Posts
Those who can read binary and those who can’t.
Te first activity we ran through for my Computational Thinking course was learning how to translate simple text into binary. Working at a software company, I feel like I’ve got a good handle on bits and bytes, pixels and codecs. I know that binary is the base of each of those, but I didn’t know how they stacked up with one another as the dataset. As I worked through encoding my name, seeing perfect squares helped me get the hang of the pattern pretty quickly. I also understand now why a kilobyte is 1024 bytes and not 1000. I had fun trying to do each letter without using a cheat sheet.
The picture is pretty tall, so click for full resolution.
I’m a scientist. I think in terms of what I can see and manipulate. Part of my training included a large amount of time making changes in systems, observing results, and making new changes in order to answer a question. It was systematic, measured, and thorough. Naturally, that tendency bleeds over into my relationships, parenting, hobbies, and pedagogy.
I’ve learned that much of the thinking we do from day to day is to solve problems.
I began learning HTML, CSS, and JavaScript a few years back, which shifted the way I think. I had to approach problems as patterns, analyzing cause-and-effect in real time through trial-and-error. The whole process is strikingly similar to scientific thought processes. I slowly realized that, at the core, programming is comparing true against false; one against zero.
Computational thinking is the process of breaking down problems into true and false statements one step at a time. Each results takes you down a path sequentially. Eventually, you reach the destination you were aiming for through this series of switches.
Teaching [STRIKEOUT:science] is as much about content as it is about thinking. Without thinking, students become repositories for facts with no faculties for problem solving. Thinking as a scientist, it is my responsibility to help students develop the patience and tenacity required to solve new problems to the new world we live in. Content is everywhere; I can look up information as I need it, and the same is true for our students. Finding the context for the content is more important, and exploring relationships with computational thinking processes can help.
I’ve explored the idea of using instructional methods to improve the quality of questions students ask, which would lead directly into idea analysis. Curiosity is natural, but not in the classroom…especially a high school science classroom. Our current expectations for education focus on the right answer, not on the right questions. Because of this, students have been inadvertently trained to disregard the unknown in favor of memorization. Focusing on questions as the basis for learning rather than facts will push our students to be thinkers, not reciters.
In case you missed it, there were two big stories in the past two weeks about schools selling or destroying their student devices. The Atlantic posted “Why Some Schools Are Selling Their iPads” and took a deep-dive into which device is the “best for interactive learning.” Additionally, Hoboken, NJ, made headlines when they publicly claimed “giving students laptops is a terrible idea.”
What it comes down to is that both schools – and schools across the country – look to devices to change the way teaching and learning happen.
Folly.
Since Apple released the iPad four years ago, starry-eyed educators have lauded the revolution that was to come. We saw the revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy and introduction of the 4 C’s of 21st Century Learning. Suddenly, every school had devices earmarked as a method for changing instruction. Every large computer manufacturer is now in education with devices, vying for attention from schools desperately trying to keep up (often at the expense of other programs but that’s a different discussion).
Rather than asking, “Does this device allow students to easily type?” educators really need to focus on new criterion:
- Can the device help students connect with the world? – Think of this as the “fourth wall” of education. Students need opportunities to connect with (both consume and produce) information outside of the building.
- Does the device dilute or enhance accessibility? – Often, devices are purchased with accessibility cited as a reason. But, neither teachers nor students receive training on how to enable that functionality.
- How will we change classroom practice? – Staff typically receives training in how to use the device, but rarely are they offered training on new methods or approaches to teaching and learning. Without support for changing practice, the computers can destroy a culture of learning.
I know I shouldn’t read the comments, but I did for both of these. 400+ comments combined, and most of them are disparaging at best. There is a general lack of understanding about why devices are important to the learning process and this is something schools in general are failing to communicate well. Perhaps this is also because of the inappropriate preparation happening when devices are purchased.
So, what can schools do?
- Research. – This is not a device pilot. If we’re focusing on larger issues of classroom practice and school culture, then the device doesn’t matter. This means reading research literature on education practice, site visits to neighboring schools, and speaking with experts on education theory. Having a solid pedagogical background will help solidify meaningful change.
- Build a core group of educators dedicated to cultural change. – These are the leaders who will slowly begin to help the school shift from one of didactic instruction to dynamic learning.
- Advocate for students. – Any change needs to keep students in mind, especially when it comes to large purchases. If the school cannot point to solid reasons (pedagogical and cultural) for why they are spending the money, they need to slow down and evaluate their motivations.
It’s disheartening to see coverage focus on purchases and failed plans rather than success stories and true change. Hopefully, as we continue to mature, we can shift the story.
Do a quick Google search for “disrupt education.” It seems 2013 in particular was a boom for companies looking to disrupt the current education system: MOOCs, apps, product launches, startups…pick your poison.
Disrupting the education space is the wrong way to influence change.
Disrupting has longevity issues. To be noticed in the startup realm, you need to make a big splash. Lots of big talk, lots of buzzwords, and lots of pie-in-the-sky ideas. All of which is geared to help that company get acquired by a larger entity (ahem Google ahem) with solid footing in education. These companies come and go, with lots and lots of money flowing through the door by venture capital. Don’t get burned by jumping on board too early.
Disruption minimizes impact. Because these companies are flying by the seat of their pants, there is very little research into the efficacy of their product on student learning. They all claim to raise scores, increase engagement, and do all the things you’re trying to do, all in one package. Yay! But, when it comes down to it, it’s a fun app for a few days, then it peters out. Students lose interest, teachers drop it. Many of these companies do not work with teachers (more are beginning to, which is nice) to see if the idea even floats in a classroom.
Disruption is niche focused. Our tools are becoming fragmented. You have your assessment app, the review game, the gradebook, and then the one giving you confidence levels…each of these companies focuses on a tiny niche slice of the everyday experience. Education is an artful science. We have to take the big picture into consideration when doing anything with students. As each new single-function app is released, we lose a piece of that picture and at the same time make our job much more complicated.
We need to transform education, not disrupt it.
Transformation is inherently different in scope and mindset than disruption.
Transformation is sustainable. Transformation is built around sustainability. We need to critically look at what education is now and how we can change it moving forward, planning for the future. There are things that need to come and go, but those decisions need to be informed by practice, data, and the impact on student learning.
Transformation is constructive. There are already seeds of change in schools. Administrators, in particular, are preparing for major change by laying a foundation of support for the teachers before student ever catch wind of the shift to come. Transformation is rooted in a community coming together and making a conscious decision to head in a new direction. These schools are building on their strengths and growing together.
Transformation has a wide scope. When you want to change an organization, you have to consider every component. How will it affect staff, students, parents, aides, administrators…without considering every stakeholder, you’re bound for trouble. That means the process is transparent and considers multiple avenues for problem solving. We’re undergoing a holistic shift, not treating symptomatic issues one at a time.
Clarification – I am not advocating that a single entity – company or school – can transform education on their own. True change takes collaborative action with flexibility and cooperation by many different groups.
Before starting this post, please go back and look at Part 1 to get the research justification for the outline below.
In an effort to make research more accessible and visible in the implementation of new ideas, here is a practical, “how-to” explanation of ways to get students to ask better questions.
While all of this can be done with paper and pencil in class, expanding the process to the web brings benefits. Students (and the teacher) can interact when and where they want. If you’re using an open community, you can also get feedback from outside sources. There is also a running record of the interactions asked and answered by each member of the community, which can be used for analysis, assessment, or just judging the health of the community.
Dan Meyer advocates questioning habits through making it a habit to ask. His keynote at CUE gives an example of how he practices asking good questions. (Please watch just a minute or two of the video. It is well worth the time.) This brings us to thing-to-try-number-one:
Have your students keep a list of questions. Not just content questions. Just questions.
Think of this as brain training. There is evidence showing that students who undergo training in asking questions score higher on information-based assessments than groups who do not receive training (Weiner 1978). Now, before you accuse me of reaching too far, the study also notes that they did not study the efficacy of a particular type of training. So, if we take Dan’s example and begin tracking perplexity, we are training our brains to pay attention to our surroundings, which could translate to the classroom. (As a closing side note, Dan also runs a website called 101 Questions which is a fun way to get kids thinking. You can also use it to upload content to get some feedback before using it with students.)
Thinking back to part 1, I gave a brief outline of a method called the “question formulation strategy. So, thing-to-try-number-two:
Try using the QFS rather than a more common tool like the KWL.
I know both strategies essentially do the same thing – get students to reflect on their learning as it happens. I like QFS better because the metacognitive processes the students engage in are open ended and content agnostic. The students are free to ask questions on anything they want, which gives then an open route to make connections on their own. The KWL also has a “finality” to it…once the student learns what they want to know (the “W” column), there is little invitation to continue exploring. QFS, on the other hand, encourages further questioning at every stage.
Finally, thing-to-try-number-three:
Use an online Q&A platform for peer feedback on questions.
Remember, there is evidence showing that questions alone aren’t enough. We need feedback. I mentiond earlier that StackExchange is a great platform for both asking and answering questions, but the added layer of voting and commenting serves as the quality control. Unfortunately, getting the platform for student use is more complicated.
StackExchange is a private company – the platform is not open source. I did some searching and there are some open-source alternatives which can be used, but they’re not insignificant to get set up.
The way I see it, there is a large community of educators with the know-how and the interest in getting something like I’ve described set up. I’m even willing to throw in my small-beans experience in helping to set up and maintain a site. If there is interest in experimenting with this idea (I’m not in the classroom, or I’d try it myself), leave a comment and we’ll see what we can do.
References
Weiner, C. J. (1978). The Effect of Training in Questioning and Student Question Generation on Reading Achievement.
I’ve been thinking over an idea since I saw this tweet from David Wees which linked a very well-written article defending the Common Core standards.
I found myself a little jealous that a group of math teachers was using StackExchange as a forum for education discussion. If you’re not familiar with the platform, it is a question/answer forum that relies on two things: credibility and crowdsourcing. Anyone may ask a question and as you engage with the community, you are granted more and more privileges. For instance, to leave a comment on a question, you have to earn x number of points. Answering questions, accepting answers, up- or down-voting questions and answers – each action comes from having a good reputation within the community.
This helps the community both ask good questions (interesting questions will be up-voted and have higher visibility) and provide reliable feedback (you can’t troll on the site because you need points to interact).
What does this have to do with education?
The Research
Observations in research literature show that teachers are usually the ones asking the questions, students are responding. Additionally, when students ask, the questions are “informative” or “unsophisticated” (Harper, Etkina, & Lin 2003; Hofstein, Navon, Kipnis, Mamlok-Naaman 2005). This can be boiled down to the fact that students “are schooled to become masters of answering questions and to remain novices at asking them” (Dillon 1990).
I think part of the struggle in helping students become better askers of questions is that we, as teachers, are rarely trained in methods which can be used to help develop those skills.
Dori & Herscovitz (1999) decided to improve questioning with an inquiry-based approach. The students were given a problem to solve (cleaner air) by asking questions to guide their learning. The research used the jigsaw method so no single group was faced with an overwhelming number of items to handle. At the end of the experiment, they saw a significant increase in the number of high-level questions asked by students. Interestingly, there was no difference in the number of low-level questions asked by either group.
This illustrated that the inquiry group did not move entirely away from low-level, informative questions, but rather added higher-level questions in their exploration. The students were also not asked to identify why certain questions were high-level and others were not. Metacognition is important to the learning process, so there needs to be an additional layer of intervention.
Koch & Eckstein (1991) performed a study which analyzed physics students’ ability to comprehend written text using questioning as a basis for learning. They note that the typical question/answer format – in which students are given questions during or after reading the text – is “suitable only if there is a teacher or other guide available to formulate the questions.” To “prepare students to assume a more active role in the learning process,” Koch & Eckstein developed the “question formulation strategy.”
This is broken into two parts: answer/questioning (A/Q) and peer feedback (PF).
Answer/Questioning
Developed specifically for teaching questioning skills, students summarize text, and the summary consists of questions, not facts like they’ve done for years and years. The students create three columns:
- Column 1 – Questions with answers in the text and the student believes they understand. The student also answers these questions on another piece of paper (or whatever medium you’re using).
- Column 2 – Questions with answers in the text but the student does not understand the idea.
- Column 3 – Questions related to the text, but are not discussed in the text itself.
Do you see what’s happening? There are three processes:
- Identifying what they understand and what they don’t (metacomprehension).
- Identifying content explicitly stated in text.
- Identifying causes for their lack of understanding (metacognitive). From the authors, “…was the answer never stated in the text and not understood, or was the answer not given in the text at all?”
Peer Feedback
Questions can be asked at length, and students can use the A/Q method explained above to improve their questioning habits, but there is little external quality control to the process. Traditionally, the teacher was responsible for giving quality feedback, but peer feedback can be just as helpful, which mitigates the workload and helps students expand on ideas more rapidly.
In short, students would read their questions out loud to the group and receive feedback on the spot. This process not only “helped students clarify fuzzy questions,” (1991) but it also increased comprehension through discussion.
The Implications
The study showed that students who used the A/Q format through the course had statistically significant higher performance on assessments than the control group. There was a second experimental group which layered PF on top of A/Q, and they had statistically significant gains over both of the other groups. These methods, when used in conjunction, help students not only ask better questions, but take and give qualitative feedback on the questions they are asking of the teacher and their peers.
I think StackExchange can work as a peer feedback for questions identified in the A/Q process.
Discussion in class is a powerful process. But questions come up when the class is not meeting. With question and answer forums like StackExchange, students can push the peer feedback portion of the process into an asynchronous environment. They are able to maintain the open forum and also – as a group – decide on the most important questions based on the voting process outlined earlier.
There is definitely an argument for this advocating a use of technology for the sake of using it, and I would agree in some cases. But, with the expansion of access points for students, using an online platform to help not only ask questions, but also develop the quality of the questions they’re asking, it becomes a much more compelling use of technology expanding the classroom opportunities rather than substitution only.
Resources
Dillon, J. T. (1990). The practice of questioning. London: Routledge.
Dori, Y. J., & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question‐posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 411-430.
Harper, K. A., Etkina, E., & Lin, Y. (2003). Encouraging and analyzing student questions in a large physics course: Meaningful patterns for instructors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 776-791.
Hofstein, A., Navon, O., Kipnis, M., & Mamlok‐Naaman, R. (2005). Developing students’ ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry‐type chemistry laboratories. Journal of research in science teaching, 42(7), 791-806.
Koch, A. (2001). Training in metacognition and comprehension of physics texts. Science Education, 85(6), 758-768.
I read an article recently on the need for an “Instagram of Sound” – the idea being that I can record a short audio clip and then immediately share it to a network. After searching and searching, I couldn't find the one I read, but there's a good article on Motherboard which makes the case.
In the absence of such an app, I decided to try it with Instagram itself. I came up with a couple of rules:
- The video had to be still (or as little movement as possible)
- I couldn't appear in the video
- The video had to be shot straight up – as if my phone was just watching from the table
I think it's really interesting to think about how sound can communicate space, action, or surroundings. Our phones are with us everywhere…in reality, this is their experience. What do we miss if all we focus on is the visual? In fact, by playing videos on mute by default, I think Instagram is eroding the experience that sound can bring. I'm wondering if pushing the opposite direction will teach me something.
You can see the few I've done, follow me on Instagram, or search #soundaroundme through the app (their silly API doesn't allow for web searches).
Update 8/20/2014 8:30 AM: I have deactivated the script for this Twitter bot. It was fun, and the process is below if you want to read more. But, the Twitter feed is now inactive.
I’ve been fascinated by the proliferation of non-spammy Twitter bots in the last year. Chatbots have been around for a long time (remember SmarterChild on AIM? Anyone?) and they’ve migrated to Twitter. One of the more famous (and in the end, decidedly disappointing) chatbots on Twitter was @horse_ebooks. It would tweet non sequiturs at various intervals and currently, even though the account is no longer active, it has 203,000 followers. Twitter isn’t just for things with fingers anymore.
creative commons licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by JD Hancock <http://flickr.com/people/jdhancock>
I think bots are fun because we can make them close to sounding normal, yet slightly…off. A turn of phrase is correct, but it doesn’t sit right. It’s a look into what we could come up with ourselves, but weren’t quite clever enough to pull off. In fact, “chatterbots” have been around since the 1990’s and there is an annual competition each year for the Loebner Prize, which is based on the Turing Test for true artificial intelligence.
Twitter bots are subverting the way the larger population thinks about online communication and how computer scripts running at intervals can become not only really convincing, but incredibly entertaining parts of our daily experience.
- *I started by building a simple bot which would search for “Shakespeare” on Twitter using the
Twython library from GitHub. Essentially, it lets you plug into Twitters REST 1.1 API using a python script. You can check out @ShakeTheBard to see some of the early tweets. That wasn’t much fun, though, because it mostly pulled quotes from plays. So, I took it one step farther.
The Markov Chain is an algorithm which can be used to generate random sequences (in this case, sentences) based on probability. So, in essence, it looks for a group of words – two or three at a time – and then determines a likely follow-up based on the frequency of those words and the text following them in the sampel. From StackOverflow:
- Split a body of text into tokens (words, punctuation).
- Build a frequency table. This is a data structure where for every word in your body of text, you have an entry (key). This key is mapped to another data structure that is basically a list of all the words that follow this word (the key) along with its frequency.
- Generate the Markov Chain. To do this, you select a starting point (a key from your frequency table) and then you randomly select another state to go to (the next word). The next word you choose, is dependent on its frequency (so some words are more probable than others). After that, you use this new word as the key and start over.
Sounds confusing, because it is.
I have a text document with every sonnet Shakespeare wrote. All 154. So each time the program runs, it chooses a starting point at random and generates a unique line of poetry based on the frequency of that choice as it goes through the algorithm. Finally, it tweets that line.
- *A lot of people use their own Twitter archive to make bots of
alternate-reality selves, but I haven’t gotten that deep into using the Twython library and pairing it with the Markov Chain library I found. So, for now, Bill is tweeting sonnet mashups. Some are pretty good, others not so much. But that’s the fun.
One of my favorites from testing (unfortunately, not tweeted) was:
Upon thyself thy thought, that thou shouldst depart.
In other words, “I thought to myself: ‘I’d better scram.’” Shakespeare is rolling over in his grave right now.
I see this as a 21st century version of giving 100 monkeys typewriters and infinite time to reproduce Shakespeare’s work. But, I don’t have 100 monkeys, and typewriters are inefficient. I’ll stick with the Pi.
I’m not expecting a ton of followers, and I’m not even sure I’ll leave the account active for any significant period of time. There is a lot of optimization I could do in the code, but I’m just exploring at this point. I’m not planning on posting the script, but if you want to see it, leave a note in the comments and I’ll get a link up.
A dangerous trend in education is the advent of the Learning Management System (LMS). Jim Groom writes about the danger of siloing our data across the web rather than sharing it freely. In other words, if you work in Edmodo, it’s difficult to share that content outside of Edmodo. It’s stuck and you’re robbed of the ability to share your work with a larger group who can build on, improve, and re-share.
The LMS has taken off because it takes the difficulty out of piecing things together. Unfortunately, rather than taking the time to look at alternatives, we go for the easy answer without considering the implications of locking out content until it’s almost too late.
I’ve started a document which walks through how to connect documents, blogs, videos, and calendars all through RSS. Rather than locking your content away, RSS pulls from various sources – preferably ones you control – to deliver content directly to you or your students. RSS has been around for a long time, but it takes time to set up and manage, which is why most people pass over the option.
The goal of this document is to help you connect your dots. It’s growing and dynamic. I’ll update it, add, and take away. Feel free to copy it for yourself and share it with your colleagues. We need to begin talking about controlling our content and I think this is a great place to start.
My previous three posts looked at ideas from John Spencer’s book Sages and Lunatics. I could go deeper because it is full of great discussion points, but I’d rather you just read the book. This is the final post.
It is incredibly difficult to spot the difference between a sage and a lunatic because at first glance, they look the same. The difference is that a Sage has some defining qualities the Lunatic lacks.
- The Sage is retrospective. He or she recognizes that over the last few decades, the relational aspect of teaching has been lost. Sure, it went way too far one way in the 70’s and has since swing back to the assessment side in recent years, but we’ve lost sight of that middle ground. Students are pupils, not humans. Teachers are masters, not people. The relationship is exacerbated every day in schools with nary a peep. The Sage recognizes that education is much more than compliance and control…there is relationship – a dynamic that is special (sacred?) between teacher and student that we need to recognize. The Sage pushes back to that ideal while the lunatic screams in the background.
- The Sage is unconventional. Confusion is a tool to be used strategically, not a pathogen to be wiped out through “educating.” Riddles and nuance flow freely during class with the intent of pushing students to just before their breaking point. A Sage rides the line between challenge and hopelessness in the face of discovering new ideas. Lunatics may often do the same thing, but for their own entertainment or indifference about the means used to reach the same end. Look carefully, and you’ll be able to see the difference between the two.
- The Sage is humble. Classroom wins are local and celebrated with the community. Yes, stories and successes are shared, but all through the lens of the student and their growth. The Sage is always looking to serve others – be it parents, students, administration, colleagues…their own growth comes from helping others grow. The Sage recognizes that when everyone has an opportunity to succeed, the organization is healthier overall. This includes passing on opportunities to help a colleague. Selflessness is indicative of the teacher who gets it.
The really difficult thing about all of this is that the Sage doesn’t feel like one. They may feel like a normal teacher or even the lunatic. They don’t claim to have all the answers, just ideas which worked out for them. Remember these things as you meet and work with educators – you may learn something from a Sage without even realizing it.
This is the third post in a series reflecting on John Spencer’s Sages and Lunatics.
Most of the books are practical manuals on how to run a classroom. They offer quick, handy, time-saving ideas.
The time of the textbook has come and gone. Schools aren’t renewing subscriptions, moving instead to things like 1:1 programs or supplemental materials. Teachers are creating and sharing their own content on the Internet for anyone – including students – to find and use in their learning. Print isn’t dead, but its nature is changing.
At the beginning of Sages, John is lamenting the “Five Tips for [X]” nature of education materials in a bookstore. I remember purchasing my classroom management book, which was full of little tips and tricks on how to wrangle a classroom full of unruly teenagers. There was some theory in there, but it was lacking any recognition of the relationships that are also required.
I’m worried that popular blog posts have become our new “Five Tips for [X].”
Is there value in the quick list (I believe the new term is listicle) approach? Sure there is. It can be helpful to see some quick ideas when you’re in a pinch. The problem comes when every resource decides to take that angle. Nowadays, our culture has become so obsessed with the hyperbolic-headline listicle that it’s started to happen in education blogs. We’re a culture with a fixitnow! mindset…we want to try things out, and if they don’t work immediately, we move on. Call it perseverance or tenacity, but have we lost something in the resources we look to use?
On the other hand, perhaps it is in the content, not necessarily the format. There can be significant wisdom in brevity. Perhaps the quick look is what we need in order to feel inspired to dive in a little deeper. I think the danger in bashing educational print is that much of it is reproduced online in blogs, and we praise the best “Top 5” or “Top 10” posts when they come from photons.
Whatever the case may be, let’s focus on sharing wisdom, sharing background, and sharing depth as we all work to improve.
This is the second post in a series reflecting on John Spencer’s Sages and Lunatics
The machete was dangerous that day.
There is power that comes with learning. Ideas are born; worldviews are constructed. As we learn, we are forced to fit that new information into our existing perceptions and biases. As teachers, we have the ability to guide students and help them navigate and wield the power they gain. John uses the metaphor of a education being a machete: it can be a powerful tool as we explore and discover, but it can also be used to manipulate and destroy.
How often do we avoid the machete in our classrooms? Is it the role of the teacher to protect students from the danger that comes from learning?
I wonder how dangerous my classroom was. Mine may have been doubly dangerous because of chemicals and pointy tools, but physical danger is easier to deal with than emotional. I had safeguards and policies in place to protect students.
I fear that my classroom may not have been intellectually dangerous.
Did I avoid the machete because I was protecting my students? Or because I was protecting myself?
It has become easier to avoid the tough questions because they “aren’t within the scope of the course.” Standardization has fooled us into thinking that we don’t have time to cover eugenics, genetic modification of crops, and the commercialization of our diets. Why talk about abortion or birth defects? Topic avoidance in the interest of covering the standards is accepted when it should be reviled.
Hindsight is always 20/20 and is an educator’s curse. I try not to think about missed opportunities with students, but they stay fresh. I’ve learnt to be aware of danger and more receptive to the idea of running straight in. Rather than fearing the gray areas, I want to embrace them.
This is the first post in a series reflecting on John Spencer’s Sages and Lunatics.
A report came out in early May with data showing college students saw teaching as one of the easiest majors to follow and said that teaching was the top profession for “average” people. In the wake of the report, there have been calls for more stringent teacher preparation, making certification tests harder, and encouraging alternative, more “rigorous” methods of teacher certification from the private sector.
Teachers are a strange breed. Heading into the job, we know that there will be long hours, little pay, and unfair expectations put on us and our students. Yet, we walk into the building every day, excited about the possibilities. I never considered teaching a “job.” It wasn’t just something I did to pay the bills.
John brings up an interesting idea in Sages: Perhaps we aren’t paid to teach. Perhaps we are paid so we can teach. (Actually, Brad the Philosopher brings it up, but John wrote it down).
I’ve written on this before, but even being out of the classroom for more than a year, I still jump to say I’m a teacher when asked what I do. It’s in my heart. I think about schools, curriculum, students, and instruction all. The. Time.
Is it possible that you are paid so that you can teach? In other words, you are a teacher. It’s who you are. You can’t avoid it.
I got to thinking, would you still teach if you didn’t get paid? In other words, if you could do nothing but teach while not worrying about bills or other financial constraints, would you commit your life to doing so?
Teachers – whether you know it or not – you are some of the most trusted people in society. Parents send their children to you every day for instruction, for nurturing, for support, and they do so often without ever meeting you face to face. Aside from the obvious problems with the reality of parent engagement, this is an incredible burden. I’m also left wondering how schools, how communities, would change if we look at teaching from the point of view of the trust they’ve put into us.
Yet we take this burden without question. We welcome the happy, the sad, the hungry, and the lonely without question. In our rooms, we see the children and we pour our hearts into them. The time we invest with each child every year is second only to their parents…how are you spending that time? Teaching isn’t a job. Teaching is a lifestyle.
My name is Brian E. Bennett, and I’m a teacher.
Fingerprint icon by Yaroslav Samoilov on The Noun Project CC BY 3.0
No, not that Mars.
FlipCon14 is coming up June 23-25. This is the 7th annual event, and I’ve had the privilege of watching it grow from 35 people in Woodland Park (FlipCon10) to nearly 450 last year in Minnesota. This year, we’re in Mars, PA (near Pittsburgh) and we’ve got a fantastic lineup planned. Along with Jon and Aaron’s keynote, Molly Schroeder will be opening the conference with her Living in Beta keynote.
If you’re on the fence about coming, we have the full schedule – including all concurrent sessions – posted online for review. Hopefully, that will help tip you over the edge.
I can honestly say that this conference kicked off my interest in improving digital teaching and learning. Each year, I learn more about what teachers are doing to help students and how I can adapt some of the things they do to my own practice. I’m excited to see old friends, and meet new ones. If you’re also planning on heading to Pittsburgh, leave a shout out in the comments.
Twitter mailase has set in big time. Twitter is dying! No, it’s just beginning!
- *I’m not sure I can really explain my own confusion or mixed feelings. The power in any network is in how it allows you to connect with people. Part of the reason I’ve started to migrate away from Facebook is because of the backend filtering of which posts you see based on “engagement.” I have no control over that filtering, and it doesn’t sit well with me that I can’t change the way it works.
Twitter, on the other hand, shows everything. I can choose what to work with and what to ignore. I’ve gone through the stages, but now I’m trying to figure out what’s next.
Deep discussions happen. Off-the-cuff questions are answered rapidly. But I’m feeling a lack of connection. I feel a lack of purpose. I’m afraid that Twitter is become one of two things: A) A place teachers go because Twitter. B) A place where people talk all the time but don’t do anything different. Ideas stop when they hit your eyeballs. But, you can justify the time as “idea-searching.”
Maybe I’m following the wrong people, but it seems like a lot is put out by the bigfolk. I want to see new people, but how do we discover the new thinkers and leaders? I feel like there’s a lot of echo without much growth. And if that’s the case, it may be time to move on.
But where do we go?
Short post tonight. For the final assignment this semester, we were asked to read Thomas Friedman’s OpEd on Passion Quotient and Curiosity Quotient as the big need moving forward in the world (the previous need being IQ – intelligence quotient).
I have to admit, this particular assignment really stumped me. I wasn’t sure about what I thought or how to best communicate those ideas. In the end, I thought about a world without passion or curiosity, and when I landed myself in that spot. Rather than telling here, on the blog, I used my absolute favorite iPad app: Storehouse. The preview below will jump you to the story.
Post Updated 4/27/14 9:15PM – Since writing this post, my group has finished our project. Rather than adding a separate post, I’ve updated the links below to the final recommendation.
The semester is winding down and that means final projects are wrapping up. In Applying Edtech to Practice, my group tackled the problem of “rethinking teaching.” Essentially, we came up with a suggestion for how teachers can improve their practice based on The Danielson Group’s teacher evaluation tool.
The Framework for Teaching has four components:
- Planning and Preparation
- The Classroom Environment
- Instruction
- Professional Responsibilities
The instrument breaks each area down into indicators which we used to outline our proposal. Using the TPACK framework as a guide, we looked at each subgroup in the Framework and linked them to simple tools teachers can use to move toward the distinguished level of performance.
To organize everything, we’ve created a Popplet as a graphic organizer. From there, you can learn more about The Danielson Group, the TPACK framework for applying technology as well as see our white paper recommendation and video of the process we used to create the final product.
Any feedback in the comments would be appreciated.
The final revision will be posted later this week.
Survey Analysis
Last week, I distributed a short survey on technology and professional development. I’ve typed up some brief analysis, looking at major patterns and asking new questions, in a public Google Doc. Please head over there to read the full summary and leave comments if you have them.
Graphics
I took some of my data and made it into a short infographic, highlighting some of the quantitative results. It helps paint a picture of who I heard from and what they had to say about technology use and professional development they’ve done.
As always, comments are welcome on either the post or the full report within the context of the analysis.
Thank you to everyone who took time to complete the survey. I appreciate the help and the insight you helped me to find.
Blog readers, I come to you again asking for help with a survey.
As many of you know, I’m working on a masters degree in education technology through Michigan State University. I have a short survey in circulation looking at technology integration and the associated professional development. It will take 5-10 minutes, and your help would be greatly appreciated.
Please pass the link along to friends, colleagues, or your social networks. I’ll be gathering data over the next few days and then posting an analysis late this week/early next.
I was working on a Chrome Extension (feel free to download and use it) this evening and I noticed something awesome.
If you right click on a webpage in Chrome, one option in the menu is “Inspect Element.” It shows a lot of programming mumbo jumbo which is extremely useful in programming, but not necessarily for anything else, especially if you’re not programming.
At the bottom of the window, I noticed a new tab that said “Emulation.” So, I clicked on it.
Lo and behold, in the latest Chrome update (M34 stable channel) you can view any webpage as if it were on a mobile device. How. Awesome. Is. That? I was able to select one of dozens of Android devices and then emulate the page (after a quick refresh) to see how it would behave…including any JavaScript you have in there as well.
Click any image to see it bigger.
I used to have to resize my browser window or put the page I was working on up on a secure testing server or something. Gone are the days of trying to test for mobile on anything else because I can do it right in the Chrome browser. It even reads custom CSS based on media queries (if you use those).
Now, do note, that if you’re developing across multiple browsers (and if you’re doing web development, you should be doing that), so you’ll still need to test for compatibility in Firefox, Opera, Safari, etc. This is just one way to easily knock out some mobile responsive design from your browser.
Why is this useful? If you teach any kind of web development class, this will make your life much easier. Also, since 50% of the world accesses the web via mobile as their primary method, responsive design is a must for any design course. This is one way to help make that process easier for quick cross-platform testing as students learn.
