21st Century Skills

Communication vs. Writing

This blog is a great place to story some of my other writing. Here is another response I wrote for the MOOC, “The Art of Teaching History.” The prompt in this case was, “What are the obstacles to teaching writing?”

Communication isn’t just writing

The prompt this week is about obstacles to helping students become better writers. I certainly support helping our students become better writers, but I feel there is a gaping hole in the conversation in the videos. Our old definition of writing is the obstacle. We must think about communication, not just writing.

The videos solely address formal, academic writing. Journals, when assigned, are still an academic writing exercise. As a few threads here have addressed, the world has shifted, and students are exposed to many different types of communication media: Twitter, blogs, videos, Tumblrs, Instagram, etc. The list is endless and ever changing.

I am glad to see a few threads here addressing the issue I see. Some of the threads here are disturbing, because the blame for students not being able to write is being placed on our students and their use of technology/digital information. That is simply not fair to our students, and shows a lack of being able to think forward. We cannot continue to live in the past and expect students to perform in school the way we, as adults, were taught. We — the adults — need to also learn from where the world is going.

I am not saying students shouldn’t learn to analyze and evaluate. They need to learn to communicate their thoughts and knowledge, including this analysis and evaluation. It is our expectations of how they communicate this that must change. Is the standard 5 paragraph essay still necessary? What about a 90 second video? A powerpoint/prezi or some other presentation? It takes more skills to communicate visually. They must still get their ideas out in an orderly manner. They must make a thesis and support these ideas. Using visuals, doing a presentation, or some other mode of communication is JUST as valuable — and perhaps in our increasingly visual world — MORE important than just being able to write.

Teaching other modes of communication also allow us to differentiate the classroom, and perhaps allow students to shine in different ways. We cannot limit our world to text. Students with certain learning disabilities or those who are creative/artisitic may show you a different side of themselves when presented with the opportunity to use other modes of communication. Students who are well versed in writing are done a disservice if they are not encouraged to explore other modes of communication.

Writing is merely the beginning. By limiting ourselves in teaching history to this mode of communication, we limit our students.

“Successful” Students

The following is a response I wrote for a Coursera MOOC I’m taking, “The Art of Teaching History.”

In the video I’m responding to, the instructor talks about what he thinks makes a “successful” history student. I admit I bristled at this a bit. Who defines a “successful” student? I’m sure there are many definitions/thoughts about success. What is “successful” for one student is different than might be for another. I tried to watch the video with an open mind.

Anyway, here is the response I posted on the course forums:

A “Successful” History Student

I struggled with the definitions given for “successful history students.” They were:

  1. Knows history/significant knowledge of history
  2. Reads and writes well
  3. Thinks analytically and historically

I do agree with #3, but the first two give me pause. In my work, I teach and develop content about state history primarily for 6th grade students. Perhaps these definitions of success apply better at an older age — more like undergrad — but I can’t apply them to 6th grade, middle school, or even to high school.

If the knowledge of history was the measure of success, we’d be testing facts. We don’t want to do that. We want to engage students in history, give them a sense of their place in the world and how the past has influenced where we are — where THEY are — today. For 6th graders, we strive to build a base of historical knowledge, of course, but our measure of success is not that they know the date of statehood. We want them to understand the factors that created the state, what were the positives and negatives about how the state was made. Who were the players? How do past events impact them today. We want them to understand the “So What” questions — why does it matter that we study history. We want them to know HOW to find historical detail and information. It is not necessary that a 6th grader memorize minute details, dates and more.

I also feel strongly that teaching history is part of the process of creating readers and writers, but this is a text-centric approach. Students today need to be able go beyond text and into visuals, audio and more. Our culture is moving from only text into communicating strongly through visuals (images, art, video) and sound. Students of today need to be as fluent – if not more so- with these modes of communication. They also need to be able to express their knowledge through these modes. Producing a video requires many skills: organizing information, determining important and non-important information, creating a thesis, writing a script, choosing appropriate visuals and audio and more. This, to me, is far more than writing, and we as educators and parents are responsible to see that students can do all this. Focusing on the academic historical essay is doing a disservice to all students except those planning on graduate work in history — and can be saved for the high school or undergraduate work.

Teaching History for the Quiz Show

Fantastic article in The Atlantic, “High School History Doesn’t have to be Boring” by David Cutler questioning why teachers are still (and why they ever) taught history as a class to memorize a series of events. I wish my kids had this guy for a teacher!

Great quote:

But as we go farther into the 21st century, with changes almost too numerous to fathom, I find it mindboggling that any teacher would still treat history class as boring preparation for a quiz show.

 

This is a great way to look at teaching history:

  • Teachers are foolish to expect students to remember anything for long that has little to no direct relevance in their daily lives.
  • Teachers need to do a much better job of connecting history to today, and placing a greater emphasis on how young people could learn from past mistakes.
  • Teachers should assess students on what they can do with what they know, rather than how much they know at any given time.

My daughter’s experience with AP History was horrific — they had to read pages and pages of dense text “to prepare them for college” – what bullshit – and take pages and pages of multiple choice tests with questions that were basic fact memorization. I hear they are doing a little more Document Based Questions in the 11th grade AP US History, but still tons and tons of multiple choice questions.

I’m much happier with her “regular” history class. Few tests, many more projects and less rote memorization. According to everyone, it doesn’t have the rigor. But who cares — we could argue the “rigor” aspect, and it’s not just shoving Google-able facts down their throats.

To AP or Not?

Another interesting article about the move away from AP classes: “Is it Time to Reconsider AP Classes?” from Mindshift.

I’m not shy about my dislike of AP classes (there are a few posts about AP classes on this blog. I’m not going to restate them here.) This post raises some very good points about why AP is being reconsidered in many schools.

Recent issue in my daughter’s school: an AP Music Theory class is being proposed. Comments from the administrators were that they didn’t want to offer it because it wouldn’t appeal to students of color/low income/ELL. Wow. Horrifying.

Video

Understanding Ukraine: The Problems Today and Some Historical Context – YouTube

I love John Green. He talks so fast, I think he gets in twice as much info as anyone else….

I cannot evaluate the content in this video, as I know next to nothing about the situation in Ukraine.

I do know, however, that John Green has nailed how students – and adults – learn. I learned more about the situation in this 6 minute video (which I watched twice) than I have in the last few weeks.

Green makes great use of using history to understand a current situation. There is really no way to understand what’s going on there without knowing the history, but he does a great job moving through the essentials, and demonstrating how history, geography and politics all contribute to the current situation.

Wouldn’t it be great if students were empowered to do this type of assignment? Not only does video production require writing (like a paper), it also requires visual literacy skills. Yeah! 21st century skills!

Professionally, I would love to be able to produce content out this quickly as it relates to current events. I’m not keeping my fingers crossed….

Teaching like it’s 1992

I am taking a MOOC with Cathy Davidson, The History and Future of (mostly) Higher Ed. I’ve heard Davidson on other webinars and probably at conferences.

I didn’t enroll in the certification, although now that I’m in the class, I wish that perhaps I had done that. I’m  mostly watching the lectures — learning lots, and some are very thought provoking.

She is very focused on using history as advocacy. I love this use of history, and the way she outlines the history of education is very telling, and it’s very clear that she is comparing it to how education is today. Why do we have these structures? Where did they come from?

In my experience, it seems that often educators feel that things are done this way because that’s how we’ve always done it. Well, that truly is not the case. Davidson explores the riots that happened at Harvard when blackboards were introduced. The philosophy that using books in education would make students lazy. The development of the multiple choice standardized test. So, why do we hold so tightly to these methods of education? Education has evolved significantly – and with difficulty – over the years. Why are we still teaching the same why we did 20 years ago? 50 years ago?

One great example she discusses in the lecture I’m currently watching is as recent as 1992 — only 22 years ago. Why 1992?

The view of history in this class is not that history is linear progress, but that things are constantly changing and that one change leads to another change.

…many of our institutions of education look pretty much like they did in 1992. … We haven’t taken in the key fact that life has changed, that informal learning  has changed.

Why is she focusing on 1992?? Because, according to Davidson, the world changed on April 22, 1993 when the internet was made public. The internet has caused “Uneven Development” in the last 22 years. The internet is a seismic shift, as was the printing press and the invention of mass printing. It has cause incredible change in a very short period of time.

Yet — her argument (and I certainly agree) is that most of our institutions of formal learning look pretty much the same. Sure, kids have computers. Sure, we use email. But the basic tennant of inhaling vast amounts of content and spitting it back hasn’t changed. The need for set times for classes hasn’t changed.

Education is one of those things that helps to filter and focus the world we live in. If we’re still teaching in a world that exists as if the internet doesn’t exist, we’re filtering the world through a previous world that really doesn’t exist anymore.

I hope to go back through some of the lectures and listen more closely. I’ve had to listen quickly to them and move on. Hoping to go back and spend more time.

Why Tech?

Great article about just jumping in and trying tech in the classroom by Kathy Cassidy, “Technology in the Classroom: Embrace the Bumpy Ride.”

Her point to teacher who are reluctant or overwhelmed is to take it slow, try something, and the real point: to use tech to teach better. Don’t just have it as an add-on, or something more to do.

Technology should help us to teach better and in more meaningful ways. It should be used to connect us. It should give us choice and allow us to share.

 

Use technology when it allows you to do something in a better way than you have done before or to do something that was formerly impossible to do.

 

Examples include using blogs to give student writing a broader audience and communicating with families in an immediate way.She suggests using Skype to connect with another classroom in another state. Use video and photography to allow for a non-textual representation of a learner’s thought process and to demonstrate their learning.

She also reminds us that an iPad or computer is just another tool, like a pencil or crayon. You can have problems with these tools, too!

We use technology not just because it is technology, but because of what it can do. It engages us and helps us to learn.

The 5 Most Dangerous Creativity Killers – 99U

Interesting post: “The 5 Most Dangerous Creativity Killers” from 99U.

I saw this in an email for museum professionals, but how does it apply to learners in school — both the adult and kid learners?

The five “creativity killers” sound very much like the traditional school system:

  1. Role Mismatch: the post uses the Einstein quote about judging a fish on its ability to climb a tree, comparing that to the workplace. While we need to be sure to challenge learners to new things, we also need to be sure that they are in a place and role where they are comfortable. Why can’t we allow students to do different types of projects? Why do they all have to take the same assessment? Some learners might be better suited to writing while others are better suited to visuals.
  2. External End-Goal Restriction: wow, that sounds like school to me! The “end goal” is almost always restricted by an external source – whether it’s a state telling teachers what to teach or what tests to give, or a teacher telling learners exactly what to learn and exactly how to demonstrate that learning. According to the post, “external restrictions are almost always a bad thing for creative thinking.”
  3. Strict Ration of Resources: in this case, mental resources, especially time, is the most important resources. Schools are always so crunched for time because are required to get through and extraordinary amount of material for the “standards.” Learners are overloaded with homework from a number or classes, and the perception is that college admission requires a zillion hours of extracurriculars, volunteering and a full slate of AP classes. There is no time remaining to be creative or do much beyond rote. Schools also have a very set time schedule: be here at 8:10, do algebra until 9:05, etc. Why do we expect all learners to need the same amount of time?
  4. Lack of Social Diversity: Yup, let’s put all kids who were born in this set time frame together because that means they’ll be at the same place. Well, no. Why do we assume that just because a child is 7 that they should be at point A in reading, B in math? While I do feel that it is often – not always – important for learners to be with others who are at the same place (e.g. learners who need to move quickly through content or those who need a different pace or approach), it does not mean all of the same age.
  5. Discouragement/No Positive Feedback: Wow — can we say schools? Testing? While some students may get positive feedback from scoring 95% on all the tests, there are far more students who get negative feedback from testing and just being in school day after day. Why not allow for mastery of content with assessments that allow for redoing tests, doing projects that fit or challenge, or doing real world projects that have real impact?

I’m going to go looking for the post about the 5 Things that Encourage Creativity.

Don’t Use that Phone!!

Just got the following notice about cell phone use at my son’s school. (He’s in 8th grade)

Question: Is it okay for my child to bring a cell phone to school?
Answer: Yes, if they DON’T USE IT!

We do not allow students to use phones for any purpose (including texting) while at school. If they need to communicate with home, they should ask a teacher and use the school phones. If we see students using personal phones, we may keep the phone for a parent to pick up.

Wow. I hardly know how to react to this. Have an 8th grader ask a teacher to use the phone to call parents? First of all, I am rarely by a phone. I strongly prefer my son text me. Please. I can be reached by text anywhere.

Let’s teach kids how to use these tools. I bet the vast majority of kids have those phones in their pockets, and many have iPhones or Androids. My son doesn’t have a smart phone – just a phone phone. He has an iPad and is allowed to use that. Why is he allowed to use this when others can’t use their phones? It makes no sense.