http://http//www.edutopia.org/economic-stimulus-education-technology-oklahoma
I have to start this blog off by commenting on another article I read for this week called Winning Equation: How Technology Can Help Save Math Education. The article discussed how a national panel has determined that our current math system is broken, and that there recommendation is to include technology as part of the solution. The problem I had with this article was that it fell short of truly discussing how to effectively implement technology in the classroom.
This is where the article, that is the subject of this blog, comes in. The subject of this article is a teacher in Oklahoma who has used her previous experience in telecommunications and journalism to give her students real experiences in math. One such project was to collect brochures and pamphlets on the reported benefit plans of choosing a particular cellular provider. She had the students develop algebraic formulas for computing true savings. The students were then asked to graph the data they found and present their findings in class. This is true learning. Instead of simply opening up a math book and completing “X” number of problems, students are given the opportunity to apply their knowledge to an authentic situation and provide a real answer that they will remember far longer. This is an example of effective implementation of technology. It is not drill and kill. It is not using a word processor to type a paper. It is using technology where they communicate digitally using presentation and graphing software. It is an experience that will have far reaching effects into their lives and future careers.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
The 21st-Century Digital Learner: How tech-obsessed iKids would improve our schools.
http://www.edutopia.org/ikid-digital-learner-technology-2008
In education, we are constantly looking for the novelty that will bring the kids in. We swing back and forth between an inquiry approach and a more direct/back to the basics approach to teaching kids. However, one aspect permeates this approach; it is most often completely teacher centered and teacher driven. Marc Prensky suggests another alternative…why not ask the students what they want to learn? Pretty scary concept. How would we get them ready for AIMS? How would we guarantee that the curriculum would be met? How would we know if they were excelling or not if we couldn’t guide them like cattle through the maize of webs and assessments we have created in education?
Marc speaks in many different places, and always invites a panel of students to come and speak in front of educators and community members. The students are asked to be real and speak the plain truth. They do. They speak about how board they are in school. They talk about how disengaged they are. When asked how they would feel about being asked their opinions about how they would like to learn, their response is often that they think it would be great if teachers would do this from day one.
So after reading this article, I thought about how this might look in my classroom. What if I asked fourth graders to tell me what they wanted to learn and how they wanted to learn it? What would that look like. I am not entirely sure. One thought that did come to mind was to simply put out a topic for discussion such as “what is the difference between a vertebrate and an invertebrate?” and then wait to see what happens. What kind of discussions will this generate? What will they suggest we do to find it out? How much more real would the learning be, and how much more engaged would the students be? As big of a risk as this sounds, I am still in charge. What would happen if we really let loose? What would happen if we let kids come to school and truly choose what they wanted to learn? I don’t have the answers, but it would be fun to find out.
In education, we are constantly looking for the novelty that will bring the kids in. We swing back and forth between an inquiry approach and a more direct/back to the basics approach to teaching kids. However, one aspect permeates this approach; it is most often completely teacher centered and teacher driven. Marc Prensky suggests another alternative…why not ask the students what they want to learn? Pretty scary concept. How would we get them ready for AIMS? How would we guarantee that the curriculum would be met? How would we know if they were excelling or not if we couldn’t guide them like cattle through the maize of webs and assessments we have created in education?
Marc speaks in many different places, and always invites a panel of students to come and speak in front of educators and community members. The students are asked to be real and speak the plain truth. They do. They speak about how board they are in school. They talk about how disengaged they are. When asked how they would feel about being asked their opinions about how they would like to learn, their response is often that they think it would be great if teachers would do this from day one.
So after reading this article, I thought about how this might look in my classroom. What if I asked fourth graders to tell me what they wanted to learn and how they wanted to learn it? What would that look like. I am not entirely sure. One thought that did come to mind was to simply put out a topic for discussion such as “what is the difference between a vertebrate and an invertebrate?” and then wait to see what happens. What kind of discussions will this generate? What will they suggest we do to find it out? How much more real would the learning be, and how much more engaged would the students be? As big of a risk as this sounds, I am still in charge. What would happen if we really let loose? What would happen if we let kids come to school and truly choose what they wanted to learn? I don’t have the answers, but it would be fun to find out.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Lead, Don't Lecture: A New Approach to Teaching: Smart Educators Say It's Better To Coach Than To Conjole ~by Ninvive C. Calegari, Daniel Moulthrop.
http://edutopia.org/lead-don't-lecture
At some point in your education you had this teacher. He/she stands at the lecturn, spewing all that he or she knows about a given subject. Whether the material is on overheads or PowerPoint slides, it makes no difference. There is no interaction. There is no exchange of ideas. There is nothing but the sound to the bla, bla, bla of the teacher’s voice, and the sound of the pencils frantically trying to keep up.
The article Lead, Don’t Lecture: A New Approach to teaching is full of common sense practical viewpoints about what teaching should be. As I read the article, I was reminded of so many of my colleagues who practice the coaching model of instruction rather than the lecture model of instruction mentioned above. While it looks different from classroom to classroom, the effect is often the same. Students are empowered to make meaning of the learning situations. Students are the center of the instruction. Students are involved in the learning. Simply put, it is about the students.
On a football team, the coach isn’t the one out running the plays up and down the field; the players are. On a chess team, the coach isn’t the one making all the moves, the team members are. The same also works best in the classroom. The teacher should be doing all the talking, the kids should. It is the job of the teacher to guide the discussion. She/he asks the right questions to generate the thought, but the kids are the ones that should be propelling the discussion forward.
One particular example the article brings up is a class who is studying the principles of flight by flying and landing model planes. As each landing occurs, they take data on the landing and record it. They then go back to the classroom and analyze the data using scientific calculators and formulas. The teacher’s role in the learning is to facilitate the experience, watch what happens, and guide them to their final destination with probing questions.
One particular part that I found powerful is the idea of using other “experts” to help out in the classroom. A good coach knows what the strengths and weaknesses of his/her team are. A good coach in the classroom, also has this same ability to know who the experts in the classroom are on any given area, and point those who need help in their direction. As teachers, we can’t meet all of the needs of our students, as hard as we may try. Using the “expert” model of coaching, allows us to reach more kids, more efficiently. Of course, the teacher needs to keep a close eye on the situation, and assess for effectiveness. If the students perceive that they are simply being passed off, without accountability, then the learning will cease to take place.
Over my tenure as a teacher, I have colleagues who I have had conversations with and have had the privilege of observing using the coaching model. I have found it to be highly effective in reaching more students individually, involving more students in their own education, and taking students to much deeper levels. As I grow as a teacher, I feel I take on more and more of this role every year. It is a process for me. It is not always comfortable to step out from the role of expert, allow students to struggle, and watch them grow. However, it is highly rewarding.
http://edutopia.org/lead-don't-lecture
At some point in your education you had this teacher. He/she stands at the lecturn, spewing all that he or she knows about a given subject. Whether the material is on overheads or PowerPoint slides, it makes no difference. There is no interaction. There is no exchange of ideas. There is nothing but the sound to the bla, bla, bla of the teacher’s voice, and the sound of the pencils frantically trying to keep up.
The article Lead, Don’t Lecture: A New Approach to teaching is full of common sense practical viewpoints about what teaching should be. As I read the article, I was reminded of so many of my colleagues who practice the coaching model of instruction rather than the lecture model of instruction mentioned above. While it looks different from classroom to classroom, the effect is often the same. Students are empowered to make meaning of the learning situations. Students are the center of the instruction. Students are involved in the learning. Simply put, it is about the students.
On a football team, the coach isn’t the one out running the plays up and down the field; the players are. On a chess team, the coach isn’t the one making all the moves, the team members are. The same also works best in the classroom. The teacher should be doing all the talking, the kids should. It is the job of the teacher to guide the discussion. She/he asks the right questions to generate the thought, but the kids are the ones that should be propelling the discussion forward.
One particular example the article brings up is a class who is studying the principles of flight by flying and landing model planes. As each landing occurs, they take data on the landing and record it. They then go back to the classroom and analyze the data using scientific calculators and formulas. The teacher’s role in the learning is to facilitate the experience, watch what happens, and guide them to their final destination with probing questions.
One particular part that I found powerful is the idea of using other “experts” to help out in the classroom. A good coach knows what the strengths and weaknesses of his/her team are. A good coach in the classroom, also has this same ability to know who the experts in the classroom are on any given area, and point those who need help in their direction. As teachers, we can’t meet all of the needs of our students, as hard as we may try. Using the “expert” model of coaching, allows us to reach more kids, more efficiently. Of course, the teacher needs to keep a close eye on the situation, and assess for effectiveness. If the students perceive that they are simply being passed off, without accountability, then the learning will cease to take place.
Over my tenure as a teacher, I have colleagues who I have had conversations with and have had the privilege of observing using the coaching model. I have found it to be highly effective in reaching more students individually, involving more students in their own education, and taking students to much deeper levels. As I grow as a teacher, I feel I take on more and more of this role every year. It is a process for me. It is not always comfortable to step out from the role of expert, allow students to struggle, and watch them grow. However, it is highly rewarding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
