Teacher | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Teacher’ Category

Not Your Father’s EDU Conference

Posted in Acceptable Use Policy, Administrator, Banning, Blog, conference, Edcamp, Education, FaceBook, Filtering, Internet, ISTE, Leadership, Linkedin, Literacy, PLN, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teachmeet, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter, unconference on June 17, 2011| 11 Comments »

With a premiere Technology-in-Education Conference, ISTE11, coming in a matter of days, I find myself comparing the Education conferences of old to the social media-influenced Education conferences of today. There is a world of differences, but, unfortunately, many of these differences have yet to be discovered by educators who have failed to recognize the juggernaut of social media. For many years I was a board member of NYSCATE, an educational technology group for New York educators. A primary purpose of this group is to conduct an annual conference that draws thousands of educators in order to discuss technology in education. In addition to my participation in this conference, I have over the years presented in many others, both large and small.

A huge difference about today’s conferences is the connectedness of the participants. Educators through social media have been able to connect with other educators without regard to geographical boundaries. Many productive online relationships have continued over a period of time without actual face to face meetings. These conferences are an opportunity for face to face connections. That translates to more time for socialization for the participants. Plans and discussions have taken place weeks before the conference about who to see and what to do. The conference provides a place for people, who have never met face to face, to meet as long-lost best friends would meet after a long separation. Places for social gatherings need to at least be considered, and at most be expanded. These personal connections of connected people may be misinterpreted as cliques, but this is often a perspective of educators not yet involved with social media. The unfortunate result may be a perception of a class distinction between the connected and the disconnected (or not yet connected).

Back Channeling is another big difference between old and new. This is when participants in a workshop or presentation tweet out on Twitter, or Facebook the points that the presenter is making in real-time. Not only are the facts of the presentation, but editorial comments as well tweeted out. This may have a great effect on presentations moving forward. I remember a recent conference having a keynote speaker using a data heavy PowerPoint presentation, and not being very aware of back channeling. After a few Tweets came out about the quality of the presentation, there was an avalanche of negatives flying out from that presentation. Needless to say these tweets were global messages going public to thousands of educators. On the other hand, a great presentation has the potential for going out beyond the limited audience in the presentation. Ustreaming is being done more and more as well. Presentations limited to small audiences are broadcast globally to any educator with a connection. Local conferences have the ability to gain global recognition.

The social media hierarchy is now replacing the superstars of higher education and industry at these conferences. Keynote speakers of the past were often professors from Higher Education or Captains of industry from the world of Technology in Education. Today, social media has chosen its own superstars, people who continue to contribute and influence education through Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, online Webinars, Podcasts, and Blog Posts. Some of the best have feet in both worlds. The conference of today is an opportunity for participants to meet those whom they consider to be social media Gurus.

I think an underestimated influence on conference participants is the effect of free online Professional Development. More and more free symposiums are being offered through social Media. Webinars and online interviews are becoming daily occurrences. The conference participants are becoming more aware of trends and issues prior to attending the conference. Presenters need to at least be where their audience is in their knowledge of the subject. Relevance means more to connected educators than it ever has before.

Another influence is the effect that the growing “Unconference” movement is having. Born from Social Media, “Teachmeets”, and “Unconferences” are changing what educators expect from a conference. These are self-directed-learning format conferences. They give most, if not all, of the control for learning to the learner. The learners direct the conference from the beginning until the end forcing the conference to be flexible and adaptive.

Blogging is another Social Media-influenced activity which has a lasting touch on conferencing. On the very first day of any conference, there will be at least one blogger who will publish a post on his or her experience. First impressions last a lifetime. Bloggers will continue to post their experiences and impressions throughout and beyond the time that the conference takes place. Once it took weeks for the word to get out about the success of a conference. On the spot blog posts have changed that dynamic. Micro blogs (Twitter) and Blog posts determine and create conference “BUZZ”. It may determine whether individuals with limited funds may or may not attend a specific conference in the future.

If Education Conferences are to benefit the educators that they hope to have participate, now and in the future, all of these new influences must be considered. Just like education as a system, conferences are dealing with participants who are becoming self- learning aware. The days of content being controlled by a few and the need to seek those few out to obtain it, are gone. Free access to almost endless information and the ability to select only information which is needed by the learner is changing the game.

If you are a person who questions the need for Mobile Learning Devices in education, look around you at your next conference. Take note of the Laptops, Smart Phones, iPads, and Tablets. Watch how long it takes people to scope out an electrical outlet to power up, or recharge. See what happens if people don’t have passwords to access WiFi.

What would happen if we forced those educators to leave their mobile learning devices at the door? What would happen if we singled out and punished individuals for texting during a presentation? What would happen after you informed educators that the filtering will limit their access? What would happen if we required participants to agree to an Acceptable Use Policy before they could connect? Participants at these conferences are learners. Let us keep that in mind when we return to the learners in our own schools.

All in all, this isn’t your father’s Education Conference!

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 »

Twitter, Simply Complicated.

Posted in Administrator, Blog, EdChat, Education, Elementary, FaceBook, Internet, Leadership, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teachmeet, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on May 12, 2011| 20 Comments »

Twitter’s biggest obstacle to being the number one tool of Professional Development for educators is Twitter. It is a simple tool, based on a simple idea, which is complicated by its simplicity. To use twitter is to get it. To explain Twitter is a losing proposition. Twitter’s reputation as an application is its worst enemy. It has been the brunt of comedians’ jokes since it began. Members of the Hollywood crowd embraced it for the purpose of engaging their fans with a majority of mindless tweets to build a following. Many have a following in the millions. The concept most accepted by the public is that Twitter is used by individuals to broadcast to people the meaningless actions and events in their day-to-day existence. How could this ever be taken seriously, not to even mention being used as a tool for Professional Development for educators?

Social learning is common to all. We learn through social encounters. We pass along information in social settings. We collaborate with others in our social engagements. A committee is simply a gathering of individuals for social interaction for the purpose of learning and creating. This all occurs in our face to face world. This all takes place with people who can assemble in close proximity at predetermined location and a pre-determined, in-common, time period. Our face to face learning has the boundaries of time and space, but when those boundaries are accounted for, meaningful learning may take place.

With the advancement of technology, and its integration with the internet, the ability to make social contact with individuals is enhanced because the internet takes us beyond boundaries of space and time. We can contact individuals around the globe. Our thoughts and ideas can be suspended in time until retrieved by others. We can exchange ideas or information in the form of: text, audio files, photos, videos, Blog posts, articles, URL’s (links), charts, data, and live interaction. All of this is made possible with Social Media.

Twitter is a social media application. It enables people to use it as a conduit for information to other individuals. That is the simple part. Now let us consider the complications that come from trying to keep Twitter simple. First, the Tweet, or the message, can only be 140 characters in length. Many find this too limiting. I expect those individuals might be long-winded in a face to face setting as well.

A huge problem with Twitter for some is understanding who is getting the message. Remember Twitter is Social Media and is based on social interaction. If you walked into an auditorium full of people and started talking without engaging someone first, no one would be listening. You would be talking out loud to yourself. If you introduced yourself to someone and then began a conversation you now have someone listening and interacting. You would then do the same with a second, third, and fourth person. You have connected with those people and selected them as persons you may interact with, and they have selected you as well, based on your intelligent contributions to the discussion. As that works in life, so it works in Twitter.

Simply stated, the only people who get your tweets are those who follow you, your “followers”. The only Tweets that will come to you are those from people you choose to follow. They are called “Following” If you follow family members, you may expect Tweets about family matters would monopolize your tweets. If the idea is to use Twitter as a professional Development tool, then the people you should follow would be educators. You will build a personal, professional learning Network by limiting the people you follow to educators. In addition, if your Tweets are educationally topical, those who follow you will also be educators, or people interested in topics of education.

All Tweets are public and will be seen by all who follow you. A Direct Message is private. A” DM” can only be sent to a person you follow and he, or she must be following you as well. You cannot “DM someone who does not follow you.

Educators tweet educational things including: text, audio files, photos, videos, Blog posts, articles, URL’s (links), Charts, data, and live interaction. These could be a lesson specific tweet, or a topic involving methods of education. Personal experiences from educators globally. It could be a question from an educator seeking an answer. Having information and collaborating on ideas creates an environment for Professional Development. It can be used at any time without regard to boundaries that impede face to face socialization. The number of participants is not limited to a school, district, city, state, or country. There is no isolation of Elementary, Secondary, or Higher Ed educators.

Not knowing how to find educators to follow may have been a problem in the past, but it is being made easier all of the time. Educational Blogs may have a “Follow Me on Twitter” Icon. Click and follow. Always check out the profile of a perspective person to follow. You will be able to see that person’s last tweets as well as their profile. Additionally, you can view icons of who they follow. Click on any of those icons and you are transported to that person’s profile. Repeat the process as long as needed, or return to the original profile to start a new path of follow research. Profiles may also contain lists of followers. A twitter list may contain a large number of educators. One click will follow every member of the list. There are several educational chats ongoing weekly. Educators from around the world are involved. If you find interesting participants in the chat, follow them on Twitter.

Twitter is only one component of a comprehensive PLN. There are many Social Media applications that serve educators well for communication, collaboration, and creation. All of these applications are constantly evolving or disappearing, to be replaced by new applications. We need to buy into the method and not the tool. Tools change, but learning continues. To be better educators we need to be better learners.

Those of us who successfully use Twitter as a tool for Professional Development need to act as ambassadors of information. We need to share that which we glean from our Personal Learning Networks and not be shy about telling other educators where it came from. It was not Ashton Kutcher, Linsay Lohan, or Paris Hilton who shared that information, but collaborative educators.

Read Full Post »

My 9/11 Memories as a Teacher.

Posted in Parents, Social Media, Teacher, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth on May 2, 2011| 7 Comments »

Tonight we got word from President Obama that Osama Bin Laden was killed by American forces. I never feel good about anyone dying, but I find the exception with this announcement. I actually feel relief and a sense of justice in this news. Since this happened 10 years ago there are many people out there who may have not been directly affected by this horrific event.

I taught in a suburb of NYC in September of 2001. Like many Long Island schools, the community included many NYC firefighters and NYC policemen and police women. In addition many of our parents worked in NYC and in the Twin Towers specifically. The twin Towers was a great part of the lives of many New Yorkers. I personally celebrated several special occasions at the Windows on the World Restaurant at the top of the Towers.

September 11, 2001 began as any other day in school. The energy was very high with teachers and students, since the school year had just begun. There was no social media, so news was delivered by broadcast media including television and radio. Twitter and Facebook did not exist. If they did they would probably have been blocked. There were no smartphones.

As teachers, we got the word from our main office during the first period. Someone in the main office had a radio on listening to the news. Many of us went to the library where we knew there was a feed for TV. That was where we observed the first Tower in flames. As bad as that was, the second Tower being hit confirmed that it was not an airline accident, but a terror attack. We ran a TV feed to the auditorium, so other teachers could be informed. The faculty soon became aware of what was going on. The decision was made to protect the students, numbering close to 1,000, from the event, since many of their parents were Police, Firefighters, or workers in offices in the Towers.

It was very difficult for middle school teachers to withhold such information from their students, but it was agreed to be the best decision. Teachers ran to the TV sets between classes to get the latest updates. There was a great deal of crying and hugging, out of the sight of students, between teachers united in the face of disaster. Our instinct was to tell our students and help them through the tragedy, but we knew that we needed to have more personal information before that could happen. As a teacher, that was the worst day of my career. I am tearing as I commit these words to this post. Before noon parents and relatives began to arrive to sign kids out of school. Shortly after, many kids were signed out and went home, teachers had to offer an explanation. We then had an early dismissal.

We were more fortunate than other districts. We lost a few parents in the Towers. Other districts were devastated. Every day for about a month, pictures appeared in the local papers of victims of the event. Literally hundreds of victims’ pictures were released each and every day. Personal accounts of first hand experiences stoked the flames of retribution. People were scared and filled with a need to strike out. This was fueled with every funeral. The funerals went on for weeks, and months after the event.The most elaborate were the heroes, the firefighters and police. Pictures of victims every day, day after day appeared in local papers. In Schools Pupil personnel, counselors, psychologists, and social workers all worked to deal with student issues resulting from the event.

There are very few people in the NYC or the NYC suburban area who escaped the effects of the event. Ground Zero is more than a place on a property in NYC. Ground Zero is in the hearts of New Yorkers. It has scored a place in my heart as an educator. The pain from that day will never leave me. As I recount that day, I am now overwhelmed with emotion. As I read peoples’ opinions about how we should not rejoice in the death of an individual, I can agree. That is however with one big exception, the death of Osama Bin Laden. I am very glad that bastard is dead.

Read Full Post »

Social Media’s EDU Reform Effect

Posted in Administrator, Blog, conference, Leadership, Mentoring, Ning, Parents, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Social Media, Student teaching, Teacher, Teachmeet, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on April 27, 2011| 6 Comments »

Each week I have an opportunity to participate in an #Edchat discussion twice each Tuesday. #Edchat, for those who may be unaware, is an organized discussion held twice each Tuesday on Twitter. Twitter is a Social Media application connecting people locally and globally for the purpose of exchanging information, links, videos, and almost anything that can be digitally transmitted. The attendance in the #Edchat discussions varies from several hundred to about a thousand educators each week. The #Edchat topics are always educational in nature. A detailed explanation can be found at #Edchat Revisited.

This week’s topics were somewhat related. The first dealt with school culture, and latter #Edchat was about how schools can more positively involve parents in the education of their children. These discussions went very quickly as the ideas and suggestions from all those involved flew by. Hundreds of observations, and suggestions, followed by reflections, corrections, and additions for those ideas were exchanged. Both sessions were very high-energy sessions, an evident influence of the passion on the part of educators involved for these topics.

If you are not an educator, school culture might need some explanation. It is not something studied by student teachers in their college classes. It can be defined, but it looks different in every school. It may be influenced by a District administrator, but it is different in each of the districts buildings. It is a collective attitude of the specific educational community, or school. It either welcomes, or discourages innovation. It sets the tone for bullying in that community. It determines the openness of educators to change. It determines how welcoming and mentoring the faculty is to new teachers. It sets the tone for openness to various methods of teaching. It influences the respect for and between students, teachers, and administrators in a building.

In the district that I spent most of my career the cultures of the High School and the Middle School were completely different. I always felt that The Middle School taught the kids, and the High School taught courses. Middle Schools are often team oriented and that goes a long way in affecting the culture of each school. Decisions were made with this in mind. Schedules were formed with this in mind. Assignments of teachers were made with this in mind. All of this supports the culture of a school, making it slow to change.

School culture tends to change very slowly unless influenced by something coming from outside the existing culture. If a new administrator comes to a school with any leadership skills and a willingness to change things, the culture may change. A problem with this is the turnover rate of administrators. Often the changes to a school last as long as the administrator does. The vision often travels with the visionary. The other way that the school culture changes, is from the bottom up. It comes with a teacher’s vision that influences others. A single teacher can influence others with a vision and a passion for that vision. In order for that to occur however, the teacher needs to have an exposure to ideas and influences other than those from the school’s culture.

Enter Social Media. Educators are involving themselves more and more with social media applications. Like me, many have developed Personal Learning Networks to help provide sources for teaching and learning. Educators exchange links for information and collaboration in order to improve their teaching. The exchange of ideas however, often goes beyond a simple exchange of information. The cultures of schools are being discussed, dissected, analyzed, and evaluated. The best parts of cultures from many schools are now being introduced to other school cultures. The vision of some is becoming a vision of many. Social Media for educators opens up a world of exposure and transparency to cultures of other schools. A first step to change, dare I say Reform.

Educators are beginning to change the way faculty meetings are conducted. The very topics opened up through Social Media are topics that educators are discussing with more awareness of what other schools do more successfully. Cultures are being reshaped by expanding the pool of experiences through Social Media. Twitter and Facebook are connecting educators and ideas. Blogs are expanding ideas and being referenced for change. Social Bookmarking is cataloging a huge quantity of quality sources that are now literally at the fingertips of educators. Educator Ning sites are growing and thriving with educational groups, Webinars and free Professional Development.

Social Media is having a positive effect on changing a system that has been slow to change. Educators need not look to justify their use of Social Media. Educators may need to justify why they are not employing Social Media. We cannot expect change, or reform, to come to education without enabling or arming educators with the proper tools to affect that change.

Your comments are welcomed!

Read Full Post »

To Reform Education, Reform PD.

Posted in Administrator, Banning, Blog, EdChat, Education, FaceBook, Filtering, Internet, Leadership, Linkedin, Literacy, Mentoring, Merit Pay, Ning, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on April 20, 2011| 11 Comments »

This week we had a much energized #Edchat. #Edchat is an online discussion involving over 1,000 educators on a specific topic each week. This week’s Topic dealt with Professional Development being relevant for educators. This seems to be one subject that rivals in popularity the opposition to standardized, high-stakes testing. It seems that most educators have an opinion on PD. There are so many aspects of this subject that one post will not cover it all. It may however, be able to at least frame a discussion.

The best first change for Professional Development would be to rename it. PD has become a hot button issue amongst many educators. Since each district develops its own policy, there are some districts that do a fine job. Based on comments by many educators on social media sites however, these districts seem to be few, and far between. In addition to district mandates, there are also different PD requirements enforced by individual states. Before the movement to change the name takes hold, let’s talk about PD as we know it today.

The most recent statements supported by Secretary Duncan tell us that a teacher with Master’s degree has little effect on students’ learning. Following this line of reasoning through, it would seem that the government would want our teachers to begin and end with a bachelor’s degree. Of course that would be a less expensive way to go, but the burden on PD would be that much greater in the future.

Demanding that any labor force spend time beyond that which is established by the job description requires that the employer pay the employee additional compensation. Since PD requires a time commitment in addition to an educator’s work week, this is what is done in most districts. Of course, if the school district is paying for additional hours, it has a right to make requirements for what it expects. Those requirements often become a point of contention. This seems to create an “Us vs. Them” dynamic and the beginning of the PD problems.

Regardless of how far any educator travels in his or her academic career, information does not stop flowing when the degree is conferred. Although teachers are expected to be content experts, the content itself continues to develop and evolve. Of course that may not be as true for Math as other subjects, but most content for most academic areas continues to accumulate and evolve. Experts cannot be experts if they do not keep up with the evolving content. A writing teacher who knows nothing of blogging is a questionable expert. A social studies teacher without an understanding of social media can hardly explain the revolution taking place in the Middle East.

Aside from the continuing development in content areas, the methods used to teach and learn also continue to evolve. Methods are also affected by the culture of our society and that continues to change. The Huck Finn controversy certainly underscores this. The culture of the community, or the school itself, has an incredible effect on the school’s approach to learning. Sharing and reflecting on the ways we teach is the best way to change and evolve. The introduction of Social Media to PD gives it a new dimension. Ning sites creating collaborative learning communities; Twitter and Facebook connecting educators locally and globally; YouTube enabling creation of content to be shared and commented upon, are all influences of social media that affect culture.

With the rapid advancement of technology, the tools for learning are changing continually. Whatever tools teachers used in their methods classes in years past, would be hard pressed to be found today. Of course, Overheads and PowerPoint are still around. The concepts of Social networks, mobile learning devices, web 2.0, webinars, podcasts, blended learning, and cloud computing are new to all. They will have a huge impact on learning, but unless educators are up to speed, they will not have an effect in education. That is when education becomes irrelevant because our educators are technology illiterate.

Approaching PD as an extra item in a labor contract may not be the best approach. PD is something that should be part of the work week. It needs to be there in order to maintain relevance for all educators. It cannot be a one size fits all approach. Different educators have different needs. We insist on this for our students, why not for our educators.

The best hope we have for real reform may lie in reforming PD first. IT directors are tech content experts, and may not know what educators need to know in order to teach their respective subjects. Educators are content experts in their respective areas, and technology is not necessarily their strength. Educators need to learn what to ask, and IT managers need to learn how to answer to meet the needs of the educators. IT people seem to view many problems as insurmountable obstacles and are quick to deliver edicts and bans to stop the problems from occurring, rather than trying to solve the problem. IT staff are educators of educators. The same approach of guidance and patience to analyze and problem-solve should be employed by IT people when working with educators.

Administrators have a big role in PD as well. Too often when it comes to PD, administrators use the “do as I say, not as I do” method. They need to be a part of the PD as well. They are the leaders in education, and that requires that they must be out front. Being out front requires some idea of what is going on. Too often, too many administrators have no clue. If PD can lead education to reform our leaders must be there as well. Sitting in an office having IT directors develop PowerPoint presentations for board meetings does not make for cutting edge educational leadership. I know not all Administrators fall in this category, but what is an acceptable percentage of those who do?

If we want reform in education, we better start paying attention to how educators learn and teach to enable that learning. They are not yet teachers when they leave their college classrooms with a degree. Great teachers come from what they learn in their own classrooms as a teacher. They need guidance and support to maintain relevance in the ever-changing world for which they are preparing kids. To be better teachers and better leaders, we need to first be better learners. Without a thoughtful system in place to enable that, the results will be limited at best.

Instead of forcing a merit pay model in education, which will not work, let’s consider using that money differently. Why not use it to compensate teachers who are being successful with their methods and are willing to share their methods with colleagues. Teacher to teacher sharing is a great way to professionally develop teachers. It also supports innovation and excellence in learning. When asked how to reform education, we should consider reforming how we educate our educators, and our educational leaders. We need to reform Professional Development in order to reform education.

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 »

World’s Simplest Online Safety Policy

Posted in Administrator, Banning, Blog, Child Predator, Education, FaceBook, Filtering, Leadership, Linkedin, Parents, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on April 2, 2011| 28 Comments »

Lisa Nielsen and I co-wrote and cross posted this post.

When it comes to upgrading education to the 21st Century, those who are less supportive of change, often hide behind, or are frightened of acronyms like FERPA, CIPA, COPPA. This is sometimes done intentionally for convenience, or unwittingly out of ignorance. Of course in a litigious society such as ours has become, law suits are foremost in the minds of administrators. It is for that reason that a clear understanding is needed by all constituents. Our students need adults to stop being afraid, and stop hiding, so education can get out of the shadows and into the light of the world in which our children live.

These acts were created to protect children. They were not created to keep students stuck in the past, educated in a disconnected school environment that shares little resemblance to the real world for which we should be preparing our children. These acts do not say we can’t publish online student’s names, videos, work, pictures, etc. They do not prevent us from using social media, YouTube, email, or any of those things that may be blocked in many school districts. An important goal of education is to strive for creation and publication of content by students. In today’s world technology and the Internet are an essential components of that process.

By blocking students from the digital world, the jobs of administrators and educators are made easier, but if people became teachers, education leaders or parents because it was easy, they’ve selected the wrong profession.While it is true that banning is an easy way out, doing so is short-sighted and not visionary. It does not approach the innovative status that we hear so much about. If you’re wondering how to navigate these waters and what is really allowed, read on to find a simple policy that addresses the three main acts: FERPA, CIPA, and COPPA explaining:

a simple policy
how to do it
why to do it
safety
a link to each act
a brief overview of each act
what it means to educators
a real life example of each

World’s simplest online safety policy

Students can access websites that do not contain or that filter mature content. They can use their real names, pictures, and work (as long it doesn’t have a grade/score from a school) with the notification and/or permission of the student and their parent or guardian.

How
Notify parents/guardians that their child’s work, likeness, name will be shared across the year, and let them know the procedure for opting out. Have the permission release provided and signed as part of the student registration packet that includes things like emergency notification contact.

As specific projects come up, notify parents/guardians in traditional ways i.e. a note home and/or using methods like a voice or texting notification system to parents, or an email. You may also want to have updates on a parent page of your school website, or on a class website or class blog.

Why Not Ban?
Establishing a purposeful online identity of which one can be proud is an important skill to teach students. Equally important is conveying the idea that being safe and responsible online does not mean hiding your identity, but rather defining it and owning it. After all, If your child is not developing his/her digital footprint, who is? In elementary school students like Armond McFadden are publicly publishing work and engaging in real learning communities about his area of passion, both online and in life. Anyone can begin making a difference and contributing real work at any age.

Never before in history have kids had the ability to create and publish so much content, so easily. Never ever have people had the ability to access so much information without leaving a seat. These are awesome abilities that come with awesome responsibilities. These abilities and responsibilities require skills that are taught and not inherited. Educators need to have the authority to teach these skills. Educators need to be trusted to teach these skills. The world, in which our kids will live, will require their knowledge and skills in this area in order for them to be competitive and relevant.Banning Internet access for misguided reasoning will prevent educators from accomplishing this much-needed goal.

These articles provide additional insight and information for parents and educators interested in supporting their children in developing and managing a purposeful and powerful digital footprint.

What about Safety?
Shows like To Catch a Predator sensationalize and feed the fear of parents having their child exposed to a child predator. It is a real fear and certainly a serious consideration.The facts however support evidence that over 90% of child predators are family members, close family friends, or clergy. We do not ban family picnics, playgrounds, family reunions, or church functions. There are no laws addressing these issues.The best way to defend our children against these threats is to educate them. Warn or rather teach them of the dangers,make them aware of the possibilities.Or, we can lock them away, effectively banning them from the outside world in which they will eventually have to live, leaving them to use whatever they picked up on their own about responsible digital citizenship, a topic probably not stressed outside of education.

When it comes to sharing student information and student work, there is a lot of misinformation. The reality is there is no evidence that doing so, responsibly and appropriately, compromises student safety. Instead, representatives from the Crimes Against Children Research Center and the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee explain that what puts kids at risk are things like:

having a lot of conflict with your parents
being depressed and socially isolated
being hyper
communicating with a lot of people who you don’t know
being willing to talk about sex with people that you don’t know
having a pattern of multiple risky activities
going to sex sites and chat rooms, meeting lots of people there, and behaving like an Internet daredevil.

Sure banning is easy, but it is educational neglect to keep our heads in the sand or look the other way. How better to support and empower kids in being safe and appropriate then to be their guides? We certainly can’t help kids with proper and appropriate use, if the very tools they want to use are blocked. The best way to ensure students are behaving safe online and in life is to be their partners, guiding and supporting them as necessary. We must also keep in mind that Being Safe Online Is Being Safe In Life. Rules for tools don’t make sense. Rules for behaviors do.

To follow are brief overviews of each of the acts that address online safety along with a link to the original act, what this means for educators and examples of each.

The Educator’s Guide to CIPA, COPPA, and FERPA

Children’s Internet Protection Act
Overview:
The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is a federal law enacted by Congress to address concerns about access to offensive content over the Internet on school and library computers. It applies only to minors in places that apply for erate funds. The law requires an Internet safety policy that addresses:

blocking or filtering Internet access to pictures that are obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors (for computers that are accessed by minors).
a method for monitoring (not tracking) activities.
access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet; the safety and security of minors when communicating electronically, unauthorized access to hacking, unauthorized use of personal information, restricting minors’ access to materials harmful to them.

What educators should know:
First, you can and should request that the teacher computer is unfiltered. There is nothing worse than frustration in not being able to do work because you get blocked at every turn. I’ve been in teacher training centers where they’ve falsely claimed they could not unblock because of CIPA requirements. Not true. Educators need to be empowered not only with access, but also with a way to preview sites to choose for use and have unblocked for students.

When working with students, we want to empower them to independently use online tools not only at school, but in life. Ensure you have conversations with students about appropriate use and consequences. Additionally, when planning lessons and units, you should have the sites students will use vetted in advance with proper safety settings selected i.e. “safe search” in Google. You should also consider creating a learning outline or guide for students with directions and direct links to sites. This helps keep the lesson on track and the students focused.

There are services like Renzulli Learning that provide educators and students access to thousands of vetted sites that are aligned to students passions, talents, interests, abilities, and learning styles. This might be a service to investigate. When doing searches, there are safe search sites such as KidsClick which is great for elementary students and also sorts by reading level. For secondary students Google is a terrific site where not only can you do a Safe Search, but you can also search by reading level, language, and you can choose to translate the results.

Example:
I served as a library media specialist in Central Harlem in a Pre-K to 8 school where I complied with CIPA rules by using myself as the method for monitoring and teaching students to use their brain as a powerful filtering tool. I empowered my students to be able to be safe and appropriate online not only in school, but in life. Sure, there were times when a site was accidentally accessed. The students knew to hit “ctrl w” to close the window and continue. We also set “safe” settings on the sites we were using. Perhaps most important, when working with students, I vetted our list of sites in advance, knowing exactly where students would be accessing information. I, as their teacher, was their filter and monitor. I had an unfiltered environment at a tough school in Harlem. Students appreciated the privilege to use the computers and the respect afforded to them. They didn’t want to lose that opportunity, which they would, had they purposely abused their right to use them appropriately.

Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act
Overview:
The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA) applies to the online collection of personal information by persons or entities under U.S. jurisdiction from children under 13 years of age. It details what a website operator must include in a privacy policy, when and how to seek verifiable consent from a parent or guardian, and what responsibilities an operator has to protect children’s privacy and safety online including restrictions on the marketing to those under 13.

What educators should know:
This law makes the job of today’s educators easier putting responsibility on website providers to keep children under 13 years of age safe. While children under 13 can legally give out personal information with their parents’ permission, many websites disallow underage children from using their services because they don’t want to bother setting up such accommodations. If there is a site which you are interested in using for learning purposes that restricts use of those under 13, consider contacting the site to see if they would be interested in supporting you in using the site with children under the supervision of a teacher, parent or guardian with proper consent. Many organizations (Google, Wikispaces, Voki, Voicethread, Facebook) are interested in supporting learning and appreciate having educators and parents as partners.

Example:
First grade teacher Erin Schoening knew Facebook would be a great tool to build 21st century literacy with her students and strengthen the home-school connection. She uses Facebook with her First grade students and their parents with the permission of parents, updated appropriate use policies in place with her district and blessing of Facebook in Education Division.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act
Overview:
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records. It applies to all schools that receive funds under an applicable program of the U.S. Department of Education. Most of the act addresses children’s education records providing parents and students the right to inspect, review, question, and have updated incorrect records. It also states that schools must receive permission from a parent or guardian to release information from a student’s education record. There are exceptions to needing consents such as the case of audits, evaluation, financial aid, judicial orders, etc.

Schools may disclose, without consent, information such as a student’s name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, schools must tell parents and eligible students and allow parents and students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose information about them.

What educators should know:
FERPA does not prevent many of the things you hear people saying it does. As long as parents/guardians are informed, schools may disclose, or allow students to disclose, information about themselves as long as it is not a grade or score. Notice permission is not necessary under FERPA. They only need to inform parents/guardians this is taking place. Parents can ask their child not be included and schools must comply, but schools can still engage in planned activities. Remember though when it comes to websites, under COPPA you must obtain parental permission for students under 13 to share information or work online.

Example:
Students and teachers are sharing successes through videos and pictures at http://innovatemyclass.org. There you will find examples of real projects students and their teachers are doing with technology. Schools have consent forms from parents/guardians and a link to the page featuring their child is sent to parents so they can get an insight into and share the success of their children with others.

These laws were passed to keep children safe, not keep children out of the 21st century. With a little common sense we can ensure schools are not committing educational neglect by keeping students stuck in the past.

Contributors:
Lisa Nielsen, Creator of The Innovative Educator blog, Twitter: @InnovativeEdu

Tom Whitby St. Joseph’s College, New York.Twitter: @tomwhitby
My Blog: My Island View

Read Full Post »

When is Comfort Uncomfortable?

Posted in Administrator, cooperating Teacher, Education, Elementary, Leadership, Observation, Parents, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth on March 31, 2011| 9 Comments »

Comfort is the main obstacle to Education Reform. Upon first stating this, it seems to be a ridiculous statement, so I guess I need to elaborate. This is a subject I discuss with my pre-service teachers at almost every seminar class and teaching observation. Of course it doesn’t have a great effect on my students, because of the arrogance of youth. They all know better than I.

If we ask,” Why aren’t educators engaging more forcefully in reform?” the answer is always the same. Educators are not comfortable with change. When we ask about educators using Tech as a tool for learning, the answer is that educators are not yet comfortable with technology (even though it has been around since the 80’s). I guess time does not create comfort. When we ask why haven’t more educators adopted a teaching method for project-based learning, or problem-solving methods, or authentic learning, or a focus on critical thinking skills, or Electronic portfolios to replace grades? Obvious answer: Educators are not yet comfortable with these subjects.

Since comfort is having such an effect on Education, I guess the next logical thing to do is to determine what “comfort” is. I am not a researcher, so I am not dealing with data. I am an observer, so I am more than comfortable offering my observations on this topic of comfort. I know from watching ten cooking shows each week that comfort food is a recognized commodity. It is often a very familiar food that a person grew up with. It comforts them to eat it as it brings back all the memories and emotions of a safer, earlier time. Maybe we need to think of learning in terms of a commodity. As far as it applies to educators, I think they harken to a time in their lives when learning for them was easy or at least doable. They may have worked at it but it was uncomplicated and it made sense. It only stands to reason that, if it worked for them as a student, it should work for their students as well. Go with what you know! Not so fast Kimosabe

Working with student teachers I have noted one problem that overtakes some student teachers. Starting out, they have a tendency to fall back on what they are most familiar with from their most recent learning experience. They are familiar, or comfortable, with the lecture method of college professors and occasionally student teachers believe that college lectures will work with the students. . It only stands to reason that, if it worked for them as a student, it should work for their students as well. The problem is that they are working with secondary students not highly motivated college kids who have already mastered what the education system had to offer.

Here comes my theory on why so many educators don’t get it. As I often tell my students, they are in a small percentage of people who understand and succeed in the education system. The fact that they made it to college puts them in a very small percentage of all people who complete a secondary education. With every additional year that they complete college commitments, they climb further up the ladder of the educational elite. They are comfortable with the system, as it is, because they have been successful in that system. They represent maybe the top ten percent of the country. Their comfort with the system has assured their success. Their success reassures their comfort. The problem they will face as educators, however, is that they will be working with 90% of kids who are not as comfortable with the education system the way that their teacher is comfortable with it.

This also holds true for teachers of generations before. It is not a generational thing however, it is a learning thing. For some, their comfort level may rest in the era in which they went to school. It was most likely an era when Technology was not incorporated into curriculum. It certainly was an era where there was little done with the internet, or social learning. It was a time when there was no WEB 2.0 tools enabling creativity at no cost, and could be accessed at anytime, and anyplace. It was a time of lecture as opposed to project based learning. Direct instruction was king and creation of content was best exemplified in the research paper. Grades ruled and electronic portfolios were a theory. This is what too many educators were comfortable with, because it is what made them successful academically. The attitude making all this possible is,”If it was good enough for me, it is good enough for my students.”This, to me, is what is meant by “the teacher’s comfort level”.

Everyone supports reform, but few support change that may be too uncomfortable. I am not saying that teachers are bad. I am a teacher who supports teachers. I am saying that the comfort level obstacle to reform must be overcome. We need to lead people from their comfort zones and get them comfortable with new tools and new methods that will make a difference in education. They need to be led to new comfort zones.

There are so many things that need to be changed it is difficult to pick a starting point. The biggest obstacle however, is change itself. Until the status quo is made more uncomfortable than reform there may be no reform. We need to focus on Professional Development and providing teachers with what they need to affect reform. That will take change and change is never comfortable.

Great teachers do not come from college classrooms; they are developed on the job. We need to get educators comfortable with a new model for teaching and learning. This can only be done with thoughtful and meaningful Professional Development. The educators comfort level, with what was helpful to them in the past, is not what makes 90% of our students comfortable in the present. We are losing a majority of our kids who are uncomfortable with a system that they do not find relevant. We can’t let the comfort of educators outweigh the discomfort that a majority of our students feel every day with our education system.

Read Full Post »

Education’s Dirty Little Secret

Posted in Administrator, EdChat, Education, Elementary, Leadership, Mentoring, Parents, Reform, Teacher, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Truth on March 29, 2011| 24 Comments »

Let’s talk about prejudice in education. I am not talking about race, religion, or sexual preference prejudice. I am going to discuss a prejudice that I believe is prevalent throughout our educational system. Of course it will be denied by most educators, but that is a tell-tale symptom of prejudice. Most people will not admit to it. They may recognize it in others, but they will never admit their own engagement in this biased philosophy. I have no idea where this prejudice starts, or how it is driven, but its existence is undeniable. No, not every educator is prejudiced in this regard, but many, too many, are.

The prejudice to which I refer is that of grade level. Many educators look to other levels of education attributing expectations or disappointments based on nothing more than unfounded misconceptions and believing it to be truth. Let’s at least state the myths, and misconceptions to get them out in the open. Elementary teachers tell students that what they are doing now is nothing compared to what middle school teachers will demand. Middle school teachers say the same thing to their students, implying that high school will be more demanding. Of course high school teachers defer to the difficult paces that college professors will put students through when they get a hold on them in college. These are all points that teachers often tend to focus on with their students especially toward the end of the year.

Now let us examine the blame game based on this prejudice. The big myth is little kids, little problems; big kids, big problems. This implies that secondary is much more difficult than elementary. Many secondary teachers have little appreciation for the job of elementary teachers. They have little understanding of the consecutive hours spent in the classroom focusing on the needs of kids, emotional, as well as educational. Secondary teachers tend to think in 42 minute periods, five classes a day, with little understanding for a one-class, all-day-long environment. Of course, the view from the high school is that Middle School teachers have a much easier job than the elite High school positions. High school positions are of course the crown jewel of jobs in education.

Of course many secondary educators tell students, “wait until you deal with professors in college”. Most educators hold Higher Education as the holy grail of education. They also hold Higher Ed accountable for not turning out super teachers to lead us out of the forest. What many educators fail to understand is that Higher Ed teachers are really content experts. They are experts of their subjects, but not experts on education. The greatest problem with new teachers is their tendency to teach, as they recently learned from college teachers, relying on the lecture model. Elementary and Secondary teachers need to do more than lecture.

High school teachers have a difficult job, because of what the middle school teachers failed to do. The Middle school teachers have a difficult job, because of what the elementary teachers failed to do. The elementary teachers have to deal with whatever the parents give them to deal with. This may be a cynical attitude, but it is not far from the truth from the attitudes of many educators. It is something which needs to be addressed. Educators need to view themselves as a part of a complete education of a child in partnership with parents. Too often teachers teach “Their subject” and not kids. It is this fiefdom mentality that is one of the things that gets in the way of learning. Some teachers play the blame game to deflect responsibility for not adequately addressing the learning needs of students. This post of course was not directed to you. It was for all those other educators out there.

I recognize the fact that many teachers have to deal with impressions previous teachers have made on students. At the beginning of every school year I would give a writing assignment. With that one assignment I could identify who the previous English teacher was. If the topic or introductory sentence started out a certain way I could identify the teacher. “In this paragraph I will describe…” was an indication as to who taught writing to that student. It took a number of conferences with the teacher involved, but eventually the problem was resolved. The teacher retired, but that is not the point. I reached out to discuss the implications of what was being taught in a previous grade affecting what came next. That was not a prejudiced judgment. It was a real teaching impediment that I attempted to deal with.

We need to discuss more about what we expect and what we need from teachers of other grade levels. It would also be great if we could all spend a day in the shoes of an educator on another grade level. We need to understand where our students came from in order to take them forward. We cannot be drawn into this teacher against teacher battle that is being stoked by politicians. Sharing and collaborating amongst educators is much more positive than the alternatives. Those who close themselves off and engage in empire building hurt all educators. We need to consider the whole picture in education for our students. We need to be educators first and not grade level labeled. We need to enter kid’s lives as a team, not have kids meet us as separate entities. I know this is the ideal, but shooting for higher goals beats where we many view us today. Again, this post was not directed at you but all those other educators who fall into this description.

I await your comments.