Gianormous projects

Once again last week, the old fix/flex debate raised its scaley head on LM_Net. More often than not, these discussions produce more heat than light and I do my best to stay out them since I've already said my piece (and probably too much).

One percieved benefit of a flexibly scheduled library program is that it allows students blocks of time to work on a project "in-depth." As one writer puts it: From my perspective, the problem with "working around" fixed schedules is that these schedules often do not allow for more in-depth inquiry/research/literature projects that impact student achievement and life-long learning.

From both personal experience and from the comments of our district's LMSs, the elementary project that drags on, week after week while being worked on in 20- minute bits, is indeed frustrating for both students and teachers. Is having one or two gianormous reseach/tech projects a year the best way to teach information and technology skills in either a fixed or flexible schedule, especially at the elementary level?

From somewhere in my files I drug this up and it makes a lot of sense:

Brain research shows that permanent learning only takes place when research activities are assigned frequently enough that students can exercise and develop the essential skills of critical reading, writing, higher-order thinking, and presenting ideas and opinions with a purpose.

Brain research also shows that these activities must be related to student interests about their world and provide the opportunity for them to develop their own “reasoned opinions” based on researched facts and expert opinions. This desired learning is impossible to do for all students when schools depend on the “term paper” as their only research strategy.

A recent study of Social Studies teachers indicates that the age of the term paper is rapidly disappearing and being replaced by shorter and more frequent types of mini-research. Education Week – November 20, 2002.

One alternative to the semester-long project is by asking students to do "everyday problem-solving." In this earlier column, I wrote:

I am concerned that when we base our information problem-solving instruction around a single giant unit or two each year, students through lack of opportunity to practice also forget all these important defining, locating, accessing, synthesizing, communicating and evaluating skills. It’s why we seem to re-teach the use of the library catalog, search engines, website evaluation, online periodical databases, and even word processing commands year after year to the same group of students who seem to have once grasped them.

Practicing information problem solving needs to be a daily activity for every student in our schools, not just a biennial “event.” It’s easy to quickly brainstorm a whole raft of information problem solving mini-activities that can be done in either the media center or classroom:

• Use the Internet to check the weather forecast and make a recommendation about dress for the next day.
• Search and report an interesting fact about the author of the next story being read by the class.
  
• Email students in another class to ask their opinions on a discussion topic.
• Recommend a movie or television show to watch the coming weekend using a critic’s advice.
• Find two science articles that relate to the current science unit. Evaluate the credibility of the sources of information.
• Locate a place from a current news headline or class reading on an online map resource like .
• Recommend a book to a classmate based on other books that classmate has read using the school’s library catalog or an Internet source.
• Update the class webpage with interesting facts from units studied and links to related information on the web.
  
• Estimate the number of calories and fat grams in the meal served in the cafeteria that day.
• Find a “quote of the day” on a specific topic and use a graphics program to illustrate and print it out.
  

Note that most of these tasks take fewer than ten or fifteen minutes for a skilled information searcher to complete. Each has direct relevance to the student’s “real” academic or personal life. Reporting the results of the research is informal and interesting. Most of these activities are meaningful ones that adults do as well.

I'd hate to think that students would come to believe that the only time to do research is when they are in the LMC. That is is something done only for academic pursuits. That the end result is always a paper or presentation.

Aren't we all daily problem-solvers? Shouldn't our kids be as well?

Take one a day.

Just how much do teachers need to know about technology, redux

Jim Forde over at edtechNOT <http://edtechnot.blogspot.com> sent this comment on the Just how much do teachers need to know about technology?  post from few days ago:

Here are some thoughts that rose to the surface as I read this excellent post.

1st- Educational technology staff development should be about creating better teachers. Whether or not they know the origin of the acronym "URL" is irrelevant. Will the ed tech staff development session offer them ideas that will make them better teachers, with their specific kids, in their specific setting? This should be the ultimate assessment.

2nd- Many of the frustrated reactions that teachers share via informal body language, rude comments or (in the worst case scenario) thrown objects are often the result of the disconnect of the "expert" from the classroom teacher. It isn't that they aren't organized, but it is that they really have no idea what great science, language arts, or math teaching looks or feels like...but "boy do they have a technology solution for you!" The reluctant veteran teachers are then labelled recalcitrant luddites. Poor alpha wolf. :-(

3rd- As it relates to the "omnivore's dilemma" and the depth of knowledge necessary, I don't want a great reading teacher worrying about why the ISDN line works or the origin of Spam. I want them to have the tools they need to entrance kids with wonderful lessons that encourage them to be life long learners. This is where their focus should be, not on why the tech around them is not working.

I probably just woke up on the wrong side of the lap top. Let me know what you think.

Jim Forde :-)

I'd like to agree 100%. Jim, but am not sure it is a simple and clear cut as you describe. Let's play with the idea that there are three skill levels all teachers need:

1. "Basic skills" How to open programs. How to use a mouse. How to organize files. How to trouble shoot why the the printer is not working.  This is where some of those "behind the scenes" understandings might be helpful. Does knowing the basics of IP protocol make a person a better teacher? No, but it might allow him/her to be a better teacher IF it allows that teacher to solve a problem quickly and get back to the business at hand - teaching. Some of these skills (how spam, filters and pop-ups work) might be essential to survival in this litigious age! See Teacher Guilty in Norwich Porn Case.

I might even include in this category things as mundane as knowing how to report attendance  online, keep an electronic gradebook, or e-mail a colleague. Whenever the mastered use of a technology allows a teacher to save time doing a routine task, it improves education.

2. "Personal productivity skills" A teacher knowing how to run a word processorto create instructional materials that are easy to read and quickly editable is a better teacher. A teacher who can use a search engine to locate best practices in his/her field is a better teacher.  A teacher who knows how to create a web page that informs parents of classroom activities and provides activities that can be done at home is a better teacher. My Beginning CODE 77 Rubrics were all based on the premise that a teacher can be a better teacher using technology even her/his students never touch it.

3.  "Direct instructional uses" I suspect this is where most of us would like to be offering staff development activities - how techers can use technology directly with students for greater content mastery or skill attainment. No argument. This might be a drill-and-practice program or a simulation program, but more likely it is some activity that has at its heart an information literacy skill asking for higher ordered thinking, enhanced (or even made possible) using technology. And this is as much or more about changing pedagogy as it is about technology. I tried looking at this use in my Rubrics for Restructuring.

 So yes, Jim, I definitely agree with your statement, "Educational technology staff development should be about creating better teachers."  I would only argue that we not be too narrow in thinking about what that looks like. I also worry that we are in such a rush to get to the third level of staff development and teacher use we slight the first two levels and that comes back to haunt us.

Oh, my rubrics are starting to look a little long in the tooth. Revision time approaches. What does teacher who takes advantage of the social web know how to do?

Requirement for handwritten assignments - a response

A few days ago I posted an e-mail from a college student who appreciated being able to handwrite his assignments. The letter evoked a number of comments, one of which read:

I was considering removing all paper from my high school technology class - all my handouts would be PDF files, and all assignments turned in would be electronic. After reading a number of similar articles, I will continue to require hand-written assignments. I disagree with those who state that it was (or is) difficult to learn to write neatly. Make it a requirement, and allow students to correct their messes.  Kenn

I was honestly curious why a teacher would require hand-written assignments. Allow them, I could understand, but require them? So I asked Kenn for an explanation. He graciously wrote back and has given me permission to post it here...

Didn't expect the response, but thanks!

There are actually two reasons...
(1) I believe that the majority of my students (freshman) are not ready to turn in all assignments electronically. Since the majority of their other assignments in other classes involve paper and pencil, they have been unable to make the transition effectively.

(2) I have two children (ages 10 and 7) and am working on their handwriting skills. I have seen a huge number of freshman with very (and I mean very) poor handwriting skills. I know I am not responsible for teaching them to write, but I believe I need to make that part of the class.

I will also be making one change next semester, regarding hand-written assignments. The students will be required to hand in at least one page of hand-written notes for each class meeting. I have found that in my computer class students will not take notes unless required to. I believe they think that since it's "only" computer class, they will either learn through osmosis or just know it because it's computers.

I proposed going paperless to my department this past summer and was approved, but will not try that until next fall. I would like to continue this conversation and be kept informed of your opinions and other if possible.

Hope this helps...

Kenn Gorman
Computer Teacher / Aquatics Coach
Oaks Christian Schools

Were I Kenn's student, I might bristle a bit when asked to turn something in that is handwritten. But then, I was never a very good student and tended to bristle easily. And like quite a number of my peers, I have grown so accustomed to word-processing everything, I am probably less flexible than the kids Ken teaches.

Thanks, Kenn, for some good discussion fodder. 

IS handwriting a necessary skill?