Throwing Diana Senechal "Under the Bus" Part 2 #NEA #AFT #edtech #edchat

Ok, in fairness to both the author of this poorly written and what I quite frankly feel is a damaging article published in American Educator I have decided to finish my notes on the article:

"At my former school, I led lunchtime literature clubs...The fifth-grade group read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn...We discussed Huck's confusion...The discussion was slow, with pauses. At one point the room fell into a long silence. One student said, 'Ms. Senechal, you're quite today!' Another student responded, 'She's thinking. There's a lot to think about here.'...I am proud that the students were able to appreciate the quite in the room." ¶21

-Does this story really illustrate a focus on student learning or is the focus on the teacher's learning? So far in this article all the content learning she has been talking about has been about teachers acquiring content knowledge so they can pass it on to their students. Very little mention of student acquisition of or construction of knowledge.

"Teachers should not have to give up intellectual authority in the classroom; they should bring their knowledge, insight, and expertise to students." ¶22

-Completely reinforces my assessment of the previous paragraph and clearly states her philosophy that teachers impart knowledge to students.

"One of the benefits of apprenticeship is that it allows for a long period of learning." ¶23

-Is she implying that one ceases to learn when they finish school and enter a profession?

"Twitter, Facebook, and texting add nothing to Skakespeare; they are only distractions." ¶27

-Used ineffectively this statement is correct. However, it is not the tool that is important with successful tech integration, it is how it is used. Used effectively these tools can deepen a student's understanding of content and increase student motivation to engage in the content. This author is clearly missing the boat on this point entirely.

"They learn much more about technology this way than they would by blogging and texting-activities they likely pursue on their own."¶27

-It is precisely because they likely pursue these activities on their own that make them applicable in the classroom as a medium of engagement. When using these tools to teach Shakespeare it is still Shakespeare the students are learning, whatever learning about blogging and texting that occurs is secondary and ought not be assessed. Additionally, we have a moral obligation to use these tools in our teaching because the use of them affords us the opportunity to teach students how to be ethical and safe when online. By this logic we could also argue that classroom strategies that include talking or listening don't need to be used in school because they are "activities they likely pursue on their own."

"Deeper engagement is sacrificed for a more trivial kind, and quiet, independent thought has little place." ¶28

-Again, where is she getting this view of learner-centered classrooms? This seems more true of "traditional" classrooms than "21st century" ones.

"We do nothing to elevate the level of communication by having them read an write blogs, watch and make videos, an send text messages and tweets during English and history classes. Students know how to use the equipment, but their writing ability remains deplorably weak, forcing colleges to offer remedial writing courses and to assist students with basic writing throughout their undergraduate years." ¶32

-Blogs, video, text messages, and tweets are all new and important forms of communication. Engaging students with these forms of communication in any class elevates student literacy in these new mediums. This is the same as arguing that having students engage in oral presentation erodes their ability to write or visa versa. It is also like saying that if a student learns a second language their ability to communicate in their first language will suffer Additionally, colleges and universities offering remedial writing courses is not a new phenomenon, they were doing it before the advent of social media. There has been no study that can substantiate these claims. Otherwise I am sure the author would have made sure to mention it.

"We could seek ways to combine disciplined practice with inspiring lessons, projects, and discussions." ¶34

-In other words, learner-centered, constructivist, project-based, progressive, 21st Century classrooms.

Throwing Diana Senechal "Under the Bus" #NEA #AFT #edtech #edchat

@micwalker

Today teachers across the United States were treated to a new issue of American Educator which seems to have some rather scathing looks at "21st Century" skills, student-centered learning, differentiated instruction, technology integration, active learning, & other school reform movements. Of particular note is an article titled "The Most Daring Education Reform of All" by Diana Senechal.

The Most Daring Education Reform of All, by Diana Senechal, American Educator, Spring 2010, American Federation of Teachers via kwout

Senechal clearly has a bias for "traditional" models of curriculum & instruction and it is clear from her article that while she may possess some knowledge of the newer movements in education she obviously has little understanding of them. I am embarrassed that a union I belong to has included this article in their publications. It is regressive, presents no substantial ideas that move our profession along a path of improvement, and relies on many unsubstantiated claims and false statements as a foundation for her arguments. What follows are my notes:

"They partake in an American tradition without heeding history or tradition; they glorify the new because it is new, while disparaging the old because it is old."

-I don't think any reformer ever disparages the old for being old, it is always something about the old that they find fault with. This statement is unsubstantiated, misleading, & false.

"this leads to situations where teachers must use technology in class, whether or not it serves the lesson well." ¶3

-No, it often leads to this but this statement is a broad generalization. What it leads to is teachers reacting to the existence of the technology and the effect technologies have on aspects of the classroom including but not limited to curriculum, student behavior, cognition, and pedagogy.

"They forget that content is not simply dry matter; it has shape and meaning; it is the result of centuries of critical thought and the basis for future critical thought." ¶7

-The content she speaks of here that is "the result of centuries of critical thought" is also the result of centuries of bias. This content (and the pedagogy that has developed around it) highly favors and supports the concrete sequential learner and reinforces cultural and socioeconomic structures of white Western society. This system has largely oppressed everyone else and has often in our past been a deliberate tool of oppression.

"To neglect to teach our intellectual and cultural traditions is to limit the kind of thinking that students will be able to do throughout their lives." ¶7

-Adversely, to emphasize them is to reinforce the biases infused into these traditions. Also, who is she referring to by "our?" It is my understanding that different nonwestern cultures have intellectual and cultural traditions that can differ substantially. Does she include those traditions when she uses the word "our?"

"If teachers must ceaselessly change their curriculum to match what is happening in society (or, more narrowly, the workplace), neither they nor their students will have the opportunity to step back and reflect." ¶11

-I fail to see any truth in this argument. I have the ability to reflect on my own life as I live it, why can't a teacher reflect on their curriculum as they modify it. Curriculum is not static, it is dynamic and ought to be consistently modified. If a major game-changing discovery is made in the field of science should we ignore it or alter our curriculum according to the new findings? Adopting the relationship with curriculum this author advocates results in equating curriculum with textbooks. The result of which is everyone ends up learning curriculum written for Texas placating to Texas ideals and political sensibilities.

"For students to engage in inquiry, they must have a strong foundation of knowledge." ¶17

-My 2 & 4 year old daughters are very inquisitive, it is how they learn. They engage in inquiry every day (almost all day). It is through this inquiry that they gain knowledge and understanding.

"But true engagement is not entertainment; it is involvement, which my be invisible at times." ¶19

-Isn't this what 21st Century pedagogy is all about? What is she criticizing here?

"Or they reach a point where they cannot take their peers any more and beak into fights." ¶20

-Let me get this straight, active learning leads students into conflict with each other while traditional classrooms don't? This statement is so far from being rational it is almost laughable. Traditional "sit and get" classrooms limit the teacher's ability to build relationships with students which leads to worse classroom behavior. In a learner-centered classroom classroom management is far easier because there is built into the instruction community building as an integral component. Statements like this are almost laughable and do not deserve serious consideration and should by no means have ever appeared in a respectable teacher journal.

"Deeper engagement is sacrificed for a more trivial kind, and quiet, independent thought has little place."

-Again, where is she getting this view of learner-centered classrooms? This seems more true of "traditional" classrooms than "21st century" ones.

I stopped reading here, couldn't take any more of it......

Project-Based Hybrid Charter School Within a School Interest Survey

For those of you who have been following my blog you will know that I have been exploring the possibility of starting a new charter school in Minnesota that is partially virtual but will exist as digitally connected classrooms within the walls of our existing public schools. If you are interested in this idea and want to be involved please fill out the interest form below:

Web 2.0 Britannica Discussion

There is a lively discussion going on over at the Britannica blog regarding project based learning and web 2.0 tools. This started with a post by Steve Hargadon and continued with a post by Daniel Willingham. I highly recommend you give it a whirl. The following are the comments I made on Daniel Willingham's thread a couple days ago. I am reposting them here because I think it follows well with some of my recent thinking and recent posts on this blog:

I completely agree that what is needed are teachers who know how to utilize project-based pedagogies effectively when appropriate and that the pedagogy trumps whatever technology might be used. Teachers need training not only on how to use web2.0 tools but knowledge of what tools are available. Since the spectrum changes almost exponentially every day this becomes extremely difficult. The field of education also does a poor job of providing this training. If a company in the private sector wants their employees to use a technology for their job they usually pay that employee to be trained on said technology and provide time for this to happen. In schools this time is almost nill and teachers are usually expected to keep up on their own. As for any system wide pedagogical shift that might happen there are other systemic factors that get in the way. To this point Alan Kellog comments, “Teach them how to think for themselves, and don’t accept whining.” The problem here is with most teachers there is no choice whether we accept their whining or not. Tenure and teacher unions make sure the status quo remains in effect. If web2.0 is a disruptive technology for schools and if that disruptive technology changes quickly (as it does), then schools need to be able to change quickly if they want to keep up. The system is stacked against quick change. In most schools there is a triad of forces that both prevent bad ideas from wrecking havoc on the system and prohibit quick necessary changes from taking place. These three forces are the school board or board of directors, the teacher union or association, and the administration.

Today, Scott McLeod asked, "Can a computer lecture be better than a human?" in a blog post about his 5th grade daughter needing to find an answer to a math problem. In their search they found an animated program online that more effectively taught the concept than any book or lecture could have done. He says that they found themselves self-motivated learners by the engagement of the tools. This is a serious problem for our schools. If our best teachers are not in our classrooms but designing programs, simulations, and teaching objects that enable self-directed inquiry and encourage independent learning and if students find that kind of education more engaging, thought provoking, and efficient than our classrooms then why should they not drop out and acquire their own education at home? Why would we need classroom teachers at all? Why would we need schools? With this scenario, home schooling looks like a great option. Maybe a superior option for many.

I don’t think we will see a major transformation of our public schools but if we do it will be in response to a crisis that hurts fiscally. When a mass exodus of students occurs and schools have to cut enough teachers and boards have to cut enough programs because of lack of funds due to declining enrollment we might then see schools enacting their own pedagogical bailout package.

Student Centered Pedagogies - Part 4

-Continued from part 3

Step 4 - Building a Launchpad

Now that you have determined what performance objectives the state, your school, you, and your students all feel are important to meet and eliminated the ones they have already mastered through curriculum compacting it is time to lay the foundation for designing projects for the students to do to meet the remaining objectives, goals, and targets.

I have seen and used many different approaches for this. In fact, it is necessary to apply varying approaches because not every approach will work best with all students. I see two broad categories for projects: Externally motivated and internally motivated. Externally motivated projects rely on events that happen or have happened recently outside the classroom. We can broadly think of these as current events that inform the curricular topics still needed to be addressed. These external sources of motivation are useful because they make apparent the why of learning anything new. An example of this would be students writing letters to the editor about a current event for an English composition class instead of doing grammar exercises. Internally motivated projects are those that are driven by student personal interest. With these projects students also immediately see the purpose for learning but what one student does might not interest other students to the same degree. An example of this would be a student in a math class who is interested in dirt bikes using data obtained about dirt bikes to make predictions, design a better bike, or determine the laws of math and physics that are at work with biking.

Another way to categorize projects is by level of collaboration. There at least six different levels of collaboration: individual, partner or small group, full class, partner with online or distant partner, small group with online small group or distant partner, or participation in a global project (ex. Wikipedia). Some students will be motivated strongly to work independently and show a strong ability to manage projects by themselves.

The individual project model (either internally motivated or externally motivated) will work well for them. For these students it is useful to conference with them before and after a project checking in with them only from time to time to see how they are doing and guide their self paced learning by making suggestions. For these students it is important that they know and feel that they are in control of their own learning and understand the expectations in terms of performance objectives.

For students who do not work well independently or who find they work best when there is a more social element to the learning environment either small group or full class projects are best for them. Using a democratic classroom the students can still feel they are in control of their own learning. However, these two models (especially full class) are much more teacher directed than an independent model. Project development will be nearly identical in a small group or full class as it is with individual projects but in most cases will take longer because you are adding the democratic element. The old saying, "If you want to go quickly go alone, if you want to go far go together," applies here. In a group or class project you will have the added resource of multiple talents, personalities, and abilities but you will also have problems not present with independent work.

The biggest problem with group or full class projects is making sure every student does their fair share of the work. This can be addressed in the planning stage. If each student is assigned a role or task they will each have their own contribution but they will also each have their own separate set of assessment criteria. It should be stressed in these cases that what the teacher will assess will not be the group's final product but rather the individual contributions of each member of the group. In a way, this turns group projects into many individual projects connected through a common theme. With this model there is often an additional motivator: peer pressure. If one student is depending on data from another student to complete their role they will likely put pressure on that student to make sure they get their stuff done. As long as you have sufficient momentum with your project so the group feeling doesn't swing the way of apathy this will work to your advantage.

Step 5 - Assessment

With project-based learning assessment is the perhaps the most important duty of the teacher. It is important for students to know before they start work on a project how they will be assessed. Rubrics and checklists help with this but when each student is required to do something different this can be daunting if not impossible. First, it is good to anticipate project tasks that will be common and have rubrics ready to go. For example, an essay writing rubric, a poster rubric, a presentation rubric, etc. For more specific tasks it is important to work assessment planning into project planning. Work with the student(s) to articulate how you will assess whether they learned or achieved desired learning objectives or if they have met the standards. Then, as students are working on projects constantly refer to these rubrics to guide their research, discoveries, and work. Using a tool like Rubistar helps a lot with this stage of the PBL process.

Student Centered Pedagogies - Part 3

See Part 2

Project Based Learning:

I was first formally introduced to project-based learning as an approach to curriculum and instruction three years ago though as an art teacher what I have done my entire career has been related to this concept. At that time I started teaching at an alternative school where the staff had decided to invest heavily in the project-based model. Our school district was in the process of being approved as an IB school and as part of that had adopted Understanding by Design as the curriculum framework district wide. This was a massive undertaking by the district as the next few years were marked by something that looked like mandated reflective practice, many training sessions, and lots of curriculum alignment. What we saw occurring in the other "normal" schools was what I have concluded was a massive misinterpretation of the backwards design model. Rather than stripping learning down to its essentials and examining what it is that really needs to be taught and determining exactly how learning is really done, regardless of our previously held beliefs, teachers for the most part approached UbD as something they could mold over their previous programs and not a fundamental structure change. What resulted were slight improvements but massive confusion on the student part as to why teachers were doing some of the things they did.

At the ALC we took a different approach. We eliminated most of our classes and replaced them with a semi structured time we called Inquiry. Inquiry was about project-based learning and we used the UbD framework to structure this time from the ground up. The idea was that students would not take specific classes during Inquiry but could work on projects they develop with the guidance of the teaching staff that could satisfy part or all of the credit needed for course completion in any of the subject areas. Inquiry was not without its flaws and we did have massive growing pains as we all adjusted to this new system of instruction. We had to overcome curriculum issues, behavior issues, time management issues, and issues related to differentiated instruction. However, we were all on the same page with this. Very few of us had experience doing anything like this and we all learned from each other and made changes in our program as we saw fit and when we saw them needed. When our Inquiry program reached its maturity we had a system where students owned their own learning, collaborated with each other, and achieved learning objectives by doing rather than rote memorization. Students were able to complete their high school credits engaged in topics that interested them. Because it was driven by student interest and personal aptitudes students were more engaged in the learning process.

Step 1 - Start from scratch:

The Inquiry model as I have described it does not fit well in a traditional school setting. Especially not one where students are only in a class for 40-50 minutes each day. However, there are elements that could be pulled from this experience and applied within the traditional school classroom. First, if we remove all of our old baggage and prior beliefs about how learning occurs or how a classroom is supposed to be managed we have a chance at actually finding a better model of instruction. So, put aside everything you have done in the past and every way you were ever taught (don't toss it out, we may reference it later).

Step 2 - Identify limitations, resources, and boundaries:

What are our limitations? I am presuming, based on my prior experiences in "normal" high schools, that teacher's classrooms are treated like islands and what you do in your class has little transfer to other classrooms (obviously not always the case but often true). In the case you are doing this alone or only with a single department and not as a building-wide initiative you will be limited by the Pavlonian bell schedule. You will most likely also be limited by the mandate to report assessment outcomes in the form of grades. Likewise, you will be limited to reporting credits as the class you have been assigned to teach that hour, unless you can partner with teachers in other classes. Since you probably have neighbors in your building who have their own thing going on and don't want their classes interrupted you will most likely be limited by the physical boundaries of your classroom and places on or near the school grounds where your presence will not be misconstrued as a disruptive presence.

What are our resources? I am assuming that your classroom has at least one computer and an internet connection. I am also assuming that you have a modest budget for supplies, capital, and curriculum. You most likely also have about 30 desks and chairs or tables and chairs. I am sure there are community members who you can count as resources as well as places of interest within reach of your school. If you have a webcam and microphone you can connect both visually and audibly to people in distant locals as well. If this is not something you already have it is something even the most modest budget can make room for. Pretty much anything out there that is open source or public domain is available. We could probably list all your resources for a very long time but for sake of getting on with things lets just keep that list in our heads for now.

What are our boundaries? It is also important to consider what our boundaries are. What can we do and where can we go. Is the internet filtered at your school? If so what sites are limited? Of course there are legal boundaries that limit what we can do but there are most likely also boundaries created by school regulations. We need to make sure we respect those because if you want something to happen in your classroom that does not follow the traditional method of instruction you do not want to be viewed simply as a disruptive influence in your school. Are there limitations created by the expectations of administrators? These are important to note if you want to keep your job.

Step 3 - Identify Learning Objectives

No matter what learning theory you subscribe to or what teaching method you choose to use it is important to identify learning objectives. The problem I often see, and something I was guilty of when I was a new teacher, is that many teachers confuse learning objective with learning activity. Another thing that bothers me, and one of the issues I take with the UbD model, is the practice of deriving learning objectives from content standards. The problem with this is with most content areas the standards are pretty basic and represent what our most under performing students should be able to do and know at the most basic level. The standards are not a good starting point if you want to engage or teach to the level of the majority of the students in your classroom.

Now, once you have determined what key ideas students should know when they complete your course then you can check them against the standards to make sure you did not forget anything. Now is time for curriculum compacting. How are you going to assess which of these objectives don't need to be met? How are you going to develop a pretest or preassessment that will accurately determine which students already know some of these key objective? I am also a firm believer that your own objectives are not nearly as important as those of the learners. How are you going to find out what students want to learn. The ideal curriculum is one that blends the objectives the teacher has for their students with the learning goals of the individual learners and doesn't waste time trying to meet objectives that have already been met. This means that no class you teach will ever be the same. You can't teach one year 30 times. If you have three sections of the same class there is no reason each of those classes have to be the same nor should they. This also means that you can't plan activities in June for a class that doesn't start until September.

Continue to Part 4