Darling Hammond concludes her commentary in the Flat world and Education with 5 key elements crucial to the success of a hypothetical (and hopefully eventual) reform of education in the United States. Below, I will dive briefly into each of them, but first I want to take a moment to reflect on the process of reading The Flat World as a whole.
Firstly, it has been a thoroughly validating process. I definitely consider myself to be a social justice minded individual. Personality tests or self assessment books on rivers of motivation always point me in that direction. When in the classroom, many people want to complain about how difficult teaching is or talk about what heroes teachers are. While I agree that in general teachers are overworked and can have a large impact on children, I have always felt that there was more to be done. That despite bringing work home or lying awake at night thinking about lesson plans or giving up lunches to work as a mentor at our wellness center that it just wasn’t enough. That there were bigger issues. It is validating to hear those issues laid out. It is also a little frightening. That book is already seven years old and was building off decades long trends. And the data has not changed much in the last 7 years. I see change all around and I believe it is a step in the right direction but sometimes I wonder if it is enough. How much more can we squeeze out of the current education system without deeper and wider reform? These are questions I suppose only time can answer for now. The first element Hammond discusses is Meaningful Learning Goals. Something that really sticks out about this is another striking comparison to other education systems in th world. Successful educational systems tend to focus on fewer learning goals per year, but make each one deeper and more meaningful. They focus on a broader spectrum of habits of mind and leveraging those to push deeper into content. In America, we have cut back the number of standards since the No Child Left Behind days, but have not made sweeping pedagogical changes towards reasoning and inquiry. Some sites are doing it well, some organizations are championing the 4 C’s and student driven classrooms, but on the whole it is a bay step in the right direction My site is currently pushing into Inquiry learning in Math, but even with the standard number reduction from Common Core pacing is crowded. We seem to be in a catch-22. State testing measures problem solving and reasoning, but students can’t demonstrate those if they have not learned what a scale drawing is or how to build a probability model. There is a fine line between covering all the material and focusing too much on inquiry. Students cannot be expected to “discover” certain aspects of math. Another element Hammond brought up is accountability. This one leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. No Child Left Behind was an example of accountability gone horribly wrong. It lacked the supportive element Hammond describes in other systems, such as Finland, Singapore, and Korea. Accountability cannot just be punitive, it needs to go both ways. Schools need to be accountable for growth in performance but the system needs to be accountable for providing the resources and environment to support that growth. If schools are underperforming, train educators to be better and reform curriculum. Examine financial policies or clean house if need be. Don’t strip funding away from the students who need it most. That is “hands-off” accountability and there is a reason why it is not present in high achieving systems. I believe the element of accountability goes hand in hand with strong professional support. In fact, they are two sides of the same coin. The best systems in the world invest in the professionals who run that system. Teachers endure massive pdagogical swings every decade. From inquiry based to rigor based and back again. Most teachers who don’t like Common Core make comments like “We’ve tried this before and it was no good” or “It’ll be around for a few years and we will move away from it again.” That is indicative of a larger problem. We abandon curriculum and pedagogy without training teachers to succeed with it. They are hanging onto the swinging pendulum of curriculum. It is common for districts to update curriculum every 7 years, not a bad thing, but certainly something that requires a continuous cycle of training to keep professionals on their toes. The logistics of improving professional support is complicated and not an issue I’m qualified to tackle, but it is abundantly clear it is one of the most essential for truly changing the core of American education.
0 Comments
Case Study #2 - 21st Century Test Grading
The above case study details a pedagogical practice of a middle school math teacher in Berkeley, California. This teacher noticed a problem with students caring more about grades than their learning. Her solution was to adjust her grading practice. This case study focuses on that practice and how that structure can be applied as an ongoing “lesson.” The procedure used in the case study starts simply enough. Stop writing grades on tests. The next step is to highlight mistakes rather than marking questions wrong. Finally, points are not preassigned to particular questions. Instead, tests are graded more holistically. After tests have had their mistakes highlighted, students then, as a class, review the teacher’s “favorite mistakes” and discuss how to correct them. Finally, students get tests back to review their own mistakes, seek help from peers, and prepare for an eventual re-test opportunity. While this is more of a structure and routine than a lesson, it can definitely take up a class period and has significant pedagogical value. This lesson does not mandate technology use. However, it still qualifies as 21st Century, in my opinion, because of a focus on developing a growth mindset and strong emphasis on critical thinking and collaboration. Also by applying the SAMR and TPACK models to augment it, it can quickly become a technology-infused 21st Century lesson. The biggest take-away I had from this lesson was seeing the grading system in action with students. I have been aware of this issue for a long time in my own classroom, especially working with intervention students. I have tried to implement more growth based assessments, like HMH’s Math Inventory can be when used properly. I also moved to the practice of not giving a score to any test that did not pass, instead prompting students to correct their mistakes and retest. However, that still did not prompt much honest reflection on one’s own mistakes. It just prompted students to approach friends with better scores for “help.” What I liked about this case was how the teacher used “flow through” grading, where students were not repeatedly punished for a single mistake. Students who made a misstep in the problem could still earn most of the points “assigned” to the problem if the work that followed the mistake was correct (in the context of the mistake). I believe this can allow students to be more reflective of their work and gives them greater motivation to try and finish every problem. Even if they make a mistake one a particularly difficult section of the problem, they can still finish strong! Another crucial piece of information was that the teacher published the grades to their online classroom platform the next day. So when students first receive their tests back, all they see are the highlights, which do not indicate final score. Tons of highlights can translate to a decent grade since not all highlights cause point loss and “flow through” credit exits. I feel like my biggest reaction to this case study is that this a huge culture investment. It takes a significant amount of re-training to get a middle school math student away from obsessing on the grade an assignment receives and shift towards how well they learned the material. It is definitely something I am interested in pursuing. THe last thing to consider is how to implement and potentially improve this lesson idea. Thinking of SAMR model I can see how substitution and augmentation could fill in easily. Our learning platform Echo has a peer evaluation function. Common mistakes could be photographed and put into an online quiz where students need to correct the mistake. Students can use Docs to physically alter work step by step to show the revisions. This could enable greater participation, since it is easy to hide in a class discussion. Then, thinking of the TPACK model, technology can be used a in a pedagogically sound way to support re-learning difficult content. Independent study modules can be set up as activities in Echo. Students who received highlights on a certain problem can be directed to complete tasks or review videos in a certain folder. The feedback from the test can be quickly applied to large scale (and private) differentiation in the classroom. I still have a lot to consider, some Echo tricks to learn, and some culture to work on before I can make these procedures a reality in my own room, but I believe it could be a largely effective practice. Rating: 5/5 I really enjoyed looking at this case study and then consider how to integrate technology. The footage of students collaborating over the mistakes was inspiring and, philosophically speaking, the grading system makes a lot of sense. Week 2 Relfection As I worked through case studies and Hammond’s continuing argument for an overhual in American education, I was struck by a theme of diversity. In case studies of schools with successful technology integration, I noticed how each school had a different model and how different teachers structured their technology use differently. As I read Hammond’s examples of adequate and equitable funding used well, I noticed that each country highlighted had significant structural and cultural differences in education.
In the case studies, it always seemed that there was a “fire-starter.” There was always a teacher or administrator or even a student who believed in what they were doing enough to overcome the obstacles of implementing their particular flavor of technology. While there are plenty of education companies and services that claim to have a mountain of research backing their approach, I do not feel like that affirming research is what is getting things started in the classroom. Technology can be difficult to acquire and can be easy to misuse. The problem is not simply financial. If it was, California would have significantly better results from its system of education. What makes a practice effective is passion and hard work. Setting up a Maker Movement or re-vamping lessons to utilize technology skills or burning the midnight oil to create podcasts for students are all things that likely go above and beyond contract requirements and hours. Technology is an educational resource with potential in the same way that PBL is a teaching method with potential. Issues of workforce, culture, equity, and community all play a large hand in educational success. Moving onto the countries, Hammond identifies Singapore, Finland and Korea as countries who have succeeded in the long and grueling process of education reform. Interestingly, each country has distinct qualities. In Korea, there is a strong culture of respect towards the teaching profession. In Singapore, education is viewed as a utilization of a great natural resource, the people of Singapore! Finland has a clear social focus on education. Even with all these different perspectives on education, all three countries find success. This again reinforces the idea of diversity in education to me. It is an “all roads lead to Rome” kind of feeling. There is no single right way to build an education system or approach pedagogy and an education system can become so much more than the sum of its parts. While all the case studies and countries examined had qualities that made them unique, they also had much in common. All the success stories I read about had a focus on the role of the teacher. The teaching profession was elevated in terms or respect or at the very least elevated above a burnt out babysitter waiting for retirement. Teachers hold respect, have social responsibility, and are constantly incentivized to improve. Teachers are also equipped to successfully fill those responsibilities and exceed those expectations. Teachers in these areas were well informed with relevant data and ample time to receive professional learning on the implications of that data. In terms of funding, the money was spent equitably and there was enough to meet the needs of a basic education. To a Californian like me, that sounds like a pipe dream but these examples show it is possible. I feel like an important concept here is the idea of what constitutes a basic education. Is education a compulsory experience that frees parents up to work or a system designed to build up those who will build the future? Ultimately, I do not know how to address the issues with our current system. The process, when successful, has been long term and racked with hardship and I wonder if our modern society has the patience and faith in the system to hang on long enough for that change to happen before tearing the system down yet again. To me, it is similar to the idea of America converting to the metric system. The government has tried to prime the pump before, but it never sticks. There is a cycle there. Adults never learn to use metric, unless their chosen career demands it. Children never learn because adults never teach it to them well enough to learn it. Those children become the adults who never use metric and then never teach metric to the next generation. The perpetuating idea in that cycle is that converting to the metric system is not worth the trouble. I sincerely hope that education is not trapped in a similar cycle. What can be done though? I can focus on my practice and my school site. The case studies of American schools prove that passionate and motivated communities can make a difference. I can show genuine care for my students. I can work to instill a growth mindset and 21st century skills in the students I have contact with. I can collaborate with my peers and try to build a team committed to making improvements in our sphere of influence. Maybe with enough small pockets of educators stepping up, the ripple effect will be large enough to spark the change needed to repair our education system. Below are three case studies. These cases have been pulled from Edutopia’s “Schools that Work” series. Each one focuses on a different American school and what they are doing to find success. All three focus on some sort of technology implementation model. The Maker Movement - Edutopia
This case study focuses on the Maker Movement, an organization dedicated to promoting the idea that in culture of consumers and users students can be makers. Students become makers by creating their own products via 3-D printing, robotics, coding or other physical production methods. I chose to examine this case of classroom technology because another teacher at my site has been telling me about grant opportunities with the Maker Movement. In this case, a student who was passionate about being a Maker brought the technology to his school. He attended a board meeting to pitch the idea of incorporating the movement into the classroom. Once in the classroom, students can create their own products while making connections to math and science concepts along the way. The style of learning promotes questions and is driven by the needs of the students. While this technology use certainly motivates students to learn and has them apply concepts in a real world setting, it is still unclear what kind of pedagogical impact it has on content delivery. How does using a computer software to convert a 3-D model into (X,Y,Z) coordinates help a student learn about the coordinate plane or three dimensional geometry? It provides a strong visual, but I do not see yet how it helps students learn initially. However, students being excited or motivated to learn the content as a means to completing their creations is reason enough to look into the Maker Movement. As far as implementing in the classroom, the required equipment to make it real is expensive. However, there are definitely grant opportunities out there. There are plenty of organizations and individuals who want to make great things happen for students. One thing that is clear though, is that the Maker Movement is, as of now, a passion project for many. It takes significant work and set up to successfully implement after securing the funding necessary. Quin’s school has Makers because of Quin’s passion for the technology. Ultimately, this is a successful use of technology when implemented by a teacher and school site who believe in it’s potential. Otherwise, it becomes a high-tech shop class. Tech Literacy through Content Learning - Edutopia This case stuck out to me because tech literacy is something I have wanted to improve in my own classroom. Our students are fairly tech savvy. They use technology daily in the classroom and use Google apps on the majority of their assignments. One app that is underused in my opinion is the Google Spreadsheet. I am always looking for opportunities to show the wide variety of uses a spreadsheet has and develop those skills in students. They are marketable skills and allow opportunities to tie in financial literacy. However, I am always wary of doing technology literacy for the sake of technology literacy. So, I was excited to see how they blend it with the content. The school in this case uses a technology teacher and classroom to partner with the core content teacher to enhance projects and lessons. The technology teacher coordinates with teachers to plan what technology skills to teach. The idea is to use technology as a tool to help students express their learning in different ways. They apply the SAMR model for different levels of tech integration:
Obviously, there is merit to all four levels. Even in substitution, the addition of technology literacy makes the lesson richer, as long as content is not lost in the process. If a teacher needs to choose between Lesson X content or Lesson X content + technology skills, it seems apparent which choice provides more for students. What is essential is that content is still the main focus of the lesson. In the video, you can see that the technology teacher is familiar with the content and relating it to the technology. He scaffolds students through story-building strategies and shows them how they can use technology to enhance their storytelling. The examples here give a lot of insight into what strong technology use looks like in an educational setting. Technology is not a means to an end, it is a way to enhance learning and provide opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning in meaningful ways. This case study definitely encourages me to take greater advantage of our own technology resources on my campus. Blended Learning Case Study - Edutopia This case interested me because I have noticed that technology can sometimes be a distraction to students and can water down the content students interact with. While I strongly advocate for students to use appropriate tools, sometimes I feel as though online learning is not always the best option for students. This case study highlighted several teachers at a school who apply blended learning in the classrooms. These teachers take advantage of technology to provide students with choice and autonomy, Students can view learning resources anytime when outside of the classroom. Blended learning helps contribute to effective differentiation. Teachers can run multiple groups in a classroom and make their presence felt simultaneously via prepared materials like podcasts. It certainly speaks to the efficiency of well-prepared blended learning. This model has been shown to be effective. Students testify that they feel they learn more with the technology use. Test results show students performing at the highest level. The school makes a strong case for blended learning. What I felt was most interesting about this case was that different teachers approached blended learning differently. The biology teacher had a different structure in her room than the math teacher. One staff member mentioned that blended learning works when you make it work. Teachers cannot just copy successful models, in the same way that students do not learn by copying each other. A teacher needs to design their own structures to meet their own goals in a way they believe in. Technology is not some magic pill for increasing test scores. It is not an easy answer to struggling schools issues. When looking on a global scale, different countries with drastically different education systems can find success with students. What makes a system effective is the teachers and administrators driving the system. Blended learning is full of potential, but that’s it. Computers do not babysit students and magically teach them math. It needs to be adapted to a specific classroom, experimented with, and implemented with fidelity. This case study has encouraged me to keep experimenting with technology and find the structures and activity types that have the largest impact on my students. Reading Reflection: The Flat World and Education Ch 1-3
If I were involved in developing education policy, this book would certainly make me squirm. In the first few chapters alone, there is damning evidence of how outdated and unequitable the American school system is and has become. As a math teacher, the effects of this antiquated system are abundantly clear. It is well known that the good ol’ U.S.A. outsources a large percentage of STEM-related jobs to other countries and, despite the ‘best efforts’ of the politicians controlling public educations, America has consistently been ranked in the 20’s for the last few decades. For Americans, the world is certainly becoming flat as opportunities to climb in STEM related fields are more and more being sent outside of our borders. As poor as the picture is when comparing America internationally, the issue becomes even more visible when you look internally. Literacy rates, standardized test scores, and discipline rates paint a vivid picture of how the color of your skin, the money in your pocket, and the state of your yard all influence your opportunities as a student. Those opportunities as student snowball their way into tremendous differences in higher education and career possibilities. For a nation founded on the premise that all men are created equal, our public education system seems to send quite the contrary message. One point Hammond makes that struck me is that the “politicization” of American education has has created this sort of pendulum effect on our systems of education. With power changes in the American government happening at least twice a decade, American education has been an evershifting landscape for the last few decades. Every President seems to feel the need to leave their fingerprint on the education system. This is evident when you speak with veteran teachers about Common Core. Regardless of their opinion, positive or negative, many will note its heavy similarity to the education system of the 1980s. As we shift from one educational perspective to the next, our country has slipped further and further behind. One unfortunate side-effect of our swinging educational ideologies is that we never really get to see the long term effects of a system. These systems are designed as k-12 systems. When we change systems midway through, it takes several years for the students in the middle to settle in. As unpleasant as No Child Left Behind was, we barely had it long enough for a single set of students to fully complete it. Common Core has only been around a few years but people are already clamoring to tear it down, we might not get to see a full set of students progress though the system, let alone several populations of fully Common Core educated students. Regardless of one’s opinion on any particular system, this is clearly a poor way to judge the effectiveness of that systems design. Good or bad, we seem prone to running from a system before it can set roots. So, I believe one of the first steps in fixing this problem is to establish consistency. Which may be hard, given the frequent shift of power in our country. This would benefit all stakeholders. Parents would remain familiar with classroom techniques. Any math teacher has heard a parent complain that math is no longer taught the same way it was when they were in school. Teachers would not need to stress re-learning their job every decade. Students would benefit from pedagogical strategies they learned in 2nd grade up in 12th grade. Consistency paves the way for educational acceleration. One important caveat, consistency is not stagnation. Education must continue to evolve with the changing world. We must instill 21st Century Skills and digital literacy in our students. We must do more than teach them to pass tests. We need to create lifelong learners with a passion for the future. As a teacher, much of this is over my head. I don’t control federal policy or state funding. What I can impact is the students in my classroom and the teachers I work with. For right now, that is a large enough task. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
October 2017
Categories |