Midterm Exams

It is midterm exam week at school. As a resource room teacher, I see a good sampling of the tests that are given. My observations give rise to the following questions:

Dear Teacher,

1) Are you using the same exam that you have used in past years?

2) Could a student who has never taken your course pass your exam?

3) If your learners were to retake the same exam three weeks from now (with no further studying), how would their retake scores compare to their original scores?

Thoughts:
1) If you are using the same exam that you have used in past years...though you have a strong grasp on your curriculum frameworks, you may be giving weight to the belief that youth have empty heads waiting to be filled. Your students are likely asking, "When will I ever use this again?"

Research proves another testing practice to be more successful. Which is, if your exam varies with each new group of learners... this semester's focus probably emerged from meeting your learners at their level of understanding and paying attention to their areas of interest as you moved forward. This increases student engagement.

2) Could a student who has never taken your course pass your exam? This student would have the same set of opportunities given in class (e.g. open notes, open book, allowing one 3x5 notecard full of notes). If your answer is yes, well...

If a student who has never taken your course would find difficulty passing your exam...be rewarded in the knowledge that your students have gained something from their time with you.

3) If your learners were to retake the same exam three weeks from now, how would their retake scores compare to their original scores? My prediction is that in most situations, test scores would go down and this would be a sign that the test assessed memorization of facts - soon after forgotten.

If your learners would perform similar or better, this is a good sign that you are teaching for retention, understanding, and transfer of knowledge. Current research puts an emphasis on learning with understanding.

Assessment is a skill that needs deeper focus in our teacher training programs!

Authority

This week I was asked the question, "What do you think of Wikipedia?" A year ago, I was one of the people who questioned its validity. I would not have accepted it as a legitimate source. Today, because of three reasons, I find myself often turning to Wikipedia when I am looking for answers.

1) I have accepted Wikipedia as a valid source. This change began while reading Knowing Knowledge (George Siemens, current) and listening to Clarence Fisher (“Classroom 2.0 or You Live Where?", 2007). Their presentations put into words, concepts with which I strongly agree. As I followed their presentations, I found an answer to my concerns about, not only processing information found on the internet, but also the importance of evaluating information given to us in our lives. In this "information age," the listener has the responsibility of evaluating the message. The definition of where we turn for authority is evolving. We live in an age where we can choose our leaders. To chose anyone less than a leader who has demonstrated that they can be trusted, that they are making good decisions, and that they are accountable for their decisions is irresponsible and has the potential for serious repercussions. In a healthy 21st century society, recognizing authority is an active process versus a passive choice.

How do people learn to make such a decision? This is where the words of Fisher & Siemens come alive. We will learn by changing our relationship to information, by becoming creators and questioners of information, and by being good thinkers. (Fisher) We will learn by engaging with, versus being consumed by, material presented. And we will learn by creating networks of thinkers who serve as an effective "pipeline" for knowledge because knowledge has become fluid and the content in the pipe is constantly changing. (Siemens)

2) In accepting Wikipedia as a valid source, I believe the findings of the journal Nature - that Wikipedia and Britannica are equally accurate. My authority on that? - my internal authority (Though it helps that I found confirmation of this statement published by a source I trust, the BBC.) Wikipedia stresses accountability. Citing references is a key focus of each article and Wikipedia will be the first to point out when an article does not cite any references or sources - at the top of the page! Wikipedia asks contributors, "Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed." Furthermore,"Substandard or disputed information is subject to removal."

They say it best themselves: "Because Wikipedia is an ongoing work to which, in principle, anybody can contribute, it differs from a paper-based reference source in important ways. In particular, older articles tend to be more comprehensive and balanced, while newer articles more frequently contain significant misinformation, unencyclopedic content, or vandalism. Users need to be aware of this to obtain valid information and avoid misinformation that has been recently added and not yet removed... However, unlike a paper reference source, Wikipedia is continually updated, with the creation or updating of articles on topical events within seconds, minutes or hours, rather than months or years for printed encyclopedias."

3) Personal use of Wikipedia has proven it to be a quick, simple, reliable way to access information that is further enhanced with many links.

I have an ongoing discussion with our school librarian. She is horrified at the thought that the internet is introducing so many sources that lack "authority." Her wish for education in America is that we teach our students to become good decision makers. I believe she'll come around.

Terms of Engagement

Thinking further on measuring engagement in lessons, I have come to the conclusion that grades must be abandoned to get a true measure. Otherwise, it will be difficult to distinguish extrinsic from intrinsic motivation. True engagement comes from the inside.

I watch him lift his head and shoulders up off the desk. I hear a deep breathe and a sigh as the noise level in the classroom changes. I look at what the eyes are doing; I look at what the hands are doing. A blush rises to his cheeks. There is a new warmth in the room – the warmth of engagement.


P. S. Do our assessments do justice to process as well as product? When we assess product, are we encouraging engagement?

You can't get there from here.

Jeff & Chris,
In my 20+ years of teaching, I have come across two schools of thought that offer insights to deepen pedagogy. Waldorf Education (Steiner) and Understanding by Design (UbD, Wiggins & McTighe). Their beliefs are turning education inside-out (Waldorf) and backwards (UbD). The common threads in the two philosophies are: delving to identify concepts “essential” to the learner, using empathy as a teaching tool, and teaching for understanding. The intensive Waldorf teacher training programs facilitate a more dramatic pedagogical shift whereas, the shifts taking place through UbD are more gradual. I did come across an interesting forum for collaboration based on UbD.

And, in the words of the New England geezer, "You can't get there from here..."
~You have to go back - back to childhood; back to wish, wonder and surprise; back to looking up at the sky and asking what our purpose is. From there, move forward again - following your heart, ever continuing to seek the purpose.

Then, when you design a lesson - connect all material to the purpose, organize intentionally for effect, engage your audience, model advanced techniques, support your purpose with rich, insightful elaboration, and use feedback to make notable changes in your presentation.

Engagement

Skis, transmissions, lovers, and learners...

Of all the possible conversations to be had under the subject of pedagogy, I have decided that the place to begin is with engagement. While a person may be in the midst of all sorts of work taking place around them, they will benefit when they themselves become engaged. Continuing to present a lesson to an inactive audience is like a motor idling unproductively because the transmission hasn't been engaged.

In the “traditional” school setting, I feel that the missing link to engagement is the feeling realm. Concepts are presented intellectually – rote. Learners need reasons to care. We care about things we can relate to. If a lesson’s relevance is unclear, is it the teacher’s responsibility to clarify it?

What are measures of engagement in the classroom? Notably, the behaviors outside of the classroom are strong indicators. A student continuing to work with an idea outside of the period, outside of the four walls, is an engaged student!

Pedagogy

“Technology must serve pedagogy, not the other way around.”
(EduCon 2.0)

I often see reference to “pedagogy” in Classroom 2.0 discussions and the critical idea that embedding Web 2.0 technology is changing how we teach. (Clarence Fisher, K-12 Online). I love the word pedagogy. It is an old word for an enormous concept - the art or science of teaching. What concepts are considered “pedagogy?” I have a list rumbling around my brain:

functioning, paying attention, risk taking;
organizing;
equity, personalization, collaboration, engagement;
utilization, movement, reflection, pain,
thinking, feeling, willing;
relevance, connectivism;
foundation building, scaffolding;
freedom

Where do I begin? I am interested in reform in education because I watch too many learners that are not engaged by the present system. Reform in education will not happen by doing the same things and simply changing the medium - to the internet. Change will come by changing the principles – the pedagogy.

Are teacher training programs preparing the next generation of teachers to do this? The traditional teacher has spent 16+ years in school - old school. Then in our own classes, we model our teachers, caring and inspiring yet - traditional.

It is difficult to be guided by a pedagogy that one has not experienced. It may feel like turning one's experiences upside-down or inside out. It certainly requires imagination and reflection.

Students 2.0

"Be Prepared....We won't be raising our hands anymore..."

... is the message this group of students is sending classroom teachers. Adroit at using the tools of Web 2.0, they are working collaboratively and internationally (of course) to share their thoughts. They are responding to the idea that "students are continually redefining their own lives and how they want to learn and interact." They are aware that we have entered an age where "thinking is more important than knowing." They are adding their voices to the future of education. They have the wisdom to perceive that they, as students, have something to teach. These lofty ideas are their words.

Check them out at http://students2oh.org/


Students 2.0 Launch Teaser from Sean on Vimeo.