Sunday, October 2, 2011
Education Paradigms
I came across this AMAZING RSA Animate video called "Changing Education Paradigms". Worth a watch.
The Others
Viewer warning: Please do not jump down my throat upon reading the first half of this post, LOL. I was required to think about how we tend to “other” [(v) – using 'they', 'them', etc as a means of discrimination... not necessarily negative, but highlighting that a difference exists]. It was important for me to become fully aware of and really acknowledge my own "othering". It was a challenge for me to not only come to terms with having these types of thoughts and ideas, but to put them out here for scrutiny.
An “other” I use way too much (mostly just in my own head, in my own thinking) is “primary teachers”. This bias started right from my first day of PDP. There was “us”, the STEP (Secondary Teacher Ed Program ) students, and “them”, the ETEP (Elementary Teacher Ed Program) students. We, of course, thought we were better than them ,and they thought they were better than us. Our argument always revolved around our academic "superiority" over them in that we already held specialized degrees and were adding Education to that. To top off that already negative and über-judgmental attitude, I was in the Math and Science cohort, so “we” though we were not only better than the elementary teachers-in-training, but also than the Arts and Trades secondary teachers-in-training.
Wow.
As my fingers stroked each of the keys of the keyboard in typing that last sentence (and again in re-reading it), a feeling of embarrassment overcame me and I struggled to fight the urge to not go back and erase it or re-word it in a less offensive way. But I won’t, because that is the true start of how my bias developed. A bias that even though I am aware of it and have matured past thinking like that, has affected both my attitudes towards these educators and my practice in general.
I no longer think of secondary specialist teachers as better than primary generalist teachers. I think that the two ends of the spectrum are different from each other in many ways, but are similar to each other in many ways as well. In fact, I would say that there are more meaningful similarities than there are differences. I hold huge respect for primary educators and have no problem acknowledging that it is a job that I simply could not do – not because it is ‘beneath me’, but because I do not think that I possess the qualities that it takes for one to be a successful educator of young children.
So how am I different from my “others”? I guess I think about teaching an academic core at a secondary level to be more challenging, to be more rigorous, and to require more expertise. I know that the curriculum in these areas tends to be very specific and often quite linear, and that factors like time constraints and standardized assessments add to this challenge.
How are my “others” different from me? To start, they deal with small children. Children that need to be constantly watched, coddled, entertained, engaged, and nurtured. They require a mother’s-like love, attention, validation, reassurance, and patience. Creating that short list alone was exhausting for me – the prospect of having to do those all at the exact same time with not one, but 25-30 students is a feat that I don’t fully understand and have huge respect for those who do it on a daily basis. And this is just in dealing with the students! On top of this, primary educators have to teach the children the basics like reading, writing, and number sense, in addition to the development of many other skills that we as secondary teachers take for granted.
How are “us” and “them” similar? To list just a few of the many, many ways: We all have a passion for learning; We are interested in how people learn and cultivating our own communities of learning; We care about students and their education; We are advocates of today’s youth; We care about ‘raising’ students who will be positive contributors to society.
These similarities are far too powerful to allow any differences to be of significant importance. Allow me to make a food analogy (as for some reason that always seems to make a nice conclusion that, while being over-simplified, can act as a concept clarifier to both myself a
s the thinker/writer and to you as the reader). So secondary and primary educators are kind of like comparing berries to melons in that they are not the exact same thing, but that they are both fruits (no pun intended). But in fact, there are many types of berries and each of those brings something unique to the table. One is not necessarily better than the other, but each has qualities that add diversity to the mix. The same with melons. So it really isn’t about “us” versus “them” (or “berries” versus “melons”) as there is a wide diversity among the individual groups and characterizing the people by their jobs is not really fair. What we should do is make a delightful little fruit salad where we can recognize the contributions of each of these fruits in a way that compliments the others instead of isolating them.
An “other” I use way too much (mostly just in my own head, in my own thinking) is “primary teachers”. This bias started right from my first day of PDP. There was “us”, the STEP (Secondary Teacher Ed Program ) students, and “them”, the ETEP (Elementary Teacher Ed Program) students. We, of course, thought we were better than them ,and they thought they were better than us. Our argument always revolved around our academic "superiority" over them in that we already held specialized degrees and were adding Education to that. To top off that already negative and über-judgmental attitude, I was in the Math and Science cohort, so “we” though we were not only better than the elementary teachers-in-training, but also than the Arts and Trades secondary teachers-in-training.
Wow.
As my fingers stroked each of the keys of the keyboard in typing that last sentence (and again in re-reading it), a feeling of embarrassment overcame me and I struggled to fight the urge to not go back and erase it or re-word it in a less offensive way. But I won’t, because that is the true start of how my bias developed. A bias that even though I am aware of it and have matured past thinking like that, has affected both my attitudes towards these educators and my practice in general.
I no longer think of secondary specialist teachers as better than primary generalist teachers. I think that the two ends of the spectrum are different from each other in many ways, but are similar to each other in many ways as well. In fact, I would say that there are more meaningful similarities than there are differences. I hold huge respect for primary educators and have no problem acknowledging that it is a job that I simply could not do – not because it is ‘beneath me’, but because I do not think that I possess the qualities that it takes for one to be a successful educator of young children.
So how am I different from my “others”? I guess I think about teaching an academic core at a secondary level to be more challenging, to be more rigorous, and to require more expertise. I know that the curriculum in these areas tends to be very specific and often quite linear, and that factors like time constraints and standardized assessments add to this challenge.
How are my “others” different from me? To start, they deal with small children. Children that need to be constantly watched, coddled, entertained, engaged, and nurtured. They require a mother’s-like love, attention, validation, reassurance, and patience. Creating that short list alone was exhausting for me – the prospect of having to do those all at the exact same time with not one, but 25-30 students is a feat that I don’t fully understand and have huge respect for those who do it on a daily basis. And this is just in dealing with the students! On top of this, primary educators have to teach the children the basics like reading, writing, and number sense, in addition to the development of many other skills that we as secondary teachers take for granted.
How are “us” and “them” similar? To list just a few of the many, many ways: We all have a passion for learning; We are interested in how people learn and cultivating our own communities of learning; We care about students and their education; We are advocates of today’s youth; We care about ‘raising’ students who will be positive contributors to society.
These similarities are far too powerful to allow any differences to be of significant importance. Allow me to make a food analogy (as for some reason that always seems to make a nice conclusion that, while being over-simplified, can act as a concept clarifier to both myself a
s the thinker/writer and to you as the reader). So secondary and primary educators are kind of like comparing berries to melons in that they are not the exact same thing, but that they are both fruits (no pun intended). But in fact, there are many types of berries and each of those brings something unique to the table. One is not necessarily better than the other, but each has qualities that add diversity to the mix. The same with melons. So it really isn’t about “us” versus “them” (or “berries” versus “melons”) as there is a wide diversity among the individual groups and characterizing the people by their jobs is not really fair. What we should do is make a delightful little fruit salad where we can recognize the contributions of each of these fruits in a way that compliments the others instead of isolating them.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Analyze That.
The results of taking the time to actually comb through my philosophy (previous post) and analyze it AND my practice (not always one in the same) was indeed interesting. When learning about the three curriculum perspectives as described by Miller & Sellers (1990), I though I knew where I as an educator, would fit. I feel that John Dewey summed it up best: “Education is life itself”. I knew that I wasn’t “zen” enough to embody the transformative perspective fully, and I hoped that I wasn’t “stiff” enough to embody the transmission perspective. The transaction perspective seemed like it was right up my alley… Or was it?
Upon taking a much closer look at the characterizations of each and going through each point in painstaking contemplation, I started making comments to myself like “well, I believe this, but don’t actually do it ”, as well as the reverse “I do this, but don’t really believe in it”. Red flag. I then went back over each point, highlighting:
- Ones that I practice, but don’t whole-heartedly agree with;
- Ones that I agree with, but don’t actually practice;
- And ones that I practice because I because it is what I believe.
Even in writing my philosophy I acknowledged that my philosophy is split between a utopic view where policy and mandate and curriculum specificity and classroom constraints do not play a role, and a more realistic one where they do (which I don’t necessarily agree with all of the time). So this of course, has an effect on my practice. Or, perhaps I haven’t forced myself to really analyze my philosophies and my practice together in a critically reflective way in such detail before/enough.
Some questions I had regarding the transaction perspective (and definitely more so with the transformative perspective, although I am less interested in becoming more of a “transformative educator” at this point) involve curriculum development, organization and evaluation. To me this idea of having any sort of control over the above factors would definitely impact the way I teach; however it seems that educators who specialize in higher-level, academic classes (in my case, mathematics) do not easily have this freedom as perhaps primary, generalist educators do. Being bound by constraints such as final exams and 50 minute blocks makes it challenging for teachers to “facilitate learners’ inquiry in directions the learners’ interest reflects”. I am not skeptical, but I am interested to see how this would be accomplished.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Philosophising
My name is Laura. I spend over $5.00 on a single coffee. I spend more minutes per day on social media than I do having face-to-face conversation. I am a teacher who disagrees with the education system.
Let me ask you: which of those facts about me caught you off guard? I’m betting it’s not the ridiculously overpriced, border-line highway robbery cost of chain-restaurant coffeehouse beverages, nor the companionship that a networked piece of metal brings me. It’s the educator who has the beef with education, right? Allow me to explain:
My Philosophy of Education
Throughout the past two years – time I had spent on graduate studies in education – my Philosophy of Education has continued to morph. I have this utopic view of what I think it means to learn and to know something, and what roles ideally teachers and students (and administration and the public) should play in education. However, I also have this realistic view that is bogged down by curriculum and policy, and together they are kind of like the angel/devil characters that sit on my shoulders, fighting.
My Philosophy of Education involves constantly striving to create a community of life-long learners. The way it makes sense to me can be broken down and fleshed out into three components: (1) Individuality, (2) Community, and (3) Purpose.
Individuality
The process of learning varies from individual to individual, and I think it’s important that educators, and more importantly, policy-makers, recognize this and work to create learning environments that respect individuality and experiences that are meaningful. Students are not cookie-cutter clones who learn A-Z in the same way, so we shouldn’t treat them as such.
Community
While individuality is important, that fact is that we are constantly surrounded by community. Communities of learners, communities of friends, communities of family – and with that comes a need to take advantage of what community can offer, and how we can function optimally in a community setting. I feel while humans can act in manners that are altruistic, we are also selfish at heart (at times) and benefit from moral education. I think educators work hard as it is to include this in their practice, and it is one example of where I feel the “hidden curriculum” holds more value than the actual one.
Purpose
I believe learning to be a process that is cyclical and not linear as our current system has it laid out as. In thinking about the goal of formal education, I think that we should focus more on how to learn, rather than what to learn. The education system we have in place in Canada and the US is like a pendulum that swings dramatically from one idea to the next, without thinking through the repercussions or looking at it from a long-term perspective. It is drastic and standardized and short-term, all of which seem to go against the purpose of education.
What Should be Taught in Schools?
Excellent question. And one I fear is not easy to answer. We live in a culture of quick-fixes and generalizations which, in my opinion, are hindering the education of today’s youth. This is where my battle of “utopic” vs “realistic” comes into play. I understand that there has to be policies and frameworks and that budgetary constraints exist. However, extraneous factors like hidden agendas and politics play a profound role in what constitutes best practice and what is expected of educators. Much of my problem lies with the curriculum itself…
What is the Role of Teachers and Students?
I think that a fundamental role of teachers is to inspire learning. I don’t see teachers as these containers of knowledge, where students are simply vessels waiting to be filled. I see the process of learning as more organic and more of a construction rather a demonstration. I see teachers as facilitators who assist students in realizing and achieving their potential, and I see students as active members in the process rather than passive recipients. I don’t see this happening in classrooms filled with +30 students and several IEPS. I don’t see this happening the way things are now.
Let me ask you: which of those facts about me caught you off guard? I’m betting it’s not the ridiculously overpriced, border-line highway robbery cost of chain-restaurant coffeehouse beverages, nor the companionship that a networked piece of metal brings me. It’s the educator who has the beef with education, right? Allow me to explain:
My Philosophy of Education
Throughout the past two years – time I had spent on graduate studies in education – my Philosophy of Education has continued to morph. I have this utopic view of what I think it means to learn and to know something, and what roles ideally teachers and students (and administration and the public) should play in education. However, I also have this realistic view that is bogged down by curriculum and policy, and together they are kind of like the angel/devil characters that sit on my shoulders, fighting.
My Philosophy of Education involves constantly striving to create a community of life-long learners. The way it makes sense to me can be broken down and fleshed out into three components: (1) Individuality, (2) Community, and (3) Purpose.
Individuality
The process of learning varies from individual to individual, and I think it’s important that educators, and more importantly, policy-makers, recognize this and work to create learning environments that respect individuality and experiences that are meaningful. Students are not cookie-cutter clones who learn A-Z in the same way, so we shouldn’t treat them as such.
Community
While individuality is important, that fact is that we are constantly surrounded by community. Communities of learners, communities of friends, communities of family – and with that comes a need to take advantage of what community can offer, and how we can function optimally in a community setting. I feel while humans can act in manners that are altruistic, we are also selfish at heart (at times) and benefit from moral education. I think educators work hard as it is to include this in their practice, and it is one example of where I feel the “hidden curriculum” holds more value than the actual one.
Purpose
I believe learning to be a process that is cyclical and not linear as our current system has it laid out as. In thinking about the goal of formal education, I think that we should focus more on how to learn, rather than what to learn. The education system we have in place in Canada and the US is like a pendulum that swings dramatically from one idea to the next, without thinking through the repercussions or looking at it from a long-term perspective. It is drastic and standardized and short-term, all of which seem to go against the purpose of education.
What Should be Taught in Schools?
Excellent question. And one I fear is not easy to answer. We live in a culture of quick-fixes and generalizations which, in my opinion, are hindering the education of today’s youth. This is where my battle of “utopic” vs “realistic” comes into play. I understand that there has to be policies and frameworks and that budgetary constraints exist. However, extraneous factors like hidden agendas and politics play a profound role in what constitutes best practice and what is expected of educators. Much of my problem lies with the curriculum itself…
I think that we waste way too much time and energy filling kids’ heads with useless and often irrelevant information. Do they really need to know what we teach them? Is having them be able to regurgitate it back to us on a test or a project really a sign of them learning anything at all? Perhaps we need to find a way to start over again and figure out what it means to be a “knowledgeable” member of society and THEN figure out how to educate to achieve that. I feel the answer lies in simplicity – basic skills such as questioning, sorting, organizing, hypothesizing, verifying, criticizing, applying, etc. Maybe the focus should switch from “what”, to “how and why”. (Excerpt from my blog post August 2010 on “Knowledge, the disciplines, and learning in the Digital Age” (Jane Gilbert, 2007) http://thoughtsandviewsoneducation.blogspot.com/2010/08/knowledge-disciplines-and-learning-in.html)True, it’s harder for students to do, harder for teachers to assess, and harder for the higher-ups to regulate, but since when is education about taking the easy way out? I don’t have answers on how this should look or how it should operate; I just feel that our current system is not optimal for inspiring and engaging student learners.
What is the Role of Teachers and Students?
I think that a fundamental role of teachers is to inspire learning. I don’t see teachers as these containers of knowledge, where students are simply vessels waiting to be filled. I see the process of learning as more organic and more of a construction rather a demonstration. I see teachers as facilitators who assist students in realizing and achieving their potential, and I see students as active members in the process rather than passive recipients. I don’t see this happening in classrooms filled with +30 students and several IEPS. I don’t see this happening the way things are now.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
What Exactly is Student-Centered Learning?
I came across this entry saved to my computer… I guess I forgot to post it! I meant to upload it prior to blogging about my trials and tribulations of this inquiry. My bad. Pretend the date reads January 30th :)
As I become more comfortable with the teacher-inquirer that I am growing into, I have learned that before diving into a field study I need to make sure I have clearly defined for myself the definitions of the terms/topics/situations of which I am inquiring.
What does student-centered learning look like in a 21st century mathematics classroom?
I’ve spent significant time in my graduate coursework examining what a “21st century classroom” looks like and qualities that they may possess. The most important thing for me to wrap my head around now is what it means to have learning be student-centered. Starting out, that was simple: learning was either teacher-centered (knowledge is imparted by the teacher and instruction is direct) or student-centered (knowledge is actively constructed by the learner and the instruction is indirect). Right? Hmm. That was a bit of an assumption. Seems that like most things in education, nothing is really black and white, and it’s investigating those grey areas where my “aha moments” tend to occur.So when looking for a definition, where does one go? Wikipedia of course ;)
“Student-centred learning (or student-centered learning; also called child-centred learning) is an approach to education focusing on the needs of the students, rather than those of others involved in the educational process, such as teachers and administrators.
Student-centred learning, that is, putting students first, is in stark contrast to existing establishment/teacher-centred lecturing and careerism. Student-centred learning is focused on the student's needs, abilities, interests, and learning styles with the teacher as a facilitator of learning. This classroom teaching method acknowledges student voice as central to the learning experience for every learner. Teacher-centred learning has the teacher at its centre in an active role and students in a passive, receptive role. Student-centred learning requires students to be active, responsible participants in their own learning.”
Okay, so the definition I originally had has been somewhat expanded. Looking at that, it made me think back to Educational Psychology 101, in my teacher-education days, and names like John Dewey, Jean Piaget, and Lev Vygotsky started swirling around my head. Oh yeah, I remember learning about that now – these guys practically came up with the idea of student-centered learning!
My next step was something I would not likely (correction = never) have done: refer to academic research to inform my understanding of student-centeredness. I came across one article in particular that caused such a shift in my thinking that I couldn’t
stop talking about it to my friends and family. They were not nearly as excited by it as I was. Whenever I become energized about something in math or education (or worse, math education), I am usually met with family members pulling out their imaginary calculators, punching numbers furiously, and pushing their also imaginary glassed up their noses whilst snorting. I think they’re trying to tell me something. I once got a T-shirt for Christmas that read “talk nerdy to me”. Yup.Back to the article. The citation for it is:
Elen, J., Clarebout, G., Lowyck, R., & Lowyck, J. (2007). Student-centred and teacher-centred learning environments: what students think. Teaching in Higher Education: 12(1).This study focused on the relationship between teacher-centered and student-centered learning environments from the perspective of a student. It identified 3 views of this relationship: (1) the balance view: the more teacher-centered a learning environment the less student-centered it is and vice versa; (2) the transactional view: continuous renegotiation of teacher- and student-roles; and (3) the independent view: teacher- and student-centeredness are independent features of learning environments. Literature research done by the authors seemed to favor the balance view. From a curricular perspective, the results from the study suggest that the development of “powerful learning environments” are more important than the transition from teacher-centered towards student-centered learning environments. “Student-centredness and teacher-centredness are not the opposite poles of one spectrum… According to students, student-centredness and teacher-centredness are not conflicting but mutually reinforcing features of a learning environment. When properly combined they jointly contribute to its quality” (Elen et al, 2007)
Knowing this has opened my eyes to what my student-centered mathematics classroom could be modeled after. It definitely gave me food for thought.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Journaling in Math - Success??
In my quest to promote student-centered learning in math, I started to use journaling as a tool for my students to demonstrate their understanding of mathematical concepts and pinpoint areas where increased scaffolding is needed on an individual basis. From the students’ perspective, doing so was a challenge – far more difficult than working through questions from a worksheet or text. It required that they comprehend their own thinking and be able to identify what they understand and what they do not. I was fascinated by their journals, and marking (while more time-consuming), I was provided with meaningful feedback to support my own teaching.
In many cases, students were able to demonstrate capability to compute an answer and in most cases how they reached it, but not why they chose that particular method for solving. A common response when asked orally was “I dunno… I just did it.” Had they been required to simply provide an answer with or without showing work (like on a traditional homework assignment or quiz), they may very well have gotten the answer correct and I may very well have assumed that they understood the concept. Journaling forced them to think about the process of coming to an answer versus just arriving at an answer. Ahh, that must be where that old cliché “it’s about the journey, not the destination” came from… a math teacher ;)
This idea of metacognition in math has definitely sparked something in me – something I think I want to explore in greater depth in my next inquiry.
In many cases, students were able to demonstrate capability to compute an answer and in most cases how they reached it, but not why they chose that particular method for solving. A common response when asked orally was “I dunno… I just did it.” Had they been required to simply provide an answer with or without showing work (like on a traditional homework assignment or quiz), they may very well have gotten the answer correct and I may very well have assumed that they understood the concept. Journaling forced them to think about the process of coming to an answer versus just arriving at an answer. Ahh, that must be where that old cliché “it’s about the journey, not the destination” came from… a math teacher ;)
This idea of metacognition in math has definitely sparked something in me – something I think I want to explore in greater depth in my next inquiry.
Turning a Teacher-Centered Math Class into a Student-Centered One
If you read my earlier posts, you’ll recall that I approached the instruction of my Math 8 algebra unit in a very different way this term. The students had not had experience in solving algebraic expressions prior to this and it was not “instructed” as I traditionally do. In many cases they were given questions and corresponding answers, and were asked to figure out how to get from one to the other on their own. They had to come up with algorithms and illustrations to demonstrate understanding of the foreign concepts, in addition to creating new examples and solutions for their peers to solve. In most cases, they were paired up and worked through problems together, re-enforcing their comprehension and fine tuning problem-solving strategies. The process was frustrating for students who were used to being told how to do the math, and often learned by example. You could take a poll in my math class (and I’m sure that of most Math teachers) of how many students hate problem-solving questions, and I would almost guarantee the percentage to be in the high 90’s. There’s always a collective groan when word problems are thrown into assignments and tests. The concern for me as a mathematics educator is that life is not a series of computations and numbered questions – the types of problems that arise in the “real world” will require students to make inferences, draw on past knowledge, and make connections. So, my inquiry was to approach algebra in a way that fostered the problem-solving process in a way that was meaningful for each student individually, and have the learning be centered around them.
This was achieved through various learning activities I tried throughout the 2 month field study, note-worthy ones being:
This was achieved through various learning activities I tried throughout the 2 month field study, note-worthy ones being:
- Learning how to collect like terms: Each pair of students was given a mini whiteboard and markers, and were given a question and corresponding answer, based on their ability level. The ability to differentiate the instruction based on mathematical strength attributed to the success of this activity. An example would be: Given 4x – 3y + 2x + y, show how we get the simplified form 6x – 2y. Be able to describe your method in words and come up with a new example with the correct solution. Students were then required to “teach” their peers how they came to their conclusions. As the teacher, I made myself available to scaffold and support the students as questions arose or to challenge their thinking.
- Learning how to solve linear algebraic expressions: Each pair of students was giv
en an iPod Touch and worked through an app called “Algebra Touch”. This app started with a question (an example would be: 2x + 4 = 10) and the goal was to isolate x. Students could “drag” terms around and noted what happened to them when they crossed the equals sign. “Tapping” a term would factor it, and “striking out” a term would cancel like terms in a fraction. The app would complete the calculations, but the goal was for the students to predict what would happen before they dragged/tapped/struck out each term, and most importantly, be able to explain WHY that was happening.
- Learning how to solving more difficult linear algebraic expressions: Each pa
ir of students was given a Macbook and used a program from the National Library of Virtual Manipulatives that illustrated balancing equations where the variable was on both sides of the equals sign, and then solving it. This program was easy to differentiate as there were varying levels for the varying abilities that exist in each class. Like the iPod, the computer program performed the calculations and students were left to answer how and why, rather than what.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
21st Century Literacy
My ideas of literacy and learning have been shifting so much over the course of the grad program I’m in. With all the information, opinions and ideas out there, I don’t know if I am now more informed or more confused than I was to start with.
“Literacy” to me always had to do with reading, or proficiency with comprehending what you read. I wasn’t ignorant to the fact that digital media was becoming increasingly prominent in teaching and learning, I just didn’t always make the association between it and literacy. For example, one of our school goals last year involved increasing literacy (like every other school in the district/area/province…). The assumption was that to increase literacy, we had to work on reading and writing. This was left mostly up to Language Arts/English teachers, with other subjects integrating literacy improvement strategies where possible. In my domain of mathematics, it was suggested to me that I use “word problems” in my math class to assist with the literacy goal. Then we would test the students on their reading and writing and hope to see improvements. But who said “literacy” is just reading and writing?
We live in a world where:
The technological advances that have taken place in the 21st century have been colossal. I’m not saying that reading and writing are obsolete, but the medium in which they currently exist is drastically different than before. Technology is not just a compilation of bells and whistles that are trendy for the moment and will disappear after its 15 minutes of fame. The Digital Age is an era that while difficult to stay ahead of, we as educators at least have to keep up with. We need to increase and adapt our current notions of what it means to teach, what it means to learn, what it means to know something.
So with that, our definition of literacy needs to continue to shift. It does not have to have a definition that is static, but rather one that is living and continually changing.
21st century learners need to be equipped with 21st century literacy skills. What does that look like?
The International School Bangkok (ISB) is an impressive institution that delivers 21st century literacy curriculum.
“The mission of 21st century literacy education at ISB
is to prepare students to meet the demands brought on by our rapidly changing global community. In order to meet this goal it is essential that we continually seek out and embed innovative strategies, emerging technologies and a variety of information sources into our learning environments. With technological change happening at exponential rates, students need to be able to independently learn, unlearn, and relearn in order to be successful in the future (and the "now"). Becoming an independent learner is at the core of ISB's vision for learning.”
The enGauge 21st Century Skills define clearly what students need to thrive in today’s Digital Age:
As society changes, the skills needed to deal with the complexities of life also change. Major new studies now define literacy as the ability to use “digital technology, communications tools, and/or networks to access, manage, integrate, evaluate,and create information in order to function in a knowledge society” (ICT Literacy Panel, 2002).
Basic Literacy: Can students demonstrate language proficiency (in English) and numeracy at levels necessary for success on the job and in a digital-age society?
Scientific Literacy: Do students have the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision-making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity?
Economic Literacy: Can students identify economic issues; analyze incentives;
examine the consequences of changes in economic conditions and public policies; collect and organize economic evidence; and weigh costs against benefits?
Technological Literacy: Do students know what technology is, how it works, what purposes it can serve, and how it can be used efficiently and effectively to achieve specific goals?
Visual Literacy: Can students interpret, use, appreciate, and create images and video using both conventional and 21st century media in ways that advance thinking, decision making, communication, and learning?
Information Literacy: Are students able to evaluate information across a range of media; recognize when information is needed; locate, synthesize, and use it effectively; and accomplish this using technology, communication networks, and electronic resources?
Multicultural Literacy: Can students understand and appreciate similarities and differences between the customs, values, and beliefs of their own culture and the cultures of others?
Global Awareness: Do students recognize and understand relationships among international organizations, nation-states, public and private economic entities, socio-cultural groups, and individuals across the globe?
“Literacy” to me always had to do with reading, or proficiency with comprehending what you read. I wasn’t ignorant to the fact that digital media was becoming increasingly prominent in teaching and learning, I just didn’t always make the association between it and literacy. For example, one of our school goals last year involved increasing literacy (like every other school in the district/area/province…). The assumption was that to increase literacy, we had to work on reading and writing. This was left mostly up to Language Arts/English teachers, with other subjects integrating literacy improvement strategies where possible. In my domain of mathematics, it was suggested to me that I use “word problems” in my math class to assist with the literacy goal. Then we would test the students on their reading and writing and hope to see improvements. But who said “literacy” is just reading and writing?
We live in a world where:
- if you can’t spell, the computer will fix it;
- any information we need is at our fingertips and can be retrieved in mere seconds;
- shorthand writing is not only acceptable, but more common than not in written communication and networking using social media;
- people don’t write letters anymore: they text, IM, tweet, blog.
The technological advances that have taken place in the 21st century have been colossal. I’m not saying that reading and writing are obsolete, but the medium in which they currently exist is drastically different than before. Technology is not just a compilation of bells and whistles that are trendy for the moment and will disappear after its 15 minutes of fame. The Digital Age is an era that while difficult to stay ahead of, we as educators at least have to keep up with. We need to increase and adapt our current notions of what it means to teach, what it means to learn, what it means to know something.
So with that, our definition of literacy needs to continue to shift. It does not have to have a definition that is static, but rather one that is living and continually changing.
21st century learners need to be equipped with 21st century literacy skills. What does that look like?
The International School Bangkok (ISB) is an impressive institution that delivers 21st century literacy curriculum.
“The mission of 21st century literacy education at ISB
is to prepare students to meet the demands brought on by our rapidly changing global community. In order to meet this goal it is essential that we continually seek out and embed innovative strategies, emerging technologies and a variety of information sources into our learning environments. With technological change happening at exponential rates, students need to be able to independently learn, unlearn, and relearn in order to be successful in the future (and the "now"). Becoming an independent learner is at the core of ISB's vision for learning.”The enGauge 21st Century Skills define clearly what students need to thrive in today’s Digital Age:
As society changes, the skills needed to deal with the complexities of life also change. Major new studies now define literacy as the ability to use “digital technology, communications tools, and/or networks to access, manage, integrate, evaluate,and create information in order to function in a knowledge society” (ICT Literacy Panel, 2002).
Basic Literacy: Can students demonstrate language proficiency (in English) and numeracy at levels necessary for success on the job and in a digital-age society?
Scientific Literacy: Do students have the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision-making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity?
Economic Literacy: Can students identify economic issues; analyze incentives;
examine the consequences of changes in economic conditions and public policies; collect and organize economic evidence; and weigh costs against benefits?Technological Literacy: Do students know what technology is, how it works, what purposes it can serve, and how it can be used efficiently and effectively to achieve specific goals?
Visual Literacy: Can students interpret, use, appreciate, and create images and video using both conventional and 21st century media in ways that advance thinking, decision making, communication, and learning?
Information Literacy: Are students able to evaluate information across a range of media; recognize when information is needed; locate, synthesize, and use it effectively; and accomplish this using technology, communication networks, and electronic resources?
Multicultural Literacy: Can students understand and appreciate similarities and differences between the customs, values, and beliefs of their own culture and the cultures of others?
Global Awareness: Do students recognize and understand relationships among international organizations, nation-states, public and private economic entities, socio-cultural groups, and individuals across the globe?
Image and text from enGauge's "21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners"
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Using iPods in Math
So now that I think I’ve begun to wrap my head around the idea of student-centered learning in mathematics, I starting thinking about ways I could integrate technology into this learning. The idea of using iPod apps is not a brand-new concept, but it definitely was to me. I starting reading about different uses for iPods in the Math/Science classroom on Dr. David Wetzel’s blog and got hold of 10 iPod Touch devices .
When searching for apps to use to support my students’ learning, a major problem I came across was that many of the apps were too primary or too advanced for Grade 8 Math. That being said, there are like a kazillion apps to choose from, and I exhausted from my search after about 2 hours. It was also important to me that the apps coincide with what we were actually learning about. We are just starting our Algebra unit, so while there are some pretty great apps on Fractions, it made no sense to use those. So finding just the right app was more of a challenge than I had anticipated.I downloaded some different apps , some free and some not, and posted the list to my website so that any student of mine who owns an iPod Touch or iPhone could download them from home. It surprised me how many students purchased the apps that were not free!
In the end, only a few of them ended up being ones that I focused on using in class. They were:
Apps that are not free:
•Algebra Touch
•DiaMath (algebra learning tool - Diamond Math)
•Learn Elementary Algebra
•Pre-Algebra Guide
•Tic Tac Math Algebra
Free Apps:
•MATH ! Lite
•Khan Academy: PreAlgebra
•eTutor
•TwentyFour Lite - A fun math game!
•FREE Equation Genius - Math equation solver
•Pop Math Lite
•Math Drop- Free
Of them, the apps that are most valuable to my students at this point in our curriculum are:
•Twe
nty Four Lite – Game where 4 numbers are given and you have to make them equal 24 using basic arithmetic. Students could challenge other students by creating multi-player sessions over Bluetooth. This game supported problem solving skills and cooperative learning.•DiaMath –The principle of DiaMath is to solve for the two empty
spaces in the diamond, using the pattern rule of: the left and right spaces multiply to get the top number (product) and add together to get the bottom number (sum). The location of the empty spaces changes, and there are varying levels of difficulties – excellent for students of varying abilities.•Algebra Touch – Covers: simplification, like terms, commutativity,
order of operations, factorization, prime numbers, elimination, isolation, variables, solving equations. Drag to rearrange, tap to simplify, and draw lines to eliminate identical terms.
•Tic Tac Math Algebra – A basic strategy game like Tic Tac Toe coupled with the challenge of solving algebraic equations ranging from simple linear expressions to systems of equations. Can be played by one or two players.
Journaling in Math
In thinking about my inquiry on student centered learning in mathematics, it became clear to me that I needed to change my assessment practice a bit. In addition to Math 8, I teach a course called Health and Career Education. In this course, my main focus is to challenge my students’ thinking and have them analyze their own lives and make informed decisions. A major assessment tool I use requires them to formalize their ideas, opinions and learnings in journals. It isn’t so much “did they get it right/wrong?”, but more of “are they thinking and problem solving?”. At the end of the day, is that not what I want out of them in Math as well?
I came across an articleby Deb Russell on using journal writing in Math (Math Journals For All Ages). She explains how journaling in Math can be a valuable technique to develop and enhance mathematical thinking. Students have to be able to think about what he/she did in order to communicate it in writing. “When a math journal entry is required as a follow up to the specific learning goal, one actually has to think about what was done and what was required to solve the specific math activity or problem.” (Russell).
So, I decided to give it a whirl. The idea was not warmly received by my students. Anytime they hear the word journal, they think that they have to get all mushy and talk about their feelings. After explaining it more, they started to realize that the journal process was not going to be emotional, it was going to be difficult!! That was even worse than being mushy!! Explaining how they got the answers they did and/or explaining their methodology was fairly foreign to them and was no doubt intimidating. I’m interested to see what they have to say.
I came across an articleby Deb Russell on using journal writing in Math (Math Journals For All Ages). She explains how journaling in Math can be a valuable technique to develop and enhance mathematical thinking. Students have to be able to think about what he/she did in order to communicate it in writing. “When a math journal entry is required as a follow up to the specific learning goal, one actually has to think about what was done and what was required to solve the specific math activity or problem.” (Russell).So, I decided to give it a whirl. The idea was not warmly received by my students. Anytime they hear the word journal, they think that they have to get all mushy and talk about their feelings. After explaining it more, they started to realize that the journal process was not going to be emotional, it was going to be difficult!! That was even worse than being mushy!! Explaining how they got the answers they did and/or explaining their methodology was fairly foreign to them and was no doubt intimidating. I’m interested to see what they have to say.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Step 1: Research FIRST
Drawing on Educational Research to Inform My Practice
Step 1: Research
Step 2: Carry out field study
Step 3: Analyze results
Seems pretty simple....
I come from a science background, where research is predominantly used to prove a point or support findings. It is used as a basis to design experiments that set out to find specific answers to specific questions. Research that led to more questions than answers was not deemed useful or relevant. Often while performing studies of a scientific nature, much of the research that is useful is that which explains why the results occurred, or is helpful in deciphering what the data means. In these cases, powerful pieces of research can be found AFTER the experiment itself has taken place.
So now you know my ‘excuse’ for not researching BEFORE beginning my series of field studies. This was a lesson that was learned throughout my first year of my graduate diploma program. I just couldn’t shut off that switch for wanting to find research that supported my data. Looking for research to ground my study was something I struggled with. I didn’t even know where my field study would take me so how was I supposed to find academic articles to support me?
Over the course of the second year of my program, the light bulb finally went on. In reading the research I’ve selected and collected often validates what I do in my classroom. In a ‘big picture’ sense, it helps me keep my eye on my purpose – why am I doing what I’m doing? What is my goal for my students? For me? In a ‘smaller picture’ sense, it has given me ideas of methodology and practical applications. Often it is easy to experience information overload, so being able to filter through what is relevant to me and my practice (i.e. honing my “crap detection” skills) has been important.
- See Howard Rheingold’s blog post, “Crap Detection 101”
- See my blog post, reflecting on Mr. Rheingold's post.
- Anyone want to reflect upon my reflection upon my reflection upon Howard's reflection? How can you tell I attend Simon Fraser University...
The following are reflections to a few prompts that were thrown my way by my instructional team:
How has academic research informed your field study?
It has grounded my past field studies in that common themes kept re-emerging in the research, causing me to look closer at these issues in my classroom. That gave me a clearer direction in which to focus my field study. Some of the research provided practical applications and examples, which were useful in planning my learning activities and helpful when I came to roadblock.
Where do you see it playing a role going forward?
Had this question been asked a year ago, my response would have been “nowhere”. I did the research because it was required of me, and used to view research as something that could be used to support my findings – almost an afterthought. I now realize the value that good research holds. When this program is over I can see myself researching whenever I notice a tension or wondering that I want to explore, or when I’m planning a new year or unit.
In your self-directed studies, what foundational thinkers have you drawn in that have caused a shift in your pedagogical practice?
Brookfield’s book, Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher (1995), was an important learning for me in that it caused me to realize and appreciate the value of being self-reflective. I’ve always been analytical and self-aware, but having to formalize this and reflect up THAT (reflections up on reflections) is where learning occurs and ‘aha moments’ happen.
George Siemens’ podcasts on connectivism and learning theory opened my eyes on what it means to learn in the 21st century and how creating networks is a crucial aspect in this.
- See my blog post on connectivism and the influences of great minds like George Siemens and Stephen Downes
Vygotsky’s Social Development Theory is no doubt a major part of any Into to Education course or Professional Development Program, but coming back to this after years of practicing has been an interesting reminder about how learning occurs. As a secondary teacher, how children learn basic educational skills is not something that is in the foreground as much as it would be for a primary teacher. It is of particular interest to me this term in that I am studying the roles of teachers and students in learning mathematics.
What research are you doing now in planning out your field study?
• Bellamy, J. & Mativo, J. (2010). A Different Angle for Teaching Math. Technology Teacher: 69(7).
• Gainsburg, J. (2009). Creating Effective Video to Promote Student-Centered Teaching. Teaching Education Quarterly: 36(2).
• Garthwait, A. & Weller, H. (2005). A Year in the Life: Two Seventh Grade Teachers Implement One-to-One Computing. J of Research on Technology in Education: 37(4).
• Rigeman, S. & McIntire, N. (2005). Enhancing Curriculum and Instruction through Technology. T.H.E. Journal: 32(12).
• Schaffhauser, D. (2009). Which Came First – The Technology or the Pedagogy? T.H.E. Journal: 36(8).
• Strot, M. (1999). A Technology Plan for Math Skills. Gifted Child Today Magazine: 22(3)
• Varghese, T. (2009). Teaching Mathematics with a holistic approach. International J of Inclusive Education: 13(1)
• Huang, R. & Leung, F. (2005). Deconstructing Teacher-Centeredness and Student-Centeredness Dichotomy: A Case Study of a Shanghai Mathematics Lesson. The Mathematics Educator: 15(2).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)