Diigo

Our 4th tool for the 5TTT journey is diigo, which I have found to be quite excellent! It's a bookmarking tool, but it has lots of great features - easy organization of bookmarks, the ability to share bookmarks, screen capture, highlighting, sticky notes - and its all saved to online and can be accessed anywhere. Here's a page I highlighted and added some sticky notes to. I also took a screenshot of Dhaivyd's blog to play around with a  few other features (I love that you can blur!).

Overall, I think diigo is a useful tool. I'm not sure how much I will use the bookmarking (I already have a system of bookmarks set up through chrome) but perhaps if I can get going with them through diigo it will be helpful to be accessed from anywhere rather than just from my computer. I'll have to work on that this summer! I think my favorite feature is the screen capture; it's not perfect - I had some issues with the images moving after selecting them - but it will definitely be helpful for classes as well as for adding stuff to the blog!

Review of MN Science Standards

Corresponding to my last few posts about standards, I came across an interesting review (via Jack Hassard's blog) called, "The State of State Science Standards" that was done by the Fordham Institute. According to the review, MN's science standards are only worth 5/10 (which according to their standards is a C). I didn't pay much attention to the score, but was much more interested in the analysis:

In the comments about "clarity and specificity" the reviewer made the following comment:

For the most part, the presentation of Minnesota’s standards is clear—but specificity sometimes suffers. With respect to the latter, the main weakness lies in the physical sciences and the all-too-common mismatches between the standards and the examples given... A tendency toward needlessly befuddling language is another failing, particularly when straightforward mathematical concepts are at hand. Consider this demand in the chemistry material: Use the kinetic molecular theory to explain the behavior of gases and the relationship among temperature, pressure, volume, and number of particles. (high school chemistry) This expectation could be much more compactly presented
as, “Manipulate the equation PV = nRT.”

2 big issues that I have:
1) I would agree that the standards are not very specific. However, I see a lack of specificity as an excellent feature that allows creative flexibility to offer students a variety of possibilities for demonstrating their understanding. Standards that are too specific are very constraining, and MN gets much more specific when providing "benchmarks" (the "mismatched examples" he mentions). For reference, here's the chemistry standard  that deals with the ideal gas law:

States of matter can be described in terms of motion of molecules and the properties and behavior of gases can be explained using the kinetic molecular theory.

Off the top of my head, I can think of at least half a dozen ways that we could address and investigate this standard. Lacking specificity - yes, and that's a good thing. I don't need the MN Dept of Ed trying to teach my class for me.


2) The reviewer also makes a serious misstep by equating "manipulating the equation" and a scientific explanation. Apples and oranges! Calculating a number using a formula is NOT the same as understanding what the calculated number means, and explaining its relation to scientific phenomena. Ever hear of the Force Concept Inventory?? There are many students who could perform the basic algebra necessary for physics, but that doesn't guarantee that they understand the concepts that are connected to those mathematics.

I think this sums up the unreliability of the review:

A curriculum founded on these materials would be a hodgepodge that fails to convey a sense of system to the student. Indeed, it would be an invitation to science by memorization.

This seems to be contradictory to his previous statements - lacking specificity, but somehow also failing to see the big picture... hmmm... not quite sure I see that, nor how it would invite memorization. Making standards more specific, in my opinion, would lead to a tendency to memorize and not worry about the "system" and how it all relates.

You can find a much more thorough discussion of some of the biases and issues with the review, ultimately giving the review a (generous) D.

Movie Review: Waiting for Superman

Waiting for Superman, directed by Davis Guggenheim

Call it a new-found interest in educational issues; I love reading, watching, discussing and thinking about them. I'm inclined to blame it on grad school. Regardless of where it comes from, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to check out this movie, with all of the (non-educator) buzz about how "amazing," "eye-opening" and "shocking" it is. It had popped up on the Netflix instant-play list a couple of weeks ago, so a friend (who is also a teacher) and I decided to watch it. It was quite thought-provoking, so I figured I would share a few things that came up.

There were a number of issues that the movie examined, many of which involved our "broken" educational system. It mainly follows three students; all minorities living in urban areas and all showing a clear affinity for learning and a great deal of intrinsic motivation. Their story lines mostly involved their school and home life, and their struggles to find a (charter) school that would offer them more/better educational opportunities than their "under-performing" public schools. It also features a former high school teacher, Geoffrey Canada*, who created and runs a charter school in an extremely impoverished area in Harlem. The film even highlights Michelle Rhee's controversial stint as Chancellor of Schools in Washington DC.

The Good
There is no question - our educational system is not perfect. Although the government "tried" to prevent it, students get "left behind" in our school system. But it's not just the students that are getting left behind, it's that some students are also being held back from achieving their full potential. There could be a variety of reasons for this, including (but not limited to) peer groups, school resources, motivation, and their classroom teacher. The movie focuses predominantly on the issues involving the school (resources & teachers), and doesn't do much to consider the influence of other factors.

The Curious
One factor that arose only briefly was the "outdated" idea of teacher tenure, which is an increasingly contentious component of teacher contracts. It made sure to show samples of video taken by students in public high schools of teachers not doing their job while in class (reading the newspaper, etc.). While it certainly is curious that tenured teachers could "get away with it," it certainly is not justification for removing tenure. However, I'm still considering the idea that it needs to be reformed. The jury's still out on this one.

The Questionable
While the movie brought up a number of reasonable problems, it also based many of its conclusions on flawed information. The most prevalent flaw involved the classification of "successful" schools, that seemed to rely on only two pieces of information: test scores and graduation rates.

The easiest strike is thrown by relying on standardized test results. There's a slew of research that shows how worthless standardized tests are at measuring student learning. Yet schools are still being classified as good/bad (or passing/failing) based on the results. There's a reason why NCLB was a flop!

The next strike is a bit of a screwball, and I had to think about it a bit before I realized what was happening. In the video, they show lots of fancy graphics that compare the graduation rates of "failing" schools (in some cases as low as 40%) to the graduation rates in the desired "high-performing" charter schools (all above 90%). But here's the rub - the movie was played up the dramatics of the lottery system these charter schools use (which is the basis of another ed movie, The Lottery), showing how desperately the kids and their families want them to get in. When they do, the families are overjoyed at the idea that their student will be successful - and why shouldn't they be? But with a student who recognizes the importance of the school and a family who will do virtually anything to get them to succeed, is it any wonder that these motivated students are graduating at a higher rate?? Of course not! I don't mean to say that the school has nothing to do with the graduation rates, but merely to point out that the students applying to charter schools with limited spots WANT to be there - and that can make a huge difference.

But there's one big, burning question that I still have - what about the other students? Sure, creating charter schools can provide opportunities for students to succeed (if they want to), but how do we reach everyone else? Let's pretend for a moment that all of the students who wanted to go to successful charter schools were actually able to do so. Almost all of the charters would maintain their "high-performing" status - with students who are trying to make the most of their opportunities going on to be successful. They get to fulfill their potential as a human beings, it's a happy ending, right?  If all of the motivated students leave, who is left in the public schools? All of the students who didn't want to be there in the first place, and who don't care enough (or have enough support) to try to get into a more successful school? The drop-outs, burn-outs, and slackers? Would it be the end of public education as we know it??

Uff-dah. Just thinking about working in a school like that makes my head hurt.

*Update: I found some more info about Geoffrey Canada on another blog, which can be found here.

Feedback

THIS. Above all else, I recognize that giving students feedback is one area of my teaching in which I'm in need of improvement. In fact, I might even go as far as to say that this is the area in which I am in need of the most improvement! Oy vey.
It wouldn't be professional development without an article to read, now would it?

Recommendations

When I first started blogging (sometime early last summer) I came across a number of blogs that have allowed me to reflect and develop my educational "theory" and apply it to make changes in my classroom. Most of them are science related, some are math, and all of them offer great insight into what a classroom can (and in most cases, should) be like. Yesterday, I created a blog roll that lists the main ones that I make a point to read whenever I have the time. Here's a few snippets from that list:

The Math/student-engagement guru:

Dan Meyer is a pretty big name in the math blogosphere, and his blog was the first one that got me searching for others. It was his TED talk that led me to him; if you're interested, start with his "Author's Choice" page. Highly recommended for anyone working with students who are less self-motivated (or anyone in math or science). 

The Puzzlers:

Each of these guys post frequently about science as well as education, and many of their posts leave me questioning and reflecting:

John Burk is a physics teacher who has endless insightful posts. I was particularly intrigued by his recent post about the growth mindset.

Brian Frank is another physics guy who teaches teachers, and constantly has interesting posts about physics as well as teaching.

The SBG-er:

Probably the best resource I have found for SBG guidance has come from Jason Buell. He has an entire page that lists all of the posts about SBG, and they have been an immense help in my transition to SBG this year. It's worth mentioning that he's also a science guy.

****UPDATE
I neglected to include another great SBG (and science) resource: Shawn Cornally, who also has a TED talk that is quite good. He also has a page of SBG stuff, and it's not just for science!


The Newest Addition:

A blog that I just found last week, but has been a great addition to my reading list, belongs to Nick Mitchell - yet another science teacher (surprise surprise). I particularly enjoyed his most recent post about the purpose of using demos in science. Couldn't have been more timely - our district just had a recent incident, and I will be attending a meeting with other science teachers to discuss our district's demo safety policies this week.

Homework; Unanswered Questions

As I was responding to Natasha's comment on my previous post, it was getting a bit long - so I thought it would be better served as a post than a comment.

Natashazen said...

I have often wondered about how much true learning a student can do at home alone. What homework resources, how much homwork, and precisely what kind of homework taska are the best for true learning? It is a question for which I still do not have all the answers

I have many of the same questions about homework - and also a lack of definitive answers. The article I posted presented some interesting conjectures about the amount of homework that is assigned and its relation to student learning - there was not a clear correlation in the research saying more homework = more learning. As you mentioned, I'm sure much of this is also influenced by the tasks as well as the resources available to students; it seems quite difficult to isolate just one of these factors as an individual influence on learning.

Another question that I have is whether or not students NEED homework in order to learn? Yes, it can be used as a form of formative assessment, but do students view it that way? Do they know how to use it that way? Should we teach them?? Should students be punished for not doing it? We know (or at least we think we know) it will help them improve their learning and perform better on assessments, but does that mean they should receive a lower grade for not doing it? So many questions....

I sometimes wonder (and I believe this was also in the article) if we are creating a bigger gap between the "smart" students and the "not-so-smart" students. The students who do the homework usually do better on assessments, but do they need it; would they learn the same amount without doing the homework? And for those students who seem like no amount of harassing will get them to trouble themselves to do homework, will it just keep them thinking (and behaving like) they are "not-so-smart"? Ok, I need to stop... question overload!

On a somewhat related topic, it is interestingly related to the growth vs. static mindset issue, which I have been currently reading about. It's really interesting, and it also reminds me of another book I heard about in grad school this past fall called Choice Words (which is on my list of books to read). I'm excited to learn more...!

Winter Break Reading

One of the best parts of winter break is that I actually have large chunks of time where I can sit down and read - rather than just the 30 minutes of SSR time at school. After racing my way through The Hunger Games trilogy, I spent a chunk of time last night and today reading articles about education. Specifically, I had come across a link to an Alfie Kohn article talking about educational research and some of the ways it is used improperly. As a scientist who is always on the lookout for ways that scientific data is ignored or misrepresented in the media (teachable moments, you know!) I thought it was interesting to look at educational research in the same way. It's kind of a long article, but if you have the time its worth reading. The last portion - a more in depth analysis of research about homework and its (lack of) benefits - was very intriguing.

After reading the article, I perused Kohn's website for a while as well, and looked at a few of his other articles as well. I can understand conservative critics finding issue with his progressive views, but I surely appreciate his critical look at many "common sense" practices. In many ways, it reminds me of similar ideas in Ken Kumashiro's book, Against Common Sense (which I read for class this past semester).

Another book I received for Christmas is called Mindset by Carol S. Dweck. I've only looked at the first few pages; I will give a more complete review when I've finished it!

I've also found a few articles about modeling in science; not sure if I will have time for them this break but they are on my list as well.

5TTT

Even though this is not my first blog, I wanted to start with a clean slate - specifically for the 5TTT program, just so I can keep it all in one place. The 5TTT (5 Tech Teaching Tools) program is being offered by the Media Specialist at Park Center, and those of us that are participating are given one task a month to complete, through the end of the year.

The first task for this month was to watch and post the following video:



I'm intrigued by this video, and I agree with a lot of what they are saying. I constantly struggle with the idea of what "learning" means, especially when kids have access to such a wealth of information via the internet. It seems that the idea of memorization (which is not the entirety of schooling) is a bit outdated; if students can look something up in 5 seconds rather than spending at least 5 hours to memorize it, why should they? At the same time, memory is a key part of intelligence - and until computers and the internet are directly hooked up to our brains to store of information that can readily be accessed, it is a skill that needs to be practiced and taught to students. I am not saying we need to make students memorize facts (like the fact that Columbus sailed in 1492) but in order to synthesize information you need to be aware that the information exists.

Another piece that really stood out to me was one of the guys in the video talking about what students need to be able to do:

"...the coin of the realm will be, do you know how to find information, do you know how to validate it, do you know how to synthesize it, do you know how to leverage it, do you know how to communicate with it, do you know how to collaborate with it, do you know how to problem solve with it. THAT'S the new set of 21st century literacies."

BOOM! (That's the sound of my brain exploding). I couldn't have said it better myself. We spent a lot of time in one of my grad school classes (History and Nature of Science) talking about the different ways to teach kids not only how to find GOOD information, but teaching them how to evaluate the information so they know what's good and are able to filter through the mass of slanted/biased/crappy information that's out there as well.

I thought a lot about a mini-project that I did with my students researching water contaminants and their effects (I even collaborated with Dhaivyd to set up a website of resources, and he gave a lesson on databases) and yet all the kids wanted to do was type their question/topic into google and copy down the first resource or resources that gave some semblance of an answer. How will they know if it's good info? Teach them how to evaluate it.

The only statement in the video that didn't sit well with me was when someone said something like, "a shut off device is a shut off student." Not sure I agree with that - and if we ever get to that point, I'm very curious to see what our society is like (I'm imagining the civilization in Wall-E).

Just a quick plug as well - I'm very glad that the video took a shot at standardized testing. It seems like the only ones who don't realize it's hurting/hindering our students is the people who are requiring the tests (aka state and federal legislators). On a lighter note, see this article.




P.S. If you are interested, feel free to check out my other blog - The Chemist's Corner. I haven't posted much recently, but the blog itself is also about teaching (especially topics I'm thinking about in grad school), but has some science thrown in as well on occasion. Most of the content here will be posted there as well - which might seem silly, but I wanted to use the same blogger program as everyone else for the 5TTT.