Technological advancement...part II...in 3D

Wow...this class has been a whirlwind tour of technologies available to students and teachers online. As the MLTI age group, we realistically could be using any of the programs we've applied anytime in our classrooms. Here are my thoughts on the big ones we've used.

MOODLE - We have several teachers in our school using this right now. They are primarily English teachers, although there are a few others thrown in. I've seen some great discussions about classroom readings on Moodle. Kids can be remarkable in their insight when you remove some of their peer pressures. Moodle helps make an even playing field for discussions. I can see myself using it to generate discussions about the bigger, over-arching concepts that accompany a lot of Social Studies lessons.

BLOGS - Realistically, I think it would be hard to use blogs at a middle level because of the lack of control. What is to stop kids from ranting inappropriately? I guess you would have to create a very trusting climate, and have clear understanding of the rules and expectations for the tool My teaching neighbor and I had an idea (when we used to teach English) to create a blog where we would accumulate book reviews over the years. Student X reads The Giver, and writes a review on the blog, and then it is available for students to use in that and subsequent years. It never really got off the ground though.

VOICETHREAD & SKYPE - These are terrific resources, but not necessarily in one classroom. Now if you wanted to communicate between a few classes on a common lesson (integration?), Skype and VoiceThread would be great. Or, maybe when my kids are learning about Brazil, we could Skype with a Brazilian classroom? Skype saves me tons of money on long distance calls every year, so it will always be good in my book.

GOOGLE DOCS - I think this is really a terrific tool, especially for collaborative work. I had a professor last fall, who would give us time in class to work on a task, type it up in google docs, and share it with the class. It was tremendously interactive, and it moved class along in a good way. I can see a limitation in that if the instructor or the student did not understand the capabilities of the program, they really would not get as much out of it, but I think that is the case with any technology. As the teacher, I also like that you can check the "history" of the Doc and see who has worked on it and when. It helps with student accountability.

The Future...

I am thinking as an optimist about the future of middle level education. As we've read, we have a number of challenges to overcome every day... AYP, curriculum that is so vast it is incomprehensible, parents, sometimes other teachers, and yes, the students, who are at the most challenging time of their lives.

But I think the future is bright, and I'll give you two reasons why.

1) I haven't been teaching very long (next year will be 11 years as a teacher and 14 as a coach), but I don't see a radical change on the horizon that is going to change the structure or alignment of American public schools. Sure, we might shift things around within the walls, but the actual middle school is going nowhere.

2) I think the fact that all schools are focusing on test results has a positive side to go along with all of the negatives we have mentioned over the course of the class. Sure, we are teaching to the test. Sure, we are losing valuable instructional time to assessment. It is all true. But...when school administration heightens their awareness of test scores, they will be loosening their grip on the antiquated "traditional classroom." If they want the best results, they have to use the best practices. So if integrating classrooms yields higher test scores, it will happen. If creating teams and portioning out more common planning time results in higher scores, it will happen. If adult advocates help boost the school climate, and that makes kids safe, and that increases scores, well then that will happen too.

The future of middle level education is a great one. This will continue to be a challenging age for kids, and a time where they will need tremendous support. However, this will also be span where kids will be as unique and diverse as they can be.

Outliers

I just finished Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell (on my new kindle). Interesting book. If you aren't familiar with it, the basic idea is an investigation about why some people are successful and others aren't. Chapter 9 deals primarily with educational opportunities. Gladwell discusses a group of schools called KIPP schools (in New York). Any fourth grader can apply, and students are chosen in a random lottery. They get tremendous achievement results from a seemingly random population. Why? Here are some key "differences" that I think might sound familiar from many of our readings:

• Longer Day - One profiled student arrived at school at 7:30 and could leave at 5pm, but clubs and extra-curriculars start at 5, so she stays until 7pm...then stayed up to 9:30 or 10 doing work (on a light work night).
  
• Longer class periods - ELA and Math get at least 90 minutes each day! Plus 60 minutes of science and Social Studies, one hour of music, plus 30 minutes of thinking skills....EVERY DAY!
• Zero tolerance for misbehavior.
• Adult Advocates
• And no huge summer vacation.

There is compelling research outlined in this book that uses reading testing data for upper, middle, and lower income subgroups. What they find is that during the school year, lower income students make the biggest growth (by far!). The thing that drags their scores down is summer vacation. When you look at tests given in June, then again the analogous tests in the following September, the lower income students have a significant decline, presumably because they aren't at school. Upper and middle class students, with more resources available at home, don't make as significant drops.

Interesting research...interesting book. I liked a few of his other books better than this one, but it was a good read, and the education component was certainly valuable.

Solidarity?

I got this quote from an article on the Intercepts Blog I follow (look way down at the bottom...):

NEA Convention 2010: NEA Votes “No Confidence” in Race to the Top

Much of the morning was spent in debate of New Business Item 2. It reads:

While the National Education Association Representative Assembly supports and appreciates the significant increase in federal funding for education, the NEA takes a position of no confidence in the US Department of Education’s Race to the Top competitive grant policies and guidelines, the use of competitive grant policies and guidelines as a basis for the reauthorization of ESEA, and similar initiatives and policies that undermine public education.

Introduced by Phil Rumore, president of the Buffalo Teachers Federation, the motion divided delegates. Supporters argued the Race to the Top process “brutalizes” teachers and students and is at its heart anti-union. Opponents thought the vote of no confidence was too harsh and undermined affiliates who had participated in crafting the process in their states.

I have to preface this by saying that I am a card-carrying member of the MEA, and I have been the entire time I have been a teacher. That being said, I have to say that my views are very anti-union on the issues of Race to the Top, as well as using student assessment data in teacher evaluations.

Let's establish some facts...

1) There are some very good teachers, some very bad teachers, and many, many in between.

2) The vast majority of the current teacher evaluation systems are (at best) limited in their benefits, and (at worst) TOTALLY useless.

3) Race to the Top...at its heart...is a battle over how teachers are: paid, evaluated, and "tenured."

Okay...those are the facts, but in my opinion, the primary issue is that the government (be they republican/democrat/ or other) want the best teachers in the best schools they can possibly have. No one can say that is a bad thing, right? The teachers want job security and equitable treatment on a daily basis. No one can argue that either, right? The problem is that these two viewpoints are completely at odds based on the seniority system that most schools use to rank teachers. So what do we do now?

Personally, I think the answer is a hybrid system of evaluation, that factors in a wealth of criteria, such as: student assessment data, involvement in student activities, innovation in the curriculum, use of technology, value to the system, and (yes) seniority. I also think it hurts us as a profession to keep bad teachers around just because they are experienced. I don't believe the issue of assessment-linked evaluation is going away, so maybe rather than voting "No Confidence," we could work an a different solution to the problem?

"You're going to need a bigger boat"

One of the things that has consistently come up as a problem for all educators as we discuss issues in this class is the amount of time we have each day, and the sheer amount of curriculum we must cover (both formal and informal curriculum). Hey teacher, today I want you to teach (potentially)math, science, social studies, reading, grammar, writing, and maybe a foreign language (just for good measure). Then, in the few minutes you have during a planning period (or on your own time) please do the following: carefully design integrated lesson plans that match up with local, state, and national standards, regularly communicate with all of your students' parents, meet with other teachers and faculty members to discuss student issues, review files, fill out paperwork, design assessments, prepare for IEPs and 504s, clean your room up (it is a mess), eat lunch, and maybe go to the bathroom.

What does this all mean? Well, I think we are headed for a change as a profession, because we are going to need a bigger boat. Never seen Jaws? Watch this clip...

Just like Quint, Chief Brody, and Richard Dreyfus, we don't have a big enough boat. If we can't get everything done in the time we have, maybe we just need more time. There are so many different ways to make more time...go an hour later each day (ugh.), cut out some of our nebulous vacation days (Do your kids ever ask why we have February vacation?), or, and I don't even want to say it, re-think how we handle summer vacation?

If our major stumbling block in doing better things in school is time, don't we just need to make more of it?

By the way...this summer is the 35th anniversary of Jaws. Wow!

To track or not to track?

After looking at the topics for the week 3 papers, I narrowed it down between tracking and middle level sports. I ended up going with sports, but I still have lots of interest in tracking. I am interested to hear how other middle schools deal with the issue. I know the research, that tracking is "bad" and mixed groupings help kids of all abilities learn.

In our school, for English and Math, we have accelerated/advanced classes, regular classes, and lower classes. In all cases, students are expected to cover and "master" the material. We tend to be a high performing school, so I wonder why it works for us.

As a student, I was tracked as "college prep" from seemingly day one. I turned out okay, but I often wonder how things would be different if I had been exposed to vocational school as well. It seems as thought the tracking may have limited my options, while better preparing me for a more likely future. With future generations needing a college degree for basically any job, won't they all be "college prep?"

Tracking is a murky issue. Any thoughts?