Earlier this fall, the Oklahoma Council for Public Affairs released the results from the survey it had commissioned about the civics knowledge of high school students, which were very alarming. Only 23% identified George Washington as the first president, 29% identified the president as being in charge of the executive branch, and 43% that Democrats and Republicans being the two major parties in America (10% identified the two parties as Communist and Republican). OCPA decried the results as proof of the failure of Oklahoma's educational system, and the results of their survey were used in many major publications.
But, almost as soon as they were released, questions began to be raised. Could it really be that only 2.8% of the 1000 polled high school students, as the survey claimed, could pass the test (which is a meager 6 out of 10 correct)? And none would get 8-10 correct? In a random distribution that would bring about 600 college-bound students and 50 gifted students, none got 8-10 correct?
This raised some questions, most notably by statistician Nate Silver. Even starting with the assumption that only 23% of the sampled students knew about Washington, the results still looked fabricated. Simply put, the distribution of student scores matches almost identically to a homogeneous distribution of probability. However, students are not homogeneous... a student that gets the first three right is much more likely to get #4 right than one who got the first three wrong.
Silver wasn't the only one, as he mentioned today. State representative Ed Cannaday, a former educator, also thought something was fishy. He conducted the same survey in school districts in his own congressional district within Oklahoma (N = 325). And, he found an entirely different set of results. In fact, 98% identified George Washington as the first president, 85% identified the president as being in charge of the executive branch, and 95% identified the correct two political parties. In fact, the average score in Cannaday's survey was 7.8 correct out of 10, very striking considering the OPCA survey said none in 1000 scored more than 7 correct.
POLITICS INVOLVED
While Silver doesn't focus specifically on it, still what is clear is the subtext of OCPA being a conservative group pushing educational policy changes. And, by the reach of the survey's results, which landed prominent places in Time, Newsweek, and the USA Today, it can be said the survey was successful, however dubious. Now that headlines have blared how Oklahoma's public schools are failing miserably, the damage is done, and a page 12B follow-up article will not do anything about it.
The lesson here is twofold. One, that in an era of data-driven decision making, standardized assessment results still run secondary to sensationalized opinion polls in the effort to sway public opinion. And two, that schools appear to be not off-grounds for fabricated politicization. Which means one thing...
If you are an Iowan representative, you better be extra critical of any external data used to describe the achievement of Iowa's students.
And if you are a newspaper, like let's say a Register in the state capital, you should be equally cautious.
Using standardized data as a measuring stick for how well the nation's schools are doing is troubling enough for many reasons. It becomes infinitely worse when using non-standardized survey data.
There are a million reasons behind the data, all the way down to whether the students had any breakfast this morning, to whether the test had cultural bias within it, to whether a teacher happened to give the students the answers. Now we have to add nefarious purposes of the testing provider to the list.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Parent-Teacher Conferences, and Asking the Students
Parent-Teacher conferences are coming in full swing with the start of November. P-T conferences were frequently disappointing in our districts, as parents had busy schedules and were keeping track of grades online, thus decimating participation. Even requiring parents to come in to P-T conferences in order to get the student's report cards didn't work; parents came in, got the paper, and immediately left. I had a similar experience with a face-to-face parental advisory group when I was a principal.
About 2003, I stopped putting any hope in P-T conferences or Parental Advisory Groups, and instead prioritized online communication. And it worked, tremendously. I had near 80% participation rate in my parental advisory group with an online communication format. I found online communication better for two reasons. I could initiate the conversation at any time, and parents were more likely to respond.
The takeaway was this. Parents care. They want what is best for their children, and they want a voice in that education. There was something about the convenience of interacting online that made it possible.
What I realize now is that I didn't offer them a forum to talk to each other online. All communication was back and forth via email with me. A discussion group or a blog would have produced more authentic sharing.
Which brings me to what Russ Goerend is doing. In addition to his other online professional learning activity, he uses blogging as a centerpiece of his teaching. His blog serves as ongoing writing instruction for students as well as a springboard for student discussion. Moreover, the blog offers parents a chance to not only find information and access notes, but also to participate in the discussion about how to improve the classroom.
STUDENT INPUT
Come to think of it, there was one compliment (I take it as a compliment... those who disagree with my pedagogical outlook will consider it a weakness of mine) that I received at the P-T conferences I had that was very rare for other teachers. Parents really liked the fact that I asked students for their thoughts on what we were learning in class and how we learned it.
We went beyond just offering multiple project choices for individuals. We actually had discussion about the format to instruction and the way we learned best, and sections of my courses were taught completely different from other sections based on what the students argued they learned best with. These usually spilled over into individual discussions with students, both inside and outside of class. For me, frankly, I felt like I was doing what I should have been doing; it was their education, after all.
Russ of course does it better than I do. I love his open threads for students and parents alike to contribute to. Teachers and administrators need to do more of this. It creates more empowering, ongoing dialogue and creates a culture of continuous improvement. More on the responses from students about the technology teachers should use tomorrow.
To do this requires a teacher to be open to criticism of their teaching, that they indeed do not have all the answers and are looking for input. I won't be naive; this is a major hurdle to most teachers, whether we want to admit it or not. But it is one we need to overcome.
Related Post:
Why aren't we asking students?
About 2003, I stopped putting any hope in P-T conferences or Parental Advisory Groups, and instead prioritized online communication. And it worked, tremendously. I had near 80% participation rate in my parental advisory group with an online communication format. I found online communication better for two reasons. I could initiate the conversation at any time, and parents were more likely to respond.
The takeaway was this. Parents care. They want what is best for their children, and they want a voice in that education. There was something about the convenience of interacting online that made it possible.
What I realize now is that I didn't offer them a forum to talk to each other online. All communication was back and forth via email with me. A discussion group or a blog would have produced more authentic sharing.
Which brings me to what Russ Goerend is doing. In addition to his other online professional learning activity, he uses blogging as a centerpiece of his teaching. His blog serves as ongoing writing instruction for students as well as a springboard for student discussion. Moreover, the blog offers parents a chance to not only find information and access notes, but also to participate in the discussion about how to improve the classroom.
STUDENT INPUT
Come to think of it, there was one compliment (I take it as a compliment... those who disagree with my pedagogical outlook will consider it a weakness of mine) that I received at the P-T conferences I had that was very rare for other teachers. Parents really liked the fact that I asked students for their thoughts on what we were learning in class and how we learned it.
We went beyond just offering multiple project choices for individuals. We actually had discussion about the format to instruction and the way we learned best, and sections of my courses were taught completely different from other sections based on what the students argued they learned best with. These usually spilled over into individual discussions with students, both inside and outside of class. For me, frankly, I felt like I was doing what I should have been doing; it was their education, after all.
Russ of course does it better than I do. I love his open threads for students and parents alike to contribute to. Teachers and administrators need to do more of this. It creates more empowering, ongoing dialogue and creates a culture of continuous improvement. More on the responses from students about the technology teachers should use tomorrow.
To do this requires a teacher to be open to criticism of their teaching, that they indeed do not have all the answers and are looking for input. I won't be naive; this is a major hurdle to most teachers, whether we want to admit it or not. But it is one we need to overcome.
Related Post:
Why aren't we asking students?
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Heartland Tutorial on Ning & Online Communities
We just finished our facilitator training for our agency-wide learning teams, which included a discussion about using collaborative online tools for better learning. Each learning team (think: professional learning community) will be using an online collaborative tool of some sort.
For training purposes, I created a tutorial on how to use Ning to build an online community, with an assist from a self-paced tutorial by Anthony Armstrong. The tutorial currently features the following sections
For training purposes, I created a tutorial on how to use Ning to build an online community, with an assist from a self-paced tutorial by Anthony Armstrong. The tutorial currently features the following sections
- Joining and Participating in a Ning
- Creating and Administering a Ning
- Digital Citizenship
- Using Collaborative Documents in a Ning
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Keeping an Eye on Net Neutrality
There certainly are many current educational issues in politics today, with the debate over standardized assessments, national standards, teacher merit pay, charter school funding, and the like. It might be safe to say that net neutrality is the one furthest off most educators' radar. It shouldn't be.
IN A NUTSHELL
Net neutrality basically states that the content on the internet should be equally available to people. That is, unlike cable, you shouldn't have sites that are intentionally blocked or slowed down by internet service providers because they stand to make money if you instead go with a competitor.
The following graphic from Jason Linkins gives a good visualization of this (CORRECTION, the graphic is from a different user, reported on by Linkins):
We currently have net neutrality, but certainly many telecoms and internet service providers see the abolishing of net neutrality as a cash cow. And, politicians have moved to restrict the FCC from assuring net neutrality by introducing legislation (ironically named the Internet Freedom Act).
THE IMPACT FOR SCHOOLS
Schools could feel the impact of a loss of net neutrality in many ways. You could start with the additional costs to purchase the internet. And as some have predicted, like the cable companies, rising uncontrolled costs could see the advent of a new technology competitor, much like satellite TV. Would schools be equipped to handle "the new web" if something came to fruition?
Many educators have turned to free web 2.0 tools in an effort to provide collaboration and creativity in their curriculum. For the longest time, the warning was that the developers that made these free services might not make them free anymore, causing an educator to be "stuck". But sources like Blogger and Wikispaces have not made any inclination that they would go away from free services.
But, that changes. It wouldn't have to be the developers at Wikispaces who say "no more free wikis". It could be the internet providers who could do that. That's not to say that there wouldn't be other agreements (many districts work with local telecoms right now to receive free cable), but it adds an unknown to the equation.
On a deeper level, the question of open access to all information vs. censorship comes up. Is it censorship if students won't have access in schools to certain news outlets? Some would argue the internet is a big place; there will always be resources available for students. But others would argue that denying students the access to information, no matter how "little" the effect is deemed, infringes on the basic rights of students.
Maybe the best way to frame this is, is internet a right (like basic utilities) or a privilege. The issue isn't quite so black and white, but it is something that educators should have in their peripheral vision because it will affect schools.
IN A NUTSHELL
Net neutrality basically states that the content on the internet should be equally available to people. That is, unlike cable, you shouldn't have sites that are intentionally blocked or slowed down by internet service providers because they stand to make money if you instead go with a competitor.
The following graphic from Jason Linkins gives a good visualization of this (CORRECTION, the graphic is from a different user, reported on by Linkins):
We currently have net neutrality, but certainly many telecoms and internet service providers see the abolishing of net neutrality as a cash cow. And, politicians have moved to restrict the FCC from assuring net neutrality by introducing legislation (ironically named the Internet Freedom Act).THE IMPACT FOR SCHOOLS
Schools could feel the impact of a loss of net neutrality in many ways. You could start with the additional costs to purchase the internet. And as some have predicted, like the cable companies, rising uncontrolled costs could see the advent of a new technology competitor, much like satellite TV. Would schools be equipped to handle "the new web" if something came to fruition?
Many educators have turned to free web 2.0 tools in an effort to provide collaboration and creativity in their curriculum. For the longest time, the warning was that the developers that made these free services might not make them free anymore, causing an educator to be "stuck". But sources like Blogger and Wikispaces have not made any inclination that they would go away from free services.
But, that changes. It wouldn't have to be the developers at Wikispaces who say "no more free wikis". It could be the internet providers who could do that. That's not to say that there wouldn't be other agreements (many districts work with local telecoms right now to receive free cable), but it adds an unknown to the equation.
On a deeper level, the question of open access to all information vs. censorship comes up. Is it censorship if students won't have access in schools to certain news outlets? Some would argue the internet is a big place; there will always be resources available for students. But others would argue that denying students the access to information, no matter how "little" the effect is deemed, infringes on the basic rights of students.
Maybe the best way to frame this is, is internet a right (like basic utilities) or a privilege. The issue isn't quite so black and white, but it is something that educators should have in their peripheral vision because it will affect schools.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Learning = Fishing
At Heartland, we are putting into effect learning teams, which 
are similar in principle to professional learning communities (PLCs). The teams afford our consultants the opportunity to learn from other consultants in areas that they prioritize, making them better at their profession.
As any administrator that has tried to institute PLCs can attest (or, anything new, for that matter), change isn't embraced by everyone, even when it directly benefits their autonomy. For many, it is an opportunity, but for others, it is a mandate that they don't have time for...
Wait a second. Learning is a mandate. And some educators have a problem with that?
Well, that's not quite fair. In visiting with some of those who had some concerns, it isn't that they have a problem with learning, per se. They just feel they learn quite well with their current routine.
Unfortunately, that's not what the research in adult learning says. And the difference is perhaps best illustrated with a metaphor. Learning is like fishing.
1. You can't learn much if you don't get off the shore. Learning is an active process, requiring effort and initiative. If you wait for the fish to come to you, you might get lucky and have something wash up next to your feet. But it isn't the effective way to do it; get in a boat and go navigate the big lake. If I told you to go learn as much as you could in one day, you wouldn't do what you normally do in a day. You would change your routine.
2. Learning isn't just quantity, but also diversity. Some beginning fishers like to go to the same hole and pull out perch after perch just to say they caught 50 in one day. There is nothing wrong with catching a large haul every once in a while, but you can't do that all the time. As fishers become more sophisticated, they realize that a diversity is important--bass, crappie, and then walleye, and even muskie.
3. Learning is organic, not systematic. I went through all the checklists of "how to fish" with my kids, be it how to bait, how to cast, how to hold the line, etc. It didn't necessarily lead to catching fish, and that is frustrating to seven-year-olds. Many learners go through the same frustrations. I did the steps someone told me to learn algebra, or to grow tomatoes! What they don't realize is learning must be done multiple times in a variety of ways to be internalized, and there is no systematic schedule to it.
4. Diversity of learning requires different locations. Move that boat around. Put the line deeper. Or in other words, check out different sources of information. Use different tools to acquire information. Including ones you haven't tried before.
5. Diversity of learning requires different times. Saying to educators, "the time you will learn is during this once-a-month, two-hour professional development session" is like saying to the fish, "the time I'm catching you will be at 2:00 in the afternoon". That isn't necessarily when you are ready to fish, or when fish are ready to be caught. Adults must have access to learning at all times in an ongoing basis to truly be most effective.
6. Diversity of learning requires casting
your widest net. Some during our sessions were slightly upset that they couldn't choose to work with those that they were most comfortable working with for their learning teams. But, the reality is people don't learn as much from those who they are closest to, much like you don't always want the fish that are right next to the boat. People learn more from those farther away.
As an analogy, fishing illustrates what George Siemens describes as connectivist learning, how adults learn best in today's age. We don't learn by prescribed times, locations, sources, people, and methods. We learn instead by a diversity of practices and by creating a wider network with more nodes. Wider networks mean learning can come at any time and not always when one is expecting it.
But to create wider networks, we need to seek out new sources, tools and people. And, that includes people we don't know. Developing our own personal learning networks to fully utilize the tools of today. And embracing online communities to interact any time, pace, and place.
are similar in principle to professional learning communities (PLCs). The teams afford our consultants the opportunity to learn from other consultants in areas that they prioritize, making them better at their profession.As any administrator that has tried to institute PLCs can attest (or, anything new, for that matter), change isn't embraced by everyone, even when it directly benefits their autonomy. For many, it is an opportunity, but for others, it is a mandate that they don't have time for...
Wait a second. Learning is a mandate. And some educators have a problem with that?
Well, that's not quite fair. In visiting with some of those who had some concerns, it isn't that they have a problem with learning, per se. They just feel they learn quite well with their current routine.
Unfortunately, that's not what the research in adult learning says. And the difference is perhaps best illustrated with a metaphor. Learning is like fishing.
1. You can't learn much if you don't get off the shore. Learning is an active process, requiring effort and initiative. If you wait for the fish to come to you, you might get lucky and have something wash up next to your feet. But it isn't the effective way to do it; get in a boat and go navigate the big lake. If I told you to go learn as much as you could in one day, you wouldn't do what you normally do in a day. You would change your routine.
2. Learning isn't just quantity, but also diversity. Some beginning fishers like to go to the same hole and pull out perch after perch just to say they caught 50 in one day. There is nothing wrong with catching a large haul every once in a while, but you can't do that all the time. As fishers become more sophisticated, they realize that a diversity is important--bass, crappie, and then walleye, and even muskie.
3. Learning is organic, not systematic. I went through all the checklists of "how to fish" with my kids, be it how to bait, how to cast, how to hold the line, etc. It didn't necessarily lead to catching fish, and that is frustrating to seven-year-olds. Many learners go through the same frustrations. I did the steps someone told me to learn algebra, or to grow tomatoes! What they don't realize is learning must be done multiple times in a variety of ways to be internalized, and there is no systematic schedule to it.
4. Diversity of learning requires different locations. Move that boat around. Put the line deeper. Or in other words, check out different sources of information. Use different tools to acquire information. Including ones you haven't tried before.
5. Diversity of learning requires different times. Saying to educators, "the time you will learn is during this once-a-month, two-hour professional development session" is like saying to the fish, "the time I'm catching you will be at 2:00 in the afternoon". That isn't necessarily when you are ready to fish, or when fish are ready to be caught. Adults must have access to learning at all times in an ongoing basis to truly be most effective.
6. Diversity of learning requires casting
your widest net. Some during our sessions were slightly upset that they couldn't choose to work with those that they were most comfortable working with for their learning teams. But, the reality is people don't learn as much from those who they are closest to, much like you don't always want the fish that are right next to the boat. People learn more from those farther away.As an analogy, fishing illustrates what George Siemens describes as connectivist learning, how adults learn best in today's age. We don't learn by prescribed times, locations, sources, people, and methods. We learn instead by a diversity of practices and by creating a wider network with more nodes. Wider networks mean learning can come at any time and not always when one is expecting it.
But to create wider networks, we need to seek out new sources, tools and people. And, that includes people we don't know. Developing our own personal learning networks to fully utilize the tools of today. And embracing online communities to interact any time, pace, and place.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Interactive Gaming for Pre-Literacy Development
I'm starting to focus on studies about the involvement of interactive games for preschool/primary students in the building of pre-literacy and pre-math skills, given some mounting evidence that this is an underutilized area in education.
The latest: THE Journal reports on a study from the Educational Development Center that suggests preschool students learn pre-literacy skills better in an environment with repeated exposure to interactive games. The specific skills were letter recognition, letter naming, letter sounds, and understanding story concepts.
Take this study with a grain of salt. I'm not convinced of the methodology, as the comparison group was a science curriculum, not a literacy curriculum, and it was commissioned by PBS, which while I admire their overall work in helping students learn, they still have a vested interest in seeing a positive correlation.
Best news though is that it is leading to further studies. Given available technology that is more accessible to young students than ever before, this will lead to more purposeful game development for that age, with a better tie-in to the Iowa Core.
The latest: THE Journal reports on a study from the Educational Development Center that suggests preschool students learn pre-literacy skills better in an environment with repeated exposure to interactive games. The specific skills were letter recognition, letter naming, letter sounds, and understanding story concepts.
Take this study with a grain of salt. I'm not convinced of the methodology, as the comparison group was a science curriculum, not a literacy curriculum, and it was commissioned by PBS, which while I admire their overall work in helping students learn, they still have a vested interest in seeing a positive correlation.
Best news though is that it is leading to further studies. Given available technology that is more accessible to young students than ever before, this will lead to more purposeful game development for that age, with a better tie-in to the Iowa Core.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Teachers Beware: Facebook Usage is Dangerous
Or so says Justin Bathon at the Edjurist, on multiple occasions.
Actually, Justin has many valid points. I've had several discussions with administrators this year alone who have mentioned younger teachers are sometimes unaware of the dangers of Facebook, namely that it is open, easily traceable, and permanent. When teachers make the mistake of getting caught up in the forum, whether it be an avenue to vent, a place to post candid pictures, or a forum to show yourself as a fun-loving person, the line can be crossed very easily.
Perhaps the most famous case involves a teacher from Charlotte, NC, who on her Facebook page:
Prospective teachers take note. It was our policy when I was a principal to not only Google a person, but to fully examine their Facebook page, and I currently recommend that to administrators that I visit with. In recent days, one reported back to me that, upon visiting a prospective teacher's page during the summer, that teacher was immediately dropped from consideration (no comment as to why, which has unfortunately let my imagination run wild). And certainly, just because you are already hired does not mean that inappropriate actions via Facebook are okay. They are not only very strong grounds for dismissal, they are also easy data to gather, as opposed to non-digital evidence.
I'm not quite as strident as Justin on this; I do believe that educators should use the tool personally to become familiar with it, not only because it can help them understand social tools to possibly use in the classroom, but also because it offers many positives to a person's life. It helps them become connected and collaborative with others that they normally would not have. But what is a non-negotiable is that teachers need to have an understanding of digital citizenship, at the very least because they are expected to help their students have an understanding of digital citizenship.
The NEA is similar to my thinking. They have posted both on the benefits of social networking in the classroom (despite the myths) as well as some of the professional pitfalls. Those two articles are great resources to share with your teachers.
And, if you would like some more, below is a brief presentation on the dangers of Facebook.
And perhaps my all time favorite, someone actually getting fired via Facebook. Add this one of what not to do to the above list.
Actually, Justin has many valid points. I've had several discussions with administrators this year alone who have mentioned younger teachers are sometimes unaware of the dangers of Facebook, namely that it is open, easily traceable, and permanent. When teachers make the mistake of getting caught up in the forum, whether it be an avenue to vent, a place to post candid pictures, or a forum to show yourself as a fun-loving person, the line can be crossed very easily.
Perhaps the most famous case involves a teacher from Charlotte, NC, who on her Facebook page:
- Listed her hobbies as "drinking"
- Said her job was “teaching chitlins in the ghetto of Charlotte”
- Said she was "teaching in the most ghetto school" in town.
Prospective teachers take note. It was our policy when I was a principal to not only Google a person, but to fully examine their Facebook page, and I currently recommend that to administrators that I visit with. In recent days, one reported back to me that, upon visiting a prospective teacher's page during the summer, that teacher was immediately dropped from consideration (no comment as to why, which has unfortunately let my imagination run wild). And certainly, just because you are already hired does not mean that inappropriate actions via Facebook are okay. They are not only very strong grounds for dismissal, they are also easy data to gather, as opposed to non-digital evidence.
I'm not quite as strident as Justin on this; I do believe that educators should use the tool personally to become familiar with it, not only because it can help them understand social tools to possibly use in the classroom, but also because it offers many positives to a person's life. It helps them become connected and collaborative with others that they normally would not have. But what is a non-negotiable is that teachers need to have an understanding of digital citizenship, at the very least because they are expected to help their students have an understanding of digital citizenship.
The NEA is similar to my thinking. They have posted both on the benefits of social networking in the classroom (despite the myths) as well as some of the professional pitfalls. Those two articles are great resources to share with your teachers.
And, if you would like some more, below is a brief presentation on the dangers of Facebook.
Five Ways Facebook Can Get You Fired
View more presentations from Paul Dunay.
And perhaps my all time favorite, someone actually getting fired via Facebook. Add this one of what not to do to the above list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
