Assessment | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Assessment’ Category

“Teaching Isn’t Really a Profession”

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, Banning, Child Predator, Education, Leadership, Parents, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on February 13, 2012| 20 Comments »

As an educator for the past four decades there is very little in the way of conversation that I haven’t discussed about what it is to be a teacher. In these discussions, over all of these years, there is one position taken by many people which always gives me cause to think less of the person with whom I am having the discussion. It forces me to question their bias on the subject. The statement that sets me off is usually some variation of,”teaching isn’t really a profession”.

The person at that point of the discussion would usually talk about the hours in the day and the weeks in the year that teachers work as if that had something to do with what a professional is. Ultimately, it always ends up with some comment about the idea that teachers belong to a UNION so they can’t be professionals.

I found two different definitions of Profession and neither mentions a disqualification of status because of time spent working or any union affiliation:

A calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation…

A vocation requiring knowledge of some department of learning or science: the profession of teaching…

I have always taught in New York. There are many different requirements for teacher certification throughout the fifty states, but the common link is a higher education degree. That requires at least four years of college. Many states require a Master’s degree, which involves an additional two years of education. Teachers are required to be content experts as well as education experts all of which entails specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation to enter this vocation requiring knowledge of some department of learning or science. I would say that teaching meets all the requirements to be considered a profession.

It is the very lack of respect for teaching as a profession that forced teachers into considering unionizing in the first place. We are not far from the days of the Schoolmarm, when the work ethic and morals of teachers had a different standard than everyone else. Teaching was often viewed as a part-time job suited well for women because of the limited hours and an academic calendar. I remember back in the 50’s and 60’ teachers were forced to work second jobs in the summers to support their families. If one’s value to society was based on compensation, teachers had very little. People referred to it as a calling as if because of that calling a salary was of little consequence. Teachers, after all, were civil servants. That implied that they were servants to the people, and a servant is not a professional.

It was that very attitude that forced many teachers to organize. The result was not only a better job and working conditions for teachers, but, as a result, it created a better learning environment for students. The real effect of teacher’s union contracts By Matthew DiCarlo via Valerie Strauss Which was further supported by Teacher Unions Boost Student Achievement According to a New Study in the Harvard Educational Review . Essentially, it stated that states with teachers unions provide a better education for their students.

Of course the other more vocal argument these days is the “BAD TEACHER” cry. That is the label most often used in targeting teachers today. My contact with most teachers spanning 40 years as an educator leads me to believe that the vast majority of teachers are caring concerned and dedicated individuals who have answered a calling. Most are parents as well. They are not bad people or “Bad Teachers”. The profession however needs its professionals to constantly update their knowledge and maintain relevance. Schools need at the very least support this, and in the best case provide it. Professional development however is low on the priority list of schools in need of reform.

The public’s negative attitude toward my profession is further exemplified in its judgment of all teachers based on the actions of a few. It is always a headline story when some teacher does something really stupid. It is stupid to openly blog a rant about one’s own students or, any kids or their parents for that matter. Teachers who have done this are not in the majority. Those are stupid and thoughtless acts of individuals. They probably represent the smallest fraction of a percentage of teachers, yet as a result of the actions of this fraction, we now have places considering legislation banning teachers (only teachers) from having contact with students through social media.

There was a case in Los Angeles recently where two teachers were accused of child molestation. That is a heinous crime and the fact that two people in the same building may have committed it at the same time is astounding. Both of those individuals deserve to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The district however decided to take it one step further and eliminate the entire faculty of that school before those individuals even went to trial. Again, this is a community that judges an entire profession based on the stupid or illegal actions of a very few.

Teachers are also probably one of the only professional groups to have their salaries printed in local newspapers at the whim of people looking for political gain. Maybe in the interest of transparency, every community member should have their salary posted in the local paper. I am sure that would have great support. That is only one of the indignities resulting in the fish bowl existence teachers must put up with from communities that lack respect for the profession of teaching.

I am a professional in the profession of education. I have worth; a great deal of worth. I am an expert in an area that required me to obtain and document years of education. I have proven my worth in my job every day as a professional teacher. Do not judge me by the actions of a very few. Do not label me a “Bad Teacher” because districts are not supporting fellow professionals with professional development. Many of my colleagues are civil servants, but they are serving a calling. They are not your personal servants. They are professionals in the Profession of Education.

Read Full Post »

Another Tarnished Silver Bullet

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, Banning, Curriculum, Education, Leadership, Literacy, online learning, Pre-Service teachers, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Student teaching, Teacher, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on December 23, 2011| 18 Comments »

The latest trend in education may be to shift teaching and learning from the classroom to the internet. We are seeing more and more states tuning to this as an answer to their education woes. Colleges have been transitioning in that direction for years. Online course have exploded over the years. I served on a committee for the New York State United Teachers examining those online possibilities for the secondary level back in the turn of the century, about the year 2000.

My personal experience with online learning, beyond the theoretical, came with my daughter as an eighth grader participating in an online-writing program sponsored by Johns Hopkins University. This occurred in 2007. I have two daughters and they have grown up in a technology-rich home environment. We are most fortunate and are thankful every day for what we have. The experience of my kids however, is probably not typical for every kid in America. That experience is what my daughter brought to the table as her preparation for this writing program.

Two things impressed me about this program. First, I was intrigued with the approach and methodology of the teacher .It was not assignments and worksheets, but rather explorations and feedback. Second, I witnessed how effective it was in engaging and advancing my daughter in writing. Of course the obvious, to be stated, is that if it were not for the first, the second would never have resulted. It was obvious that the educator on the other side of the computer screen was trained and experienced in delivering more than material and worksheets to spark more than just involvement on my daughter’s part. She was participating with interest. As a “classroom teacher”, I was most impressed. As a father, I was very proud of my daughter’s accomplishments. As an educator, I began to think, is this the way to go?

Stepping back into the “Wayback Machine” and returning to today, I need to ask many more questions. There are many who see this as a silver bullet for education. It addresses the concerns of politicians and business people. Online learning can be cheaper and more cost-effective than classroom teaching. They foresee one educator reaching larger numbers of students than could be done with conventional teaching methods. Less overhead, more profit, lower taxes. With the Kahn Academy and the popularity of the TED Talk Lectures how can online learning miss the mark? It is the one stop answer many have been looking for. That would be the many who are not educators, but seem to direct the reform discussions.

If we are to travel the path to online learning, we need people to lead the way. Most colleges are preparing teachers for classroom teaching. Technology itself has found it difficult to break into the teacher preparation mindset. The idea that a teacher can teach solely over the internet, or even for part of the day, has not yet been accepted by many of those who teach teachers. The blended classroom may be happening, but it is through pioneering and not engineering. We need more than a workshop to train teachers to teach over the internet.

The idea of the blended class on the secondary level, which is far less a goal than complete immersion into online learning, cannot depend on happening with just students coming from colleges as new teachers. With over 7 million teachers in the United States we can’t expect that all of them have the ability or inclination to self-teach themselves the skills necessary to support an online teaching initiative.

The other big obstacle to this online learning is the same thing that is an obstacle to conventional education that we continue to ignore, poverty. There are families that are not financially capable of supporting that which is necessary for online learning. They do not have the bandwidth metaphorically or literally to do this.

I also question the ability of the students to be prepared for such a change. Being educated in an environment that at best has mixed feelings about technology in education, are our students properly versed in, not only the skills needed, but the mindset required for online learning? We have schools that still ban the internet. We have teachers who will not give up the chalk board. We still budget for overhead projectors and textbooks. These are not bad things. They are however indicators that we may not yet be prepared for immersion into online education. As always, the use of technology for the sake of using technology in an education setting is doomed for failure.

As an adult, I am all for online learning. Adults however, learn differently than children. As an educator I support the use of technology as a tool for learning. I would use it anywhere that it fits into what I teach and how I teach it. I believe we need to teach our students for the lives they will be living, which is not the same as the lives led by us, their teachers. I believe we must move forward to stay relevant. None of this can be successful however without the proper preparation.

The agenda for online learning may be misguided by people whose motivations are guided less by quality education and more by cutting costs and taxes, or, in the case of private schooling, to increase profits. Online learning, to be done properly, will require educating the educators, and providing the poor with that which they must have to participate in education. Students will also have to be provided the skills to participate in the process. Colleges will need to prepare teachers differently. Oh, and here is the elephant in the room. Who stays home with the kids as they are receiving their online education?

If we are going to go in the direction of online learning, than we must prepare for it. I think if we do so, it may change not only the way we teach, but it will affect the way everyone learns. It cannot be done on the cheap. Professional development in our system is, and continues to be the weak link of education. We cannot again add-on something else without training and supporting those who must use it, and then blaming them when it ultimately fails. There are so many unanswered questions. Even as we answer the questions however, we must keep in mind, that there is no single answer. There is no silver bullet.

Read Full Post »

Many Lenses, But Little Focus.

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, Banning, Elementary, Leadership, Observation, Parents, Professional development, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on November 27, 2011| 3 Comments »

To understand why certain decisions are made, we need to understand the decision maker and the pressures under which certain decisions are made. This is sometimes referred to as looking through the lens of the decision maker. It takes into view many of the factors pushing and pulling on an individual responsible for making a decision. Sometimes decisions of some magnitude may require a number of individuals on a number of levels to make separate decisions. Each of those decisions is made looking through a different lens.

Certainly the leader of any School district, the Superintendent, has the most politically influenced job. Most often the position is held by an educator who has exhibited great business management skills as a primary focus. Of course it is not expected that Superintendents need professional development at this stage of their career. They must be able to effectively deal with huge budget considerations with every decision. Matters of money, procurement, personnel, labor relations, and infrastructure all fall to the Superintendent. There are demands by government both State and Federal requiring conformity to regulation. There are pressures from the reform movement for increasing accountability, as well as legal considerations at every turn. This leaves little time for weighty research to support every decision affecting education in the classroom.

The decisions for technology in education for most districts fall to the IT director. This position is often filled by a person with a technology background and not always from education. The pressures on the director in this position revolve around getting technological things to work smoothly. It requires using the bells and whistles of technology that the public expects to see for education in the 21^st century. This also involves the Public’s perception of SAFE access to technology for their children. This perception can vary with communities depending on each community’s understanding of technology. There are also the problems of installing technology to a not-so-tech-friendly environment in regard to infrastructure, or user acceptance. They must also get teachers to understand the bells and whistles of technology to ensure the adoption of the high-tech stuff in order to justify many high-priced ticket items. Again, this leaves little time for weighty research to support every decision affecting education in the classroom.

Each building in each district has its own Educator/Manager, the Principal. Many of the business and reform pressures seen by the superintendent also come into play on the building level for the principal. There is a very real pressure coming from dealing personally with parents, teachers and students. Many considerations of both public relations and labor issues affect many decisions. Again, this leaves little time for weighty research to support every decision affecting education in the classroom.

Of course there are the decisions of the teacher. Considerations in this position include pleasing all of the other decision makers in regard to accountability in supporting all of the decisions and mandates that have worked their way down to the classroom. Teachers serve: The superintendent, the IT director, the principal, the parents, the law, and the students. Now there are also questions of teacher accountability being tied to many things out of the teacher’s control. Again, this leaves little time for weighty research to support every decision affecting education in the classroom.

Now at the bottom of the list, but never the less a decision maker in the education system, is the student. The ultimate decision to be made in the entire education system is dependent on what has worked its way down from the top. The final decision is whether or not kids will accept the opportunity for learning being offered to them by the system. Their decision will be based on relevance, curiosity, and personal need. How much of this is addressed once the decisions affecting the learning in the classroom have passed through so many lenses. Are we focusing those lenses on the needs of learning for our children, or are we losing focus because of everything else? Maybe we need to refocus our support so that most decisions are made with education in the classroom as the prime directive.

Read Full Post »

Assessment: Formative, Summative, Punitive?

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, cooperating Teacher, Curriculum, Homework, Leadership, Literacy, Pre-Service teachers, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth on September 8, 2011| 15 Comments »

For the first time since I have been supervising student teachers, I have a group at the start of the year, as opposed to my usual assignment at the latter half of the school year. This has brought to light a subject that I often fought against as a teacher, and now have to counsel student teachers on how best to approach the subject. Summer Reading: how do we assess it?

New York State’s recommendation for reading is that each student completes reading 25 books per year. Most adults don’t even approach that goal, but adults have to work and their time is committed to other stuff. It is understandable that adults’ time must be dedicated to other stuff. Kids have more time to read than adults. In a 24 hour period a kid’s time is taken up by: one hour preparing to get to school, seven to eight hours in school, two hours extra-curricular (depending on the sports’ season), and one to two hours of homework. Let’s allow an hour and a half to eat dinner and chill. That has accounts for Eleven to Thirteen hours. If we consider the ten to twelve hours of recommended sleep, that would leave one to two hours per day that a kid could be, and should be reading to get to 25 books per year. It all works out on paper. I always loved the expression, “Man plans, and God laughs”.

For all of the reasons mentioned it is difficult to get all 25 books done in the school year. Of course, if you ever went into a Border’s Book’s during the summer when there was a Border’s Books, you would see an awesome display of Books for the Summer Reading Lists for your school. Summer reading is highly recommended to keep those young brains sparking away. Many districts assign multiple books to really charge up those summer-lazy brains. Hopefully, thought was given to those book lists to be high interest level books of brevity, so there would be at least a chance of accomplishment. War and Peace is not a beach book. It has been my experience that those who make up these lists are often people who love reading and actually read 25 books per year or more. In their day, they must have been the best students, if we are to consider the New York State recommendations as an indicator. I do believe that reading is important, and we should, most definitely, provide suggested lists to students for summer reading.

That being said, I need to talk a little bit about my understanding of assessment. I always approach assessment as a tool for the teacher. Formative assessment tells the teacher how well the teaching is going. Is there a reason to re-do something, or is it time to move on? Summative assessment is the final result. After all is said and done, how much was learned? It is like a chef who needs to taste the cooking until the diner gets the plate (formative). The diner tasting the meal is the final assessment (summative).

Now we move on to the point of all of this. Students are told that they MUST do the summer reading. This may be in more than one reading and in more than one academic subject. They are also told that there will be a test within a short period of time from the start of school which will go into their average. By the way tests are one form of assessment, so this test should be formative or summative. If the teacher is using it as formative assessment than it is testing how effective the lesson was, but there was no lesson. Therefore, it must be a summative assessment. How much learning was accomplished from the activity?

One would hope that in an ideal situation, we could get most of our students to at least an 85% achievement level. If the entire class did not get there, it might be necessary for the teacher to revisit a number of things to clarify and expand on some ideas. After all a good chef does this to complete the course for the summative assessment of the diner. Sometimes, if at first you don’t succeed… There is always a re-test after fine tuning. This would be wonderful if that was done.

This does not always occur in the real world of education. Some teachers give the final test and what a student gets is what student gets. “You should have completed the reading.” “You had every opportunity and all the time of the summer to get it done.” “ You knew the rules going in.” “ This is the way our department does it.” “ That is what summer reading is all about.” “ I don’t make the rules, I follow them.” Does any of this sound familiar?

What does a failing grade on the summer reading test indicate? After all it is a summative assessment so it should tell us something. Does it indicate the student has a reading problem? Does it indicate that the student fails to make connections. Is it an indication that there is a problem with higher order thinking skills? Does it indicate a need for remediation? Are there emotional problems interfering with learning? These are all possibilities. This is what teachers should be asking of any summative assessment that identifies a student’s failure to learn.

Of course if these are not the questions being addressed by the teacher, there might be another reason for this assessment grade to be averaged into the student’s average. It is not assessment, but PUNISHMENT. The student did not do what he or she was told, and the student needs to pay a price in the form of a lowered average. That should require an asterisk on the grade at the end of the year stating that the average is not a true account of the student’s ability to learn. It has been skewed to account for punishment for not reading over the summer.

Many of those students who receive punishment for not reading do not take it as a constructive criticism, for that is not what it is. It is intended to be a negative experience, as all punishment is. That does not promote reading. There are many ways to assess things beyond a test. Group discussions, and projects based on the reading give reasons to students to complete the reading. Teachers need to remember that we are here to promote and nurture learning and not to punish students into submission. Leave that for the behavior policy. Assessment is not for punishment.

I am sure there will be comments on this and they are welcomed. I am off to read book number two, the year will soon be over!

Read Full Post »

Leadership Accountability

Posted in Accountability, Administrator, Assessment, Education, Elementary, Internet, Leadership, Mentoring, Merit Pay, Observation, PD, Pre-Service teachers, Professional development, Professionalism, Reform, Seniority, Social Media, Teacher, Tenure, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on August 17, 2011| 11 Comments »

I am growing tired of the number of posts and stories I read about everyone’s plan on “teacher accountability”. I see too many holes in too many plans to deal with what is being categorized as “THE PROBLEM” with education; bad teachers. Unfortunately, when the outcome of many of these ill-conceived plans like Merit Pay result in failure, that too will be blamed on the teachers for its failure to work and not the fact that the plan itself was flawed. Teachers are in a no-win situation with targets painted on their backs. Nowhere was it more evident than in the reporter’s attack on Matt Damon for his support of teachers at the Save Our Schools March in D.C.. I guess we should be grateful for, if it wasn’t for the press coverage of Matt Damon, the entire March might have gone on with absolutely no press coverage. Why cover a bunch of protesting teachers when we all know that they are the problem with education? They cost too much and do too little. The newest added dimension, thanks to enlightened Missouri Legislators, is that all teachers are suspected to be potential child molesters.

I am not saying that teachers should not be held accountable. I am saying that there is no one factor that is creating the perceived failure of our education system. I recently read a post suggesting that the professional thing for teachers to do was to pick themselves up by the bootstraps and fix themselves through self-evaluation. Of course that was my take on it, and I did comment to the blogger. You may assess it differently. Teacher Accountability & PLCs.

The one big question that keeps nagging at my brain is: Where is our leadership in all of this? Other questions: Who is standing up for teachers? Besides Diane Ravitch whose voices are we hearing nationally in support of teachers? But the most important question of all is: Where are our local, educational leaders in this? What responsibility are the superintendents, assistant superintendents, directors, principals, and assistant principals taking for the “demise” of our education system?

I do not want to enter the realm of Admin bashing, but there are some observations that can be made that might be helpful in leadership evaluation. After a career in secondary education, I have a longstanding awareness of the capabilities of teachers. Additionally, my recent experience with educators involved in Social Media is also very positive, and finding that most educators are involved to improve their craft and be relevant as educators. Most educators entered the profession for reasons more noble than to bilk the system with an easy ride for high pay and healthcare. The leadership of education comes from these very ranks. What happens to the educator who transitions to an administrator? Are all administrators leaders? How much of our administrators are still educators?

The industrial model of education requires a hierarchy of supervision. Unfortunately, for some Admins, this creates an adversarial relationship with an Us/Them mentality and teachers become the problem. Those admins may no longer be comfortable with teachers and tend to lead from their office. You won’t find them in professional development workshops. Some will never enter the student cafeteria at lunchtime. Walking the halls is the lowest priority on a long list of important administrative duties.

A stable school culture is developed over time. To affect that culture in a positive way, any admin needs to spend time working on needed change. The system however, often requires that admins move on, to move up. Aspiring admins are too often not around long enough to affect needed change leaving that to the next admin to come along. This also creates a void in teacher evaluations. Any continuing guidance an admin may be offering a teacher in need of such structure, leaves with the admin. The new admin generally does not want to rock the boat or create enemies, so follow-through is usually tabled for the time being. That usually means, until there is a problem that is visible. Some refer to this as falling through the cracks. administrator mobility causes many, many cracks.

Leadership works best when there is a mutual respect between teachers and admins. It has been my observation that this works best when admins view themselves more as educators than supervisors. An educator who supports other educators in the goal of developing learners is a much more respectful way to lead than the Boss and Worker model. Support of teachers requires trusting teachers. That requires giving teachers power. The Power and control issue in any school creates that adversarial thing that always gets in the way.

The whole educational philosophy idea can really muck things up as well. At the extremes we have conservatives and progressives. The conservative approach to education much as in politics, harkens back to the tried and true methods of olde. The progressive philosophy calls on teaching the 21^st Century skills and employing tech tools for learning. Of course the bulk of educators fall somewhere in the middle, again, much like politics. This is where professional Development and life-long learning come into play. Better learners make better teachers. Better learners also make better leaders. This can’t happen with once or twice a year workshop day for teachers. We need Leaders to offer constant PD and to lead the way by modeling their involvement.

There is an Irony here that I feel the need to point out. I do not expect too many comments from administrators objecting to my opinions here. Most of the administrators who would even be exposed to this post are the administrators looking to learn and reflect for a better way to lead. The unfortunate part about that is that, they represent only a small, but hopefully growing number. So, the people who I need to have read this post for the most benefit, will never see it. Maybe they would, if someone printed it out and walked it into their office.

To be better students, we need better teachers. To be better teachers, we need better leaders. To be better leaders, we need better methods. To get better methods, we need more involvement. To get more involvement, we need to be better learners. Ta Da! To be better Educators, we ALL need to be better learners.

In addition to all of this, we need to be better marketers of education. Marketing is the key to success. I once took a marketing course for educators at, of all places, Disneyworld, the Mecca of marketing. That was a valuable course for me. I learned the four important points for marketing education.

Do a good job. 2. Do a good job. 3. Do a good job. 4. Tell everyone about it!

Read Full Post »

The Future of EDU in SIX Hours

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Curriculum, Education, Leadership, Reform, Skills, Standardized test, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth on July 16, 2011| 9 Comments »

Every three years I force myself to do something that, although it is geared to save me money and provide for my safety, I dread it more than the possibility of Kidney Stones. New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, the DMV provides a Defensive Driving Course for drivers to complete and earn a reduction on their insurance premium, or a reduction on points on their license as a result of traffic infractions. Not wanting to suffer alone, and needing to get the highest reduction possible on my insurance premium, I enlisted my wife and daughter to attend the SIX hour course with me. Misery loves company. We did have a choice of two, three-hour sessions, or one, SIX hour course. Our choice was to not prolong the agony over two sessions. We opted for the SIX hour course

I do not know for sure, but I imagine other states offer such courses for their drivers. The entire SIX hour course was developed by the DMV. The instructors are all certified by the DMV. The 56 page workbook was developed by the DMV. The 20 question course Exam with multiple choice answers as the culminating event was developed by the DMV. The course was delivered on a DVD which was produced by the DMV. The course was delivered by a private driving school. The classroom was provided by the driving school. The fee for the course went to the driving school.

I always go to this course waiting to see the original Blood on the Asphalt, an old Driver’s Ed standby 16mm film from the 60’s. It never appears. It must be residing in some Driver Ed museum. The DVD used to present the course provides a number of very modern videos during the course, all of which are of a higher quality than those of the 60’s. The pre-packaged curriculum is very well thought-out. What wasn’t so well-thought-out was the rows of folding chairs in the room for the SIX hour course. There was a non-interactive whiteboard in the front of the room. It could have been a blackboard. All in all, it looked like a modern version of a 19^th century classroom without the Franklin stove.

The instructor was a very nice guy. He had been specifically trained to teach this defensive Driving course by the DMV. He was, as many of these instructors are, a retired teacher. He was also a driving instructor. He was friendly, engaging, and humorous. He did however need to follow the curriculum set out by the DMV and complete the 56 pages within the allotted SIX hour time slot. Additionally he needed to confirm our completion of the 20 question multiple choice Exam.

Here is what really struck me during the course. We went step by step following the curriculum and doing the worksheets at the appropriate times. We watched the prescribed videos as they appeared on the DVD. I had a cup of coffee and a bagel early on, so I was somewhat awake. My daughter however, was nodding off, and had to get off the somewhat padded folding chair for the comfort of the carpeted floor. Halfway through the SIX hour course, that’s when it happened. We watched one of the prescribed videos on driver safety. The subject of the video was putting people through a driving simulator. They encountered various scenarios in the simulator. The subjects drove in the simulators and adapted to various defensive driving scenarios. We got to look at the results. As the video ended, the blaring question in my brain was, “Where the Hell is this damned simulator?”.

If we all took turns in the simulator, my family and our 8 classmates would all be better defensive drivers in a much shorter period of time than SIX hours. We would be the “Ninja Warriors” of defensive drivers. Instead, we were being prepared over a SIX hour period to pass a 20 Question Multiple choice test developed and delivered by the DMV. That is when I realized why fate had me endure this SIX hour agonizing experience. It was to view the future of Education.

This was a course developed by the government. The instructor was trained by the government to stick to the curriculum. The curriculum was canned on a DVD so that there would be little deviation from the prescribed material. The consumable worksheets were developed for the course by the government. Private industry partnered to make all of this possible. The classroom, furniture, instructor’s pay, tech and whiteboard were all provided by independent business and no taxpayer expense.

It was all too obvious. As all of this went through my head, I could not believe the parallels I was beginning to formulate. Consider: the government mandates, the call for a standardized curriculum, the certification of teachers, the goal of passing a standardized test, and even the arrangement of seats in rows. Let us also consider the incursion of private business into the education space. The best thing of all is that we can do all of this in just SIX hours. I believe I have seen the future of Education. What is even worse is that I have experienced it. It is not learning.

The best thing is that the DMV offers an online alternative. It may be quicker than SIX hours, but I do not know if it is better. The best part is that the worksheets and test are presented online. The key, for a less scrupulous person, would be another Tab on the computer. During the Test a student could open a Tab and go to. From that point on it is a matter of cut and paste. So much for “Ninja Warrior” Defensive Drivers. The 20 Question Test however, the real indicator of defensive driving readiness, would have been aced, to make the student a certified defensive driver. I feel so much safer on the road.

If this is a path for education, and there are indications that it may be, what can we expect as the outcome for our kids? We need to rethink prescribed curriculum, standardized tests, the use of technology and all of the rest. There are no easy answers. I have experienced the future of education in SIX hours. I have seen the enemy and it is us.

Read Full Post »

The Homework Option Plan

Posted in Administrator, Alfie Kohn, Assessment, Education, Homework, Leadership, Parents, Reform, Skills, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on May 22, 2011| 20 Comments »

I was recently asked, along with several other educators, to comment on a post dealing with grading homework. The premise on which we were asked to comment involved a teacher grading homework and giving a zero as a grade to those students who did not do the assignment. This is not an uncommon practice amongst educators. I employed this strategy myself for many years. It was and probably still is an accepted strategy, but after decades of teaching, I have grown to a point where i am not a big believer in giving homework. I stated my homework philosophy in this post, Hmwk: Less Value or Valueless?

If homework is to be given by a teacher, students need to believe that the teacher will value their efforts in completing it. Homework requires a sacrifice of personal time on the part of the student. If students observe that the teacher is not at least checking homework, they will not spend time, which is important to them, doing the assignments that are not valued. A mistake often made however, is that rather than assess the work, the teacher records a zero, or a failing homework grade for the student. This would also apply to a project prepared outside of the class that was to be presented at a specific time, a deadline.

I see assessment having two functions. The formative assessment is to tell me how much the student understands, so I can decide to move forward, or if I need to, change my strategy. The summative assessment comes at the end to determine, how much of what I taught, was learned by the student. A zero for a homework grade does not seem to fall into either of these categories.

It would seem that the zero grade is a punishment for non-compliance. Maybe an argument can be made for assessing the student’s understanding of deadlines, but that might be a stretch. That may be more of a work-ethic value and I don’t know how to assess that in number terms. The issue is bigger than zero for a grade of non-compliance. It is a question of the relevance of homework.

If the grade is an assessment of the work, and the student’s understanding, but it was not done, how can it be assessed? If the homework is more important to the teacher than it is to the student, who benefits? The zero seems more like retribution for not finding value in what the teacher values, or has been told to value. It’s more of a control thing, and not an assessment thing. If a student consistently performs well in class, how is it that when assessed on the same skills performed outside the class in the form of homework, the work gets a zero? It is a power issue.

Maybe we need to change the emphasis or at least offer an option for change. We could give control to the students, by giving them a homework opt-out option. Of course the ultimate control would need to be given to the parents, but let us consider this option. Students, with parents’ permission, could opt out of a homework grade for the year. The teacher would give homework assignments to the entire class, but would only be required to assess the work of those who have opted in for it. Students who have opted in, get a homework grade as an extra grade in their overall average. Every student will be given an opportunity to do the assignments, but, the only grading the teacher needs to do would be for those who opted in. If, as the teacher would hope, the homework makes a difference, it should be evident to all in the grades of the students who have opted-in. The opt-outs could still do the work, but it would not be assessed for a grade. Additionally, if opt-in students miss a specific number of assignments, they would be opted-out and parents would be informed. The group choosing to do the homework is now perceived as having the advantage in grading, making it very desirable for all. Of course that only works if the homework is relevant and if it does make a difference. There is a very good possibility that homework may make no difference at all in the students’ learning. In that case, those who have opted out, have not been harmed at all.

I believe homework should be given as infrequently as possible, and only if necessary. It should take no more than brief period of time. If homework is given to students, it must be valued. Their efforts outside of the class should be recognized. If we consider the schedules of our students and value down time, homework becomes less important and class time becomes more valuable.

This topic of homework is often a huge magnet for teachers’ comments on a blog post. For some reason educators feel a need to defend or attack the homework issue as a matter of professional pride. I await those comments.

Read Full Post »

A Third-Rail Education Issue

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, cooperating Teacher, Education, Leadership, Observation, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Skills, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth on April 12, 2011| 11 Comments »

I am far from an expert on this topic. My teaching experience barely involved my participation in this turn-of-the-century program that I would now like to open to discussion. With that as an opening for this post, readers may not be interested enough to read any further. The fact that I haven’t mentioned what program I would like to discuss, is the only thing that may keep readers hanging in. As Social Security is the third rail of politics, I believe that Inclusion Programs may be a third rail education issue. Anyone looking to explore this issue, or a possibility for alternatives, may be burned beyond belief.

I understand, and, for the most part, agree with the philosophy, that students should learn in the least restrictive environment. It is this belief that has removed students with special needs from small classes working with special education teachers specifically trained to address the specific needs of those students’ and placed them into mainstream classes. The idea is to have special-needs students as active participants and beneficiaries of mainstream classes, and working within an academic class along with the academic subject classroom teacher, as well as the special education teacher, and any required aides, if indicated by a student’s IEP. In the ideal situation the number of special needs students would be limited and the overall class size should also be small.

Educators often consider fairness to all as a primary consideration in any program for education. It is truly a noble endeavor, but sometimes fairness to all, means unfairness to some. The Irony of course is obvious. Staffing programs like this with effective teachers is the problem. Academic teachers are educators with expertise in content areas and little concentration on special education. Special Education teachers are educators with expertise in Special Education methods and little concentration in content areas. Sometimes an educator comes along with expertise in both areas. They are not in the majority. I do not know if there is a Secondary Inclusion certification. The best models of inclusion involve: collaborative teachers, common planning periods, small classes, limited number of special needs students, and participating teachers in complete and enthusiastic support of the program. It can be a very costly program.

Many believe that the inclusion programs are better alternatives to the small special education classes that often separated special needs students from their fellow students. Including them in a general academic setting is seen by many to be more beneficial, as long as all of the students’ IEPs are being addressed in the overall setting.

As a methods teacher in higher education, many of my students do observations in inclusion classes each and every week. As a supervisor of student teachers, I observe many of my students doing their student teaching assignments in inclusion classes. I am in a position to look at many inclusion programs in many schools. The problem I have observed is that there seems to be many different models of inclusion in place, and they seem to vary greatly. It is understandable when one considers all of the variables in such programs. Multiple teachers for one class, small class size, required aides, scheduling considerations for common planning, these are all money considerations. These were very important when the programs were conceived and implemented. Under today’s climate of cutbacks and reductions however, their import has been reduced. Education considerations are taking a back seat to monetary considerations.

An Inclusion program, to be successful, requires a delicate balance of components. It is not a cheap way to go. Many believe that it is the best setting and the most effective way to meet the needs of students who require special methods and considerations to learn. That may very well be true. My point is asking if anyone is questioning if these programs, under the current conditions, are still meeting their intended goals. Can schools provide the same quality of education while scaling down all of the components necessary to make it happen? Are schools even trying to assess the effectiveness of these programs in their current forms?

My fear is that these programs will become a shell of what they should be. I fear administrators will not call for needed assessments to determine if these programs are still viable with less money invested. I fear that questioning these programs, even for the purpose of assessment; will be deemed as an assault on students with special needs. If we can’t fund education the way it must be funded to succeed, should we not reconsider what, and how we do things. If it is not important for us to fund things properly, how do we best deliver what we can with what we have? How do we do what is needed, as opposed to what we can afford. I fear I have too many questions with too few people even trying to seek real answers. I do not oppose these programs. I do oppose doing things half-assed and then looking to blame someone for the failing result. We all may benefit by assessing how we are teaching, as opposed to what we are teaching.

Read Full Post »

A Secondary Idea

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Banning, Education, EduCon, Elementary, Homework, Leadership, Literacy, Mentoring, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking on February 21, 2011| 5 Comments »

This post is the third and last on a topic involving a change in the way most schools incorporate technology into the curriculum for the benefit of students and teachers alike. The overall idea was spelled out in Piece of the Pie, and suggested changes on the elementary and secondary levels in our approach to technology integration. A more detailed description of the Elementary piece was explored in An Elementary Idea. In this post I would like to offer a suggestion for an approach on the secondary level.

Many of the obstacles to integrating technology into the curriculum as tools for learning are the same on the secondary level as they are on the elementary level. Insofar as teachers needing to seek professional development the problem remains the same. Too often teachers don’t know what it is that they don’t know when it comes to technology in education. It goes beyond just learning tech. It requires a continual commitment to learning with the ability to provide the time to do so. Beyond that commitment, the idea of comfort is always worked into the discussion. Teachers seem to have a need to be comfortable with technology in order to learn or use it. Little of this helps get technology into the classroom. The time restraints and discomfort of some, deny the access of technology in the curriculum for many. Beyond the teachers however, the other obstacle is a lack of support on the part of the district. This is usually a result of lack of money, or understanding, or leadership. Too often it’s a combination of all of those elements.

The plan for the secondary level is as simple as scheduling a study hall. It will require a model very familiar to special education teachers. It is a resource room with access to technology. The teacher in charge of the room may become a jack of all trades and a master of none. It will require the teacher to be a mentor more than a content expert. The teacher’s expertise will be in knowing where to direct kids to go for an exploration of content. The room will require access to technology or at least the ability for students to use their own personal tools to access the internet.

In this scheduled class students may be directed to any number of tutorial sites like the Kahn Academy. This will enable students to explore subjects in ways that may be different from those presented in the regular class. The idea of open source exploration may also slip the bonds of the textbook of the classroom with the guidance of the tech resource teacher. This will be a place of exploration to teach students the ability to explore subjects independently in an effort to develop independent life-long Learners.

This learning environment will also allow students to understand and develop their own Personal Learning Networks. The idea of responsible digital citizenship will be reinforced on a daily basis. Emphasis can be placed on the positive aspects of social media and social learning. The skills of collaboration and communication will be the focus. Students needing to work on projects or presentations will also benefit in this learning environment. The ability to Skype with experts and authors can take place to benefit all in this collaborative environment.

The age of the students should not matter. Freshmen to seniors mixed in one place can all benefit from this mentoring process. The mission of this environment would be to create a mentoring environment with access to technology to supplement, and enhance that which is being taught in the various classes of the students in this environment. This will remove the classroom barriers as students gain independence in learning outside the classroom. The idea would be to make them participatory learners, directing their own learning. There would also be a need to teach and strengthen critical thinking skills in order to improve the ability to acquire accurate and relevant information. These students will be media literate. The benefits of this learning environment hopefully will spill over to the other classes.

That would be my proposal with some of the benefits spelled out. It will meet certain academic and media literacy needs. It will require a change in thinking on the part of some, but it would be fairly simple to implement. It addresses the 21^st century skills that we hear and talk so much about. This proposal however, will also probably never go anywhere but this post for two reasons. One, It cannot be measured by a standardized test. Two, it requires people to think and do things differently from the way they are doing things now. Our need to talk, debate and argue endlessly about reform without change will continue. I will however probably feel compelled to continue making suggestions for reform.

Comments are welcomed.

Read Full Post »

An Elementary Idea.

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Banning, Blog, Elementary, Leadership, Literacy, Mentoring, Parents, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teachmeet, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, tagged Elementary, Parents, PD, Professional Development on February 18, 2011| 24 Comments »

In my last post, Piece of the Pie, I suggested adding a teacher to the elementary program in order to better utilize technology as a tool for learning. I have had a number of requests to expand on that idea. I have never been an elementary teacher, so I am not sure I have the clearest picture of how to make the right changes, but I can frame the problem and offer a suggestion which can be changed accordingly.

When we talk about reform in education there are no easy solutions. There are layers of problems intertwined with more layers of problems. Often a solution in one area may ripple out and cause problems in other areas. This is a primary reason many people would like to blow up the system and start from scratch.

In order to appreciate my suggestion for change, I think I might best start by addressing the problems that I am attempting to address. It is not a single issue but, again, a layer of intertwined conditions preventing or at least obstructing our ability to create the best environment for learning for our kids.

The first part of this problem involves teachers and Technology. For a myriad of reasons the advance of technology development is out pacing our teachers’ ability, or understanding as to how to use it effectively as a tool for learning. We need not explore the reasons for this gap, but we must acknowledge that for a huge number of our teachers this gap exists.

The second part of this problem is the need for our kids to understand the advantages as well, as the pitfalls, in the use of technology in order to prepare for a technology driven society. Yes, there are those who feel that people should reject the fact that we are becoming a technology driven society and they have that right. They don’t have the right to make that decision for others however. In order to decide about any choice, one needs to understand the choices and their implications. That being said, technology does have a place in education as a tool for learning.

Of course I am making a recommendation to add teachers in an era of cutbacks and layoffs, so this entire idea may be a non-starter. I would like to see an elementary teaching position created for the purpose of integrating technology into the elementary classroom. This is not an IT position, but a classroom teacher position. This would be a revolving teacher, one who schedules visits to many classrooms as a support person. This Tech teacher would enter classes one or two times a week for a period of time to work with kids using technology as tools for learning in support of the curriculum that is being taught by the primary teacher.

This Tech teacher will be responsible for planning with the primary teacher in order to integrate technology in a meaningful way to the class environment. This can be done with applications or websites. Skyping in experts and authors can be an activity for this Tech teacher. The introduction of Social Media and responsible digital citizenship could be added to the list. Tech tools for the creation of content are another area the Tech teacher could explore. She/he would also be the Go-to person for Parent Workshops for technology in the classroom sessions. A teacher offering to be a source parent support.

It would need to be mandated with required a schedule for this Tech teacher to enter these classrooms on a regular basis. There is an argument for this to be applicable at every grade level, but at the very least it should happen from fourth grade, and continue through sixth.

The addition of this Tech teacher is the best form of Professional Development in technology for the entire staff. Teachers, who are not now using tech for whatever reason, will see its benefits in their own class without needing to do it themselves. They will also have a say in how to incorporate it in what they want to do. This increases their understanding and guides them through its use. It will also increase collaboration with all teachers since the Tech Teacher revolving from class to class will be making connections with teachers with similar interests, goals and lessons.

Every Tech teacher should have a COW. That would be a cart with a class set of laptops, Computers On Wheels. Being able to have a person responsible to guide the students to the best sites and the best free web 2.0 tools will be a great help to the primary teacher. It also allows the primary teacher to explore the benefits of student, and class blogging. That opens the door to responsible digital citizenship, critical thinking, reflective thinking, creation of content, collaboration, communication, and enhancement of self-esteem.

Using the push-in teacher model enables the primary teacher the time and incentive to learn and grow with the students. Hopefully, the more they learn and share, the more they will venture forward. Both teachers and students may begin to develop connections with others who have similar likes and interests, as well as people who are experts in various areas. We know this a Personal Learning Network. Imagine what could happen if kids learned to responsibly create their own PLN’s as elementary students and develop and grow that PLN throughout their academic career.

There are many pluses in this plan, at least as I have laid it out, but there are huge obstacles to make it happen. When it comes to education reform, many wants reform, but few want change. Out of the Box innovation does not come from in the box regulation. I proposed an idea that addresses many issues and may offer solutions to persisting problems in Professional Development and use of Technology. I am only a Shaker, I am not a Mover. If we are to ever get Education Reform, we need educators, not only discussing reform, but making changes as well. The alternative will be business mandated labor reforms couched in the cloak of Education Reform for the sake of privatization and profit.

I now need to post a similar idea for the secondary Level.

Comments and ratings welcomed