm doing my "final" professional development session with public school teachers. I say final only because it's the last commitment I made while a State Dept. of Ed. employee. I'm supposed to talk about Problem-Based Learning. The early part of this book, while not explicitly so, talks about Problem-Based Learning.

Students need to engage in inquiry, beginning with a driving question and proposing a hypothesis/solution. They need to use complex representations to communicate and collaborate. They also need to use models, represented in some visual format. That's basically what my presentation is, in 3 sentences. If you are a Yukon Public School teacher, don't bother coming to listen. You just got the nutshell version!

Finally, there is a situativity perspective. This means that knowledge is not static. Knowledge is a process. I think of it as a sieve. When you interact with the information, you change what is there and it changes you, as well. It goes beyond simple knowledge acquisition and moves into a fundamental change in the way in which learners collaborate. This change comes as a result of the collaboration.

Bring it on. This is going to be a great class.

In case you are wondering what's going on here, here's a little intro video I made of myself for class.

You want spoonfeeding? Sorry, no can do

I am really struggling to write here. When in the course of my jobs I write something that I feel is appropriate to post, I'll do so.

The following is a response to a student. I'll let you draw conclusions based on what I say (said).

You said "I understand that we are adults, but I am paying a hefty tuition for a professor to teach me." You will probably be sorely disappointed in this class if that is your expectation. I am a facilitator of learning and much of what you do and learn in this class will be a result of independent learning. As a teacher, I hope your other professors will do the same. Knowing the mission of professional studies as I do, that is the intent, although it doesn't always happen in actuality.

Education has changed significantly over the last 10 years. A major change has been that the impetus for learning has moved from the teacher to the student. This is true in MANY progressive universities and it's how I structured my classes in both the university and the high school. I've learned a lot of what I do from other, veteran professors here on campus, so I know you will run across these same strategies in other classes; some of those profs teach in this program.

That said, I recognize that the program is expensive. I just spent over $30k for a Master's. However, I didn't pay for a professor to teach me. I paid for convenience (1 night a week) and for a professor to know how to engage me in the learning process, whether through lecture or independent learning. My philosophy is that you get out of class what you put into it.

It is my job to bring all of my mental faculties to bear on the learning environment so that it is one that is conducive to students being engaged and learning However, it is your job to come prepared to class (which you clearly do) and do your best on each assignment and while you are participating in class. I say things like "You are college students and need to figure things that are not spelled out on your own" because that is what is expected of college graduates. You should be a critical thinker, a problem-solver, and an independent learner.

This week, I was asked to prepare an RFP for a vendor. Prior to that assignment, I had never heard of an RFP and didn't even know what the letters stood for. However, through a day of research and independent learning, I was able to learn not only what it was, but what was supposed to be included in one and I prepared a (very) rough draft. This was done much to the surprise of my boss. She didn't even expect that I would know what it was, no less be able to create one from scratch. I learned that skill through professors putting me into situations in which I had to think for myself. This is exactly one of the skills I am hoping to engage you in. Be sure to check the learning objectives again. No doubt you will see "critical thinking" listed.

This program is not about (at least it shouldn't be) "paying for a degree" or even "paying for a professor to teach you". It is about you engaging in the process of learning. Many students come to SNU thinking the professor should "spoon-feed" them the information, assign them an "A", and get them on to the next class. I refuse! I will point you in the right direction, facilitate learning to the best of my ability, award points where they are due, and PREPARE you for whatever challenge you meet next.

You guys know how these things go. Sometimes you've just got to get these things out of your head before you can move on.

common core and frameworks

*this was sent to my science listserve and I've cross-posted here*

I've been doing a lot of thinking this week about the Next Generation Science Standards. I've had many emails from folks across the state full of questions about the revised PASS, the Common Core, and how those are related to what's going on in science (Next Generation Science Standards - NGSS). I also had a chance to work on the framework for the Oklahoma Physics Subject Area test. This test is what you take to be certified to teach Physics here in the Great State of Oklahoma. What a great learning experience! I learned so much that will help as we move towards the HUGE task of developing national science standards. It's overwhelming and exciting all at the same time. More on those standards later.

I've been working to get teachers informed about the status of science education here in Oklahoma and what the expectations are concerning standards. Here's an overview:

 -The Common Core Standards (CC) are only for Mathematics and English/Langauge Arts. The CC does not give any content concerning science. There are some literacy standards for interacting with science and tecnological texts, but those are not content standards. Those are standards for having students read and interact with the type of texts we encounter in the science disciplines. There's a ton of misinformation out there about Common Core, e.g. "the only science I have to teach is in the Common Core." Uh, wrongo! That's kinda like using the excuse of "well, they didn't say I had to pay for a refill, so I assumed I didn't need to." Just because it's called the Common Core doesn't mean it covers all the Core areas. (on a side note, I think the name has contributed to some of the confusion).

 -The PASS (specific to Oklahoma) have been revised and should be used when planning science lessons. It might be helpful to refer to the CC to make those critical connections to mathematics and literacy, but the only document that contains content for science is the PASS. The Pocket PASS for science is at the printer and should be ready to be mailed soon, so consider checking the website to order. We'll be on overload getting those out when they arrive, so please be patient! You can download a current version of the revised PASS for science from the website, as well. If you are reading this and you aren't an Oklahoma teacher, the PASS is an acronym for Priority Academic Student Skills. We used to have this for all content areas, but now ELA and Math are under the Common Core.

 -The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are in the process of development right now. When standards are developed, there must first be a framework to guide the standard writing process. This document has been written and can be found by going to http://www.nextgenscience.org. In 2009, the National Research Council brought together a panel of scientists and science educators. This makeup of this panel was split about in half between scientists and educators. The educator side of the panel had K-12 strongly represented. The panel wrote the framework and it will now guide the standard-writing process. I'll give you more information as I get it.

 I'll not bore you with the details, but the framework basically splits into 3 dimensions: Scientific and Engineering practices, Crosscutting concepts, and the disciplinary core ideas (including Physical, Life, Earth and Space, and Engineering and Technology).

Most of those are probably self-explanatory except the crosscutting concepts. These are the ideas that are not discipline specific and are not skills or practices. They are Patterns, Cause and Effect, Scale Proportion and Quantity, Systems and System Models, Energy and Matter, Structure and Function, and (finally) Stability and Change. These 7 concepts can be applied to all of the scientific disciplines.

The framework includes a plan for integration between the 3 dimensions, a plan for implementation, a discussion of diversity and equity, and guidance for standards developers. They also included some rationale on what the assumptions were when writing the framework and reasoning behind the organization.

It's been about 15 years since we've had any kind of National Science Standards. The last version was done in 1996 by the National Research Council and included many of the aspects of what I imagine will be included in the Next Generation Science Standards. However, because the Common Core already exists for language arts and mathematics, the new science standards will be designed to articulate (or work with) the Common Core. The NGSS will include standards that fit together with grade-specific standards in mathematics. Once this is done, I expect that standards will all complement each other. I also expect when the Common Core is revised, they will make more explicit connections to the Science Standards.

Okay. I lied. I bored you the details. Here's the abbreviated version: the Framework will drive what is in the standards and the organization of them. It is not a standards document. It is the shell of the house around which the standards will be built.

So where does Oklahoma fit into this process, you ask? Well, we could sit idly by and let other states decide what we should be teaching or we can work toward getting into the Leadership Consortium of states and help write the standards. I'm kinda leaning toward the latter!

Achieve.org (the bi-partisan education reform organization) sent out a press release last week a list of the states that would be leading the standards development and Oklahoma was not listed. I'll take the heat on that one. I was not aware of the process to get us into the leadership consortium. However, the news isn't all bad. I'm now aware and in contact with Achieve to get this fixed. They still want us to be a part of the leadership (my predecessor worked really hard in this area) and we want to be a part.

I'm thrilled at the idea of helping construct this. Talk about something a person could be proud of and take ownership in! We are going to drive what the majority of students in the United States are studying in science! That's exciting!

In case you are wondering (and can't tell) I'm loving the new job. I miss my students, but I get to interact with my SNU students, so the sting isn't quite so bad. I miss my colleagues at PC High, but I love meeting new people here at OSDE as, well. There is so much transition going on, both here locally, and nationally in science education! It's a great feeling knowing (or at least hoping) that you are having an impact on what students are learning in the classroom and I still feel very much a part of that. I'm thankful and blessed beyond belief to be afforded the opportunities I've been given.

 

My Final Duty

Putnam City has a tradition in which the previous Teacher of the Year speaks to the district faculty on opening day. Ive got to say, I was really looking forward to this. There's something very exhilarating about standing up in front of a captive audience of about 1200 professionals and telling them what's on your mind. I think my experience at IgniteOKC gave me a taste of public speaking and I like it! I'm not saying I'm good at it, but I enjoy it. When you have people clapping (even if you told them to) or laughing or even cheering, it gets the adrenaline going. It was a great experience.

I talked about the Common Core and I'm afraid I stole some (or a lot) of the superintendent's thunder. I felt pretty bad about that, but much better when several people asked if they could have a copy of my speech. So here you go: (it's long - as usual) I just cut and pasted from my notes, so please forgive any grammar and punctuation errors. I write just like I talk.

By the way, I sitting in Logan Airport in Boston, on my way home from a STEM plan learning lab. I'll debrief on that in another post. It was an enlightening experience in so many ways.



I’d like to start out by saying thank you to Mr. Hurst and the rest of the administration for the opportunity to speak to you all today. I was honored to be chosen as your Teacher of the Year for 2011. Being selected as a State Teacher of the Year finalist made my decision to take the Science Director job a very difficult one. In fact, I can easily say it was one of the most difficult decisions ever. I’m so proud to be a part of the Putnam City Schools family and I wanted so badly to represent each of you at the state level. Thank you so much for the opportunity to do so and I’m sorry I had to drop out of the competition because of this new responsibility.

Now if you’ve never spoken to a group this large, know that it can make you a bit nervous. I’ll just say that if I say something you agree with or that resonates with you, or even if I just mention your school, to let me know you are listening, you can clap or say something like woo-hoo!

15 years ago, I applied to be a bus driver in Putnam City Schools. I was hired and drove off and on for 10 years until I finally finished my undergraduate degree at SNU in 2007. During those years, I came into contact with what I believe to be the greatest faculty in the State of Oklahoma. As a bus driver, you certainly get a different perspective of the students and faculty. My time as a bus driver allowed me to learn what caring about students means and I learned that from you guys. One of the schools I drove out of was Tulakes Elementary (anyone here from there?) Every day the teachers would bring the students to the bus. They would get on the bus with the students and they showed me what an example of a caring teacher looked like. If a student was having a bad day or if they knew of some particular difficulty at home, the teachers made sure I knew about it. I have no doubt that this type of thing continues across the district in other schools and on other buses.  Little did I know back then, that I would get the privilege to join the faculty of Putnam City, a fantastic group of educators and that I would be afforded the opportunity to teach the best students in the state.

Speaking of great students, my own kids, Jessica and JC, have been in Putnam City their entire lives and I’d like to publicly thank each of you who influenced them during their time here. When I first started driving a bus, I applied for a transfer into the district so Jess could begin Kindergarten at Overholser Elementary. About that time, we moved into the district and the kids attended Rollingwood, Capps, and most recently, Putnam City High School. Jess graduated last year and JC will be a Senior this year. We were purposeful about purchasing a home in the district so our kids could attend school in Putnam City because we believed then, and still do, that the district offers the best academic and extra-curricular opportunities in Oklahoma. Because of the relationships I’ve built and the quality of education my children have received, I will always consider Putnam City Schools my home.

For those of you who are new to Putnam City this year, I want you to know that this is a special place. If I were to go into all the reasons for making such a broad statement, we would be here all day and I doubt any of you want that. (that is an appropriate place for applause) I’ll just say that there is a sense of family among the teachers in each building that I’ve not experienced in any other workplace. I’m thankful for the community that teachers and administrators work hard to build. If you don’t feel that in your building, I hope you do whatever it takes to treat your colleagues as family (or in some cases, better than family). It creates an environment of support and makes Putnam City a great place for students to learn.

The faculty members in this district have challenged me to grow and the members of the administration have given me opportunities to facilitate that growth. I have been fortunate to have leaders who allowed me the chance to try new things in my classroom. This led to an enriching teaching experience for me and hopefully a positive learning environment for my students. I hope the administrators in the district will continue to allow teachers to innovate in the classroom. Principals, if you aren’t already doing that, I’d challenge you to give your teachers some slack and see just what kind of excitement they can generate in their classes.

As I have begun to transition into the job of Science Director at the State Department of Education, I am beginning to realize that the change we’ve all been looking for in education is here. I doubt you’ve been able to read any journal or website without hearing about the Common Core State Standards Initiative. I’m not here to tell you that the Common Core standards are the saviour of education, but I do think they are common ground with which we can all start to increase the rigor and relevancy of our classes. If you don’t know about the Common Core, you should get informed. You can find information on the State Department of Education’s website or at corestandards.org. I thought I might share just a little of my understanding of the Standards (I’m talking to you as a teacher as a teacher, not as the State Science Director, give me a little slack, I’ve only been on the job for 3 weeks!)

The major components of the Common Core are this:

Include more reading and writing of informational texts in all content areas. - This isn’t really anything new. We’ve been talking about having students read and write for quite a while. Yes, you CAN have students in an English class learning to read and interpret a historical document. In fact, that is just the kind of thing the core standards encourage you to do. Literacy is everyone’s job. Think about it, if a student cannot read or write at grade level, how can they interact with the rest of their education? I guarantee you can connect literacy strategies to every single subject area in every single grade. If not, you are probably doing it wrong.

Provide opportunities for students to practice the 3 modes of rhetorical writing (narrative, argument, and informational) I can tell you from experience, when students enter college, they are going to have to do each of these three kinds of writing, probably in their first composition class. It doesn’t mean they have to be able to do them perfectly, but they should have already been exposed to this kind of writing, at a minimum. This isn’t just at the secondary level, either. Elementary students should be practicing their writing skills. How about having them write out the directions on how to accomplish a task and then let another student follow those directions?  

Require students to supply evidence and/or reasoning to justify their position. This can be mathematical reasoning, evidence from a text when analyzing literature, or scientific evidence from observation or experimentation. It doesn’t really matter what the topic is, but students must be able to give a reason for why they think a certain way or believe something. In this case, the process by which a student arrives at an answer is just as important as what their answer is. This may mean that you put students in a position in which there is either more than one right answer, or (heaven forbid) a situation in which you, as the teacher, do not know the right answer.
Expose students to grade-appropriate texts (which may be more complex than they have been in the past). The core standards are very explicit in giving examples of the kinds of texts students should be reading and at what level they should do so. Notice I said examples, I didn’t say mandates.

Use student work from each grade level to show proficiency (This is clearly a situation in which a series of GoogleDocs would work great as an e-portfolio!) This is a big part of the Common Core: being able to show that students are proficient at a particular skill. Just as the students should be able to give evidence of their reasoning, you as teachers should be able to give reasoning that supports your assertion that students are proficient in a particular area. We must be purposeful in causing opportunities for students to create artifacts that will demonstrate proficiency.

Teach using real world examples.  I’ll talk more about this shortly. I’m really passionate about this one, and I’ll tell you why in just a minute.

Integrate technology into instruction. Yes, the Common Core is very explicit on this one. The students Quote “use technology and digital media strategically and capably.” end quote. And they are not just using technology just to be using it. They quote “employ technology thoughtfully to enhance their reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language use.” end quote Ha! Some of you thought technology would decrease their language skills! Try having your students summarize a story or a semester-long project into 140 characters or less (maybe using twitter or polleverywhere). You will see some students writing more creatively and being more excited about what they are doing than ever before. Innovation like this will require training for students and teachers, I recognize that. In fact, it will probably require you as educators to begin doing some independent research into the use of technology in your classroom. I won’t lie. It’s not going to be easy. But then nothing worth doing ever is. If you need help with technology, I know of several people in the Putnam City technology department who are more than willing to help, you just need to ask. I’ve also heard there are some new instructional coaches who will be able to provide you with some much needed innovation assistance, as well.

Enough of what the Common Core is. Let me tell you what it is not.

The standards are NOT a national curriculum. They do not tell you how to teach your content. You should rely on your own professionalism, your district curriculum directors, and the collective wisdom and experience of your colleagues to help guide you in this area.

PThe Standards are not a comprehensive guide as to what should be taught, they are the minimum of what students should know and be able to do. However, those minimum guidelines are pretty explicit. For example, if you have students who cannot use the words their, there, and they’re correctly, they haven’t shown proficiency for what they should be able to do by the end of the 4th grade. Yes, I did choose that one because its a pet-peeve of mine.

The Standards do NOT include interventions for students below grade level and English Language Learners. However, PLCs can provide assistance with below-grade level interventions and I’m sure the ELL teachers are happy to help, as well. You have resources, but you have to ask for help!
Finally, the Standards do not define every single thing students need in order to be college and career ready. Teachers, districts, and states have some leeway on considerations as to what else is needed for students.

After stepping into the shallow end of the pool with the Standards I can tell you this: As an educator, there’s nothing in the Common Core I have seen that we shouldn’t already be doing.

My wife teaches at a local university, so you can imagine that we spend a significant amount of time talking about students, about teaching, and about our own learning. There is one thing she talks alot about that is a common struggle for many students arriving at college: the ability to think critically. The skill of analyzing a text or a situation and being able to cite specific evidence to support their position is something with which many students struggle. That’s a significant part of what Common Core is about: critical thinking. At the college level, students can still learn new content, but if they come in without the ability to think critically, they have a significantly smaller chance of academic success, no matter what their major is. Additionally, when students enter a workplace, they can learn how to run a cash register, but the ability to deal with a new situation requires problem-solving!

As a science teacher, I get really excited when I read anything that says students should be able to quote “evaluate the argument... including the validity of the reasoning... and sufficiency of the evidence”! end quote.  I heard someone on NPR the other day talking about gas wells and how they have a new method of getting more gas out of those old wells. If you were my family, I’d explain exactly how they do that, but suffice to say, there is a large group of people who are concerned about the contamination of ground water because of this new practice. The group is pushing for full disclosure of chemical levels in ground water before and after the drilling process. The host said, and I quote “The public needs some evidence so they will know the practice is safe.” end quote.  Really? How many average people in this country would be willing or capable of looking at evidence and drawing a reasonable conclusion? I suspect the average person would be willing to let some reporter interpret the evidence and tell them what to think. Consider that when you would rather let your students memorize facts instead of putting them into critical thinking situations.

I give this example because another significant part of the Common Core is relevance. I told you earlier I would get back to “Teach Using Real Life Examples”  As teachers, we owe it to our students to show that what they are required to learn is going to be useful later in life (or at least in a later class). In my physics classes, you cannot imagine the excitement on students’ faces when we would take some algebra or trig function and leverage that to actually learn about the position of an object or some force being applied! If you can’t make your subject relevant to students, you should reconsider what you are teaching. I’m not saying its easy to make your class relevant to students’ lives (unless you teach physics), I’m just saying you owe it to them to be explicit in that relevancy. This is especially important as students get into late elementary and middle school and begin to wonder, “What am I even doing in school anyway? What’s the point of all of this?” If we wait until students begin their high school years to introduce the relevance of learning, school may be so irrelevant by that point, they won’t be inclined to listen.

I’m so proud of each of you and I know this year is going to be better than the last. I hope if there is anything I can do to help you, (especially in science) that you will contact me. I’ll be looking forward to hearing about the exciting things going on in Putnam City. I hope you have a great year and I appreciate you giving me the chance to speak today.

master teacher summer institute

This week starts a new beginning in my journey. I checked in through Human Resources at the State Department of Education as the new Science Director. As soon as I got done, it was off to the National Center for Employment Development in Norman, OK to begin the Master Teacher Summer Institute.

This program is an exciting one in which teachers work in their content area for part of the time and in their geographical region for the rest of the time. There is a strong focus on building relationships and that is something I appreciate the most. We spent most of yesterday with Tina Boogren from Solution Tree (Richard Marzano's company) working through the book, "The Highly Engaged Classroom". Tina is a fantastic speaker and educator who has something to share with teachers from all content areas and all grade levels. I really enjoyed learning some new strategies on how to "hook" students and then keep them engaged in the learning process.

This morning, several of the other Curriculum Directors presented on the idea of Multiculturalism in Education. They worked through about 3 hours of information, sharing strategies for building community in a diverse classroom throughout. The most interesting to me was Bafa' Bafa', a simulation in which learners engage in role play as people from different countries. This simulation really magnifies the cultural clues and hidden meanings that exist within different cultures. It's quite enlightening and I recommend it highly! (Good Lord! I just realized I've linked to the site for purchasing the program. Expensive, but worth it.)

Finally, this afternoon, we were able to work as content areas and Tiffany Neill brought some great inquiry lessons to us. Not only did we do some inquiry, we spent time taking it to the next level and thinking about what everyone else did with the data we gathered. Everyone collected data (a skill on which every student needs to work) and then we were told to create a representation of the entire class set of data to share. 4 different groups = 4 different representations. We spent time going around looking at what each thing represented (or at least what we thought it represented) and giving a critique, as well.

Here's where things got interesting. Groups went back and read what had been said for a critique and had the chance reflect/modify or to defend what they had done. This part of the process is SO important! We have to work on more opportunities to give students the chance to take a stand and argue their point. It is almost like debate. They present evidence to support their position. This is the next level of learning; it is beyond the content and takes students to a higher level of thinking and a deeper level of understanding. This is where the Common Core will take us: increased rigor at a deeper level. Remember the Sunday School song "Deep and Wide?" That is not the Common Core, its only deep, not wide.

Tomorrow, we will finish up our content time and then work together as groups for Regional Conferences. I'm interested to see exactly what that Regional Conference is going to look like. I'm definitely learning something everyday. I might even be beginning to wrap my brain around bits of this job.

new beginnings

This has been a week of transition. I have accepted the position of Science Curriculum Coordinator for the Oklahoma State Department of Education. I've said for a long time that teaching physics at Putnam City High School was the last job I would ever want, meaning it is literally the last job I ever wanted to have. However, sometimes opportunities present themselves and you feel like you cannot pass them by (lest they do not return!)

In my next to last Master's class, I was working with a group of people and one of them said, "You know that the Science Curriculum Director position is open? You would be awesome at that, you should apply!" I said, "No, I didn't know that. I'm not sure that's something I would want to do. I mean, I'd have to leave my classroom!" So I went down home that evening after class and talked to @mishelleyb and we decided that the only way I would know if I wanted to do that job was to apply and interview. So, in April I applied. Knowing how little experience teaching I have had, I did not think I had any chance at even interviewing for the job. Honestly, once I applied, I totally forgot about it.

I moved forward with the State Teacher of the Year application and focused on teaching to the best of my ability. I didn't give Science Director another thought. As we were on our way to Philadelphia for the International Society of Technology in Education Conference, I received a phone call from the Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum about presenting at a conference in Oklahoma City. In the course of that conversation she mentioned my application and assured me that I would be called for an interview. This was completely out of left field as I was so nervous about making the finals for State TOY. At that time, I was informed that there might come a time when I would have to choose between TOY and Science Director. Uh, can you say no-brainer? TOY is a big honor. In fact, for me, its been huge. However, to be able to influence teachers beyond my district and to be able to affect change in science education versus being a spokeperson for the vocation of teaching? Yeah, not really a difficult decision.

What was a difficult decision was leaving my classroom. It was incredibly hard to think about leaving my students to be taught physics by someone else. However, knowing I would have some influence on that teacher and others who teach science across the State of Oklahoma helped make this much less difficult. In the course of the interview I learned that a significant part of this job is focused on teaching teachers, e.g. conducting professional development. This is something about which I am passionate. In fact, I'm as passionate about that as I am about teaching physics and earth science, so how could I say if they offered?

To make a long story short, I interviewed for the job last week and they offered the position to me on Monday and I have accepted.

I start next Monday and I believe I am going to hit the ground running. We are conducting Master Teacher Academy 3 days of next week and then I am going to a workshop to begin assisting in the process of developing a STEM plan for the State of Oklahoma. I mean, really? That's the kind of responsibility I have now? Oh, my. What have I gotten myself into? I've certainly moving out of my comfort zone. It feels like starting over in teaching. I feel like I'm about to start my first year again.

I do know this, I am going into an office in which there are other Directors who are experienced and are excited about me coming to work with them. We are moving towards the Common Core and we have already re-done our science standards and I'll be helping to implement those. The team I am going to work with is awesome from what I hear.

I'll be continuing this blog in its current format. I'm continuing my education and this will simply be a place to share what I am doing in my teaching (I'm still adjuncting 3 classes for SNU) and my learning (I am beginning to understand just how much I don't know). If you enjoy reading, I hope you will continue to do so.

the common core - my thoughts

The last few days have found me researching the Common Core. I am about to attend my final class for my Master's program and I had to do a research paper for class. I was allowed to choose the topic, as long as it related to education administration in some way. I decided early on in the class I would do my paper on Merit Pay. I'm the only student in the class with no aspirations of being a principal. I would like to move into Curriculum Administration one of these days and I felt Merit Pay might be something I would have to deal with at some point. However, for reasons I might get to here in the next several months, I decided to change my topic to The Common Core.

Most of what I have seen about the Common Core Standards has been negative. I was pleasantly surprised to find that I am vehemently in support of the Standards now that I have done some research and read them myself. Critics say teachers had no part in writing the current standards (so far, only English/Language Arts and Mathematics). All I can say to that is the Common Core Standards Initiative rebuts that with some very well written standards. As a professional educator, I recognize a well-written objective/guideline/standard when I see it and that's what I see when I read this and this.

Others say the standards amount to a national curriculum. Teachers who buy into that rhetoric are a big part of the problem with today's educational system. If you can't recognize the difference between being told what students need to know and what you can teach to students, you might talk to your district about some professional development. It should be something akin to your Methods Class from your undergraduate degree because that's where you should have learned to distinguish between objectives/standards and curriculum.

Rigor. That's what I got when I read the Standards. When I read them I thought about problem-solving, persistence, analysis, pattern-recognition, evaluation, and application. Students who meet these Standards will be able to not only find information, but use that information in an unfamiliar situation. If you memorize how to solve a puzzle, are you really problem-solving? No! You have to be able to take what you have learned and apply that to another, new situation. Sounds a lot like the upper levels of Bloom's Taxonomy to me.

Here's a piece of advice, before you start thinking or speaking negatively about this, go read them yourself. Don't believe what you hear or read. Not even what I've said here! If you are reading this, you are likely a trained education professional. Go read the Standards, think critically about them, evaluate whether or not they can be useful to changing the face of American Education and make your own decision. Just because I like them doesn't mean you have to.

However, know that the Common Core Standards are likely coming to a state near you. Depending on what you read, somewhere between 37 and 48 states have adopted the Standards or are beginning the process of adoption. Why not embrace them and find a way to be successful within that framework? You can whine and moan about it all you want, but at some point you have to ask yourself, how can I learn to be happy about this? Because it is coming!

ISTE Day 1 and 2

I've been here at ISTE 2011, in Philadelphia, for a couple of days now. It's been quite an interesting journey. I love following the tweets at #ISTE11. There is an overload of information with which to keep up.

We started the day yesterday by just hanging at the hotel and not really getting out until after noon. We took a very short walk to Penn's Landing and had a Taste of Philly, part of the events leading up to the 4th of July.

We got over to the Convention Center and checked in just in time to hear the opening keynote speaker. He was a molecular biologist named Dr. John Medina. A molecular biologist? Yes. He was really great. A very dynamic speaker, in fact. He talked specifically about how the brain process information, a terrific topic for a room (gigantic room) full of teachers interested in how to be more effective. I guess I'll have to read his book, Brain Rules.

Before I knew it, 7am arrived and I had to be up, have some breakfast, and get to the convention center by 0830 to hear Dayna Laur talk about "Meeting the Common Core: Rigorous, Relevant, Project-Based Learning." The presenters talked at length about this site, the Buck Institute for Learning. I was afraid it was going to be about how we needed to pay for their stuff, but it wasn't. In fact they talked about some free resources we can use for PBL stuff, in addition to the fact that all of their stuff if free. I am working to move my class more toward a PBL model. I think my students would all benefit from the model as they are mostly honors students who "just want the answer." This particular demographic is one that has been taught to value the "right answer" above the method by which that answer was ascertained. In PBL, the goal is to have students show their mastery of skills instead of arriving at a pre-determined answer. In fact, in a good problem-solving environment, the teacher won't know the answer since it hasn't been solved yet! A great strategy they talked about was one in which a class is connected (via Skype) to a professional in the field (pertaining to the problem) to give critique and expertise throughout the process.

I then moved on to "Technology to Improve Staff Morale" with Rushton Hurley, a Japanese-language teacher from California. He had some great tips for sharing technology and moving into a true collaborative model with colleagues. The "take-away" for me from that session was to try and share something with my colleagues and let them come ask questions if they want to move beyond just an introduction. My vision for this is to share a 2 minute tech tip during faculty meetings. I can start it and then see if I can get my colleagues to start doing it as they find something they like and feel is "share-worthy." I'll then become the facilitator. I could even begin to video these and post them to "Tech Tools for Teachers."

During lunch, I got to go to the OTA Affiliate booth and sit for an hour to "pay" for my trip here. I am here as a result of being named Technology Teacher of the Year by the OTA. However, it comes with a price. I have to work our booth for two full hours. I say that with a smile on my face, because I would gladly work that booth for an entire day or two to get to come. I met several folks stopping by to say hello. I got to tell them about the OTA meetup at the The Field House from 1630 to 1800 on Tuesday evening. It will be lots of fun, so if you are around, stop in and say hello.

After lunch I had some free time so I went down and sat in the blogger's cafe and tried to process some of what I had learned.  As I was doing this, I began to realize that this conference would benefit so many people who are not here. For someone like me who has been to technology conferences before, I am able to get a few ideas to use tools I already have to be better, but there are people who aren't here who would be much more willing to use this stuff in their classes after hearing success stories. If you are reading this and have never been to ISTE, go ahead and plan to go to San Diego next year. It's overwhelming and one of the best things a technology adopter can do to get out of their comfort zone. During this time, I also got spend some time with @mishelleyb since we both had a little time with no sessions, this was clearly one of the best parts of the day.

The last session I attended was #teach with #tweet. These 3 guys (@joebender, @crafty184, and @brueckj23) shared how they have used twitter in elementary/secondary/higher ed classrooms. They had some great ideas and I was able to think and process about how I would like to integrate it into both my high school physics and university geography classes. I got to attend the session with a colleague from SNU and we talked about online classes over the summer. I'm stoked to collaborate with her (and @mishelleyb) while I teach online during the upcoming summer session. I'm a little nervous, but it should be fun! I almost forgot, there was also a flash mob during this time. A little crazy.

Finally, the kids came in from the hotel and we walked over to the Reading Market. @mishelleyb had been wanting to go and sample the Amish stuff in there and we were all pretty excited about the eats we had heard about. If you want to see what we experienced, click here. We had a great culinary adventure. It seems that much of our travel is driven (no pun intended) by food. We are a foodie family and have some of our best times around the dinner table, whether ours or some restaurant.

The fact is these two days have been a tremendous amount of fun, work, and learning. I'm sure many people think "Who in the world wants to go to Nerd Camp for 4 days? Especially with your own kids and wife?" I do! These trips are some of the most rewarding of my life, both professionally and personally.

360 Leadership, Part 5

Section 5 of the book discusses leading down. This is where my interactions with students come into context. The very first principle in this section is “Walk Slowly Through The Halls”. As teacher-leader, how in the world can you get to know your students if you never leave your classroom? Great relationships are the key to great teaching. Our administrators constantly tell us to “stand outside your door between classes.” If teachers are being excellent (refer to section 2) that should not have to be said. Teacher-leaders need to learn who their student are outside the context of a single classroom.

Also in that section, Mr. Maxwell says we need to “Model The Behavior You Desire.” Whether you are a teacher, parent, or account executive, that is great advice. No one will follow someone who says one thing and then does the opposite. Our actions speak much louder than our words and this is especially true in education when students are watching what do and learning from our actions. They are not only learning our content, they are learning how to interact with people through their interactions with us.

Finally, Maxwell is explicit in the way 360-Degree Leaders are valuable. This part of the book was the most redundant for me. I felt like it was a summary of the rest of the book, or maybe it is just common sense. The main point here is that leaders are needed at every level of every organization. Experience at one level of generally leadership prepares us for leadership at the next level. In fact, the opposite should also be true: if you cannot lead at a lower level, why should you be trusted to move to the next level? He points out that every organization needs the qualities that 360-Degree leaders possess.

The take-away idea from this entire book is the concept of teamwork. People who want to see an organization or idea succeed will put the needs, wants and desires of others above their own. We certainly need more of those kinds of people in education. Without them, we will never see any change. We will keep stagnating in an out-dated system of educating our youth instead of moving forward toward returning as a world leader in education. Everyday I need to ask myself, what can I do to support the mission of my school, my leader, and my colleagues? That will drive my decisions.