Archive for the ‘education reform’ Category

Sharing success stories from Eastside High

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009

This note in from Dr. Sandy Wagner, long-time advocated of technology in education and currently helping out as a math tutor at Eastside Preparatory School in East Palo Alto:

“This article in the San Francisco Chronicle and the accompanying video describe the school in East Palo Alto where I have been tutoring for four years.  Eastside is a result of creative genius and hard work; it had to be invented and the existing models were scarce.  The story is impressive - Chris Bischof, a basketball fanatic in high school, found the best pickup games were in East Palo Alto, which once led the nation in per capita murders. When he was heading off to Stanford Chris realized that none of his ball playing friends was going anywhere.  That simple observation became the focus of his undergraduate career, and led him to that first meeting with eight students about 13 years ago.”

Eastside Succeeds By Focusing on Students - San Francisco Chronicle, June 11, 2009

Sandy goes on, “There are some phrases in the article that make the whole thing sound simple, that anyone could do it: “believing in students helps them find success”, “the school appears to brush aside any doubt that closing the achievement gap can be done.”  The important quote is a modest one from Chris, who really deserves a MacArthur ‘genius’ grant or at least national recognition - “it’s the full package - that’s what it takes.”  If anyone wonders why a nearby high school with similar goals and student body, and the support of Stanford University, just flounders along, it’s because this is not a simple thing that can be achieved with slogans and college pennants hanging on the walls.”

Sandy has hit on some of difficulties of communicating why school models differ. It’s difficult to explain how slogans don’t translate to success, when slogans are such compact little devices. In contrast, subtle, complex human interaction takes too long to explain, much less to actually do.

The article mentions some features of the school.  Here are more contents of “the full package”:  There is a large room reserved for tutoring by volunteers, and tutoring time is built into each day. There is a modern computer lab and complete connectivity throughout the school, but no library.  Teachers are remarkably dedicated to the school’s mission - their regular day is 8 to 5 with kids.  Advanced Placement classes, including calculus, advanced biology, and physics, are in each student’s program.  All students reach at least pre-calculus.  Every incoming student takes summer school to get up to speed in math and writing.  Every senior spends 6 weeks at the summer “boot camp” in preparation for all phases of the college admission process.  Every student takes Spanish; those who already speak it take courses to prepare them for AP Spanish.  All students take art and music and show their work in public exhibits and concerts at the school.  A full time staff member is dedicated to staying in touch with graduates during their college years.  Every senior does a research project that is presented, quite professionally in my experience, to a panel of teachers.  All this is provided tuition-free.

This school does sound like a fabulous, caring place, but there are places with great facilities that fail miserably to serve their students. There are so many lessons to be learned here, but I think the big one is, “…the full package–that’s what it takes.” Tinkering around the edges won’t work, nor will slogans about how different things will be. Sandy says, “it had to be invented” not because good schools don’t exist, but because real innovation can’t be checked off a shopping list or slapped together from parts and pieces. Sharing models, and going beyond the superficial is important to help all the other future Eastsides and future Chris Bischofs of the world. People have the power to reinvent education, we just need to share success stories, ideas, and why the hard work is worth it.

Sylvia

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tinkering with Twitter

Sunday, June 21st, 2009

By now you’ve probably heard of Twitter, the latest techno-craze taken up by those-in-the-know, celebrities, and well, me too. It’s so popular that the inevitable “it’s not so great” stories are now making their way into the news. According to this Harvard study (link from BBC news) Twitter hype punctured by study, “…most people only ever “tweet” once during their lifetime…”

“Based on the numbers, Twitter is certainly not a service where everyone who has seen it has instantly loved it,” said Bill Heil, a graduate from Harvard Business School who carried out the work.

That quote alone got me thinking. Since when does everyone have to love the same thing instantly and do things in exactly the same way. Oh, right — school.

A couple of months ago I wrote two posts on the subject of tinkering that have probably gotten me the most (offline) comments of anything I’ve written. Technology Literacy and Sustained Tinkering Time and Tinkering as a mode of knowledge production in a Digital Age.

Part of the magic of tinkering is that everyone does not do the same thing, that people can easily pick up tools and materials (digital or otherwise) and quickly do something that is personally engaging.

Hurray for Twitter for making it so easy to try out, so easy to decide if it’s right (or wrong) for you. Hurray for a world where you can twitter about lunch and twitter to save your country.

Are there parallels to learning?

In some ways, yes… especially for technology, making simple tools available means people (students and teachers) can try them out and find immediate uses. Or discard them quickly. They have a low barrier to entry. Twitter fits this bill nicely.

In some ways, no… education is about asking youth to find their passion and make meaning of the world, without making them hate it. Even if it takes effort to push them into it, even if it takes a caring, persistent adult to show a youth that that passion does indeed exist. Tools that offer a high ceiling, a potential to go further than you ever thought possible, to create, to creep into complexity, to explore a craft deeply, meet this need. That’s not Twitter, nor most of the Web 2.0 world.

Tools that offer both are indeed extremely rare and valuable.

Sylvia

Share/Save/Bookmark

New report from the EU on Games in Schools

Friday, June 19th, 2009

A new research report - How are Digital Games Used in Schools has just been released by a group called European Schoolnet, a consortium of 31 ministries of education in Europe. This study was sponsored by the Interactive Software Federation of Europe , representing companies in the interactive software industry.

How are Digital Games Used in Schools covers  the use of games in schools in Europe: video games, computer games, online games that run on consoles, computers, handhelds or mobile phones.

- Full report (180 page PDF) - English version
- Synthesis report (40 page PDF) - English version

The researchers interviewed over 500 teachers, 30 decision-makers, and included 6 case studies and a review of the scientific literature. They came to some interesting conclusions, both from a teaching and learning standpoint.

  • “The teachers who are involved in these practices leave nothing to improvisation in their pedagogical use of these games; on the contrary, they prepare them very carefully.”
  • “Experiments in the classroom use of games are bringing teachers together in a community of practice, and associating the whole educational community and parents around the pupils’ achievements.”
  • “Practices centred on games rehabilitate more traditional teaching tools in the eyes of the pupils.”

European Schoolnet also established a social network as part of this study for teachers interested in using digital games in the classroom.

From the conclusion - “The investigations that have been made show that electronic games favour a way of learning that is particularly in tune with the modes of learning now regarded as effective. The table below summarizes several major principles of learning that are now known and recognized. It relates them
to the characteristics of electronic games and the modes of use that they generate. The correspondences that
emerge argue in favour of a‘re-opening of the case’ [of using digital games in the classroom].”

Report table

- Full report (180 page PDF) - English version
- Synthesis report (40 page PDF) - English version

Sylvia

Share/Save/Bookmark

Last chance for free ebook from ASCD

Friday, May 1st, 2009

Update - this offer is now expired. You can still get the e-book for $9.95 (or $7.95 if you are an ASCD member.) Still a pretty good deal if you ask me!

May 6, 2009 is the last day to download a free ebook, Educating the Whole Child, from ASCD. After this, this 366 page e-book will only be available for a fee.

Do students really want to learn? Can schools and classrooms become joyful? Are there natural links between standard curriculum and what motivates students to learn? Explore these and other questions in this e-book collection of articles from Educational Leadership by renowned authors such as Carol Ann Tomlinson, Richard Sagor, Nel Noddings, Thomas R. Guskey, and Allison Zmuda.

Besides these fabulous and well-known authors, you will also get our article, Working with Tech-Savvy Kids, along with other articles by Working with Tech-Savvy Kids, along with other articles by Will Richardson, king of the edu-bloggers, and many more.

Don’t miss out on this free offer!

Educating the Whole Child ebook - free download link (valid April 15 - May 6, 2009)

Sylvia

Subscribe to the Generation YES Blog

Share/Save/Bookmark

Successful, sustainable strategies for technology integration and tech support in a tough economy

Wednesday, April 1st, 2009

This weekend I’ll be in San Diego as an invited speaker at the National School Board Association (NSBA) conference. I’m not sure I realized how relevant it would be when I proposed Successful, Sustainable Strategies for Technology Integration and Tech Support in a Tough Economy as my topic last year.

I’ll be focusing on 5 strategies that create strong local communities of practice around the use of technology. All of these strategies include students as part of the solution. They are:

  • Technology literacy for all - Creating an expectation that modern technology will be used for academics, schoolwork, communication, community outreach, and teaching. A key success factor is teaching students how to support their peers as mentors and leaders.
  • Student tech teams - The 21st century version of the old A/V club, this strategy expands the definition of tech support from fixing broken things to also include just-in-time support of teachers as they use new technology. This digital generation is ready, willing and able to help improve education, we just need to show them how.
  • Professional development 24/7 - The old idea that teachers would go off to one workshop or a conference and immediately start using technology has been proven wrong. Truly integrated technology use requires a bigger change than that, and it doesn’t happen overnight. Teachers require more support in their classrooms that they can count on when they need it. Students can help provide teachers with this constancy and supportive community.
  • Students as stakeholders - Whenever schools initiate new technology programs, there is typically a call for all stakeholders to be included. Parents, teachers, staff, board members, and members of the community are invited to participate — but rarely students. Even though students are 92% of the population at the school, and are 100% of the reason for wanting to improve education, their voice goes unheard. Students can bring passion and point-of-view to the planning and implementation of major technology initiatives. They can be allies and agents of change, rather than passive objects to be changed.
  • Students as resource developers - Students can help develop the resources every teacher and student needs to use technology successfully. These resources can be help guides, posters, instructional videos, school websites, or teacher home pages. Students of all types can use their talents to build customized resources for their own school. Artists, actors, and techies can contribute to this process.

Building a self-sufficient community of technology users means that whenever possible, you build home-grown expertise and local problem-solving capability. This is the high-tech equivalent of a victory garden, only with teachers and students all growing their own capabilities with each other’s help.

In this tough economy, no one can afford to ignore the potential students have to help adults solve the problems of technology integration and support. Students are there, they just need adults to teach them how to help, and then allow them to help.

And after all, aren’t these the 21st century skills everyone talks about? Like solving real problems, learning how to learn, collaboration, and communication? How real is the problem of technology integration, and how foolish of us to overlook students as part of the solution, especially when the reciprocal benefits to the students are so great.

Sylvia

PS - For a look at how these strategies can be applied in laptop schools, download my new whitepaper - Student Support of Laptop Programs. (16 page PDF)

Subscribe to the Generation YES Blog

Share/Save/Bookmark

Quote for the day

Monday, March 16th, 2009

“Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an accumulation of facts is no more science than a heap of stones is a house.” - Poincaré 1905

Share/Save/Bookmark

Off to Qatar

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

This week I’m off on a new adventure - I’m an invited speaker at the ICT Conference 2009: Exploring ICT in Education in Doha, Qatar. I’ve never worked in this part of the world and I’m looking forward to meeting new people from Qatar and other Middle Eastern countries. They’ve asked me to talk about games in education and of course, student voice and student involvement in technology integration to support education.

Qatar seems like a fascinating place, I’ve read up a bit about it (Wikpedia has a nice article) and I’m looking forward to learning more. The first thing I learned is that I didn’t even know how to pronounce it - I assumed it was “kah-TAR”, and it’s actually more like a cross between “gutter” and “cutter” although I’m sure that’s not exactly right either.

The country has a focus on education as their path to the future; these days looking beyond their oil revenues seems like a really smart policy.

Sylvia

Share/Save/Bookmark

The disconnect in science education

Monday, February 23rd, 2009

Every year, Project Tomorrow administers the annual SpeakUp survey of students, parents, teachers, and administrators. Every year, we hear from U.S. students that they are fascinated by technology, love learning, and want more. Results from the over 300,000 participants in the 2008 survey should be available soon.

While we wait, let’s look at some interesting data from the science questions from 2007.

In the U.S., STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) is a hot topic these days. Pundits bemoan the lack of basic science literacy, blame American students for apathy, and predict we will be crushed by global competition. But who ever asks students what they are interested in or how best they learn?

In looking at the report, Inspiring the Next Generation of Innovators: Students, Parents and Educators Speak Up about Science Education, you immediately see the glaring inconsistencies in how students learn, what fascinates and excites them, how teachers want to teach, and what’s actually happening in classrooms. What does it mean for the future when less than 40 percent of these students see learning science as important for making informed decisions in the future? How does that square with the same students reporting that they “…are open to learning science and pursuing STEM careers—intrigued by opportunities to participate in hands-on, group-oriented, “fun” experiences, as well as by opportunities to meet with professionals and use professional-level tools.”

It’s obvious that students are experiencing a disconnect. They are interested and intrigued by science — but not in school.

  • Students report that their especially fun or interesting learning experiences using science and math have been hands-on and group-oriented.
  • Students are interested in pursuing careers in STEM fields — when they know about them.
  • When asked about the essential features of their imagined ultimate science classroom, the leading answer for students in grades K-2 and in grades 9-12 was “teachers excited about science”. Students in grades 3-5 were more interested in “fun experiments” (69 percent). Other highly essential features for students in grades 3-12 were “real tools” (standard lab and technology-based tools) and being able to do “real research,” including online research on computers.

Imagine that — students want teachers who are inspired and inspiring, who bring the classroom to life with real world tools and examples. These teachers are out there, students want and need them, but apparently are getting them too rarely.

This disconnect is reflected in the teacher responses as well.

  • Just 25% of teachers say they’re using inquiry-based methods with their students; methods that both educators and researchers argue are essential for the development of scientific literacy.
  • Only 16 percent of teachers reported they are assigning projects that help students develop problem-solving skills.
  • Teachers report that 21st century tools and projects would help — but lack the time and funding to implement them, and feel constrained by mandated curriculum.

But the biggest disconnect is that most K-12 school administrators don’t see this problem. Here’s the percentage of each category that gave a passing grade to their school for preparing students for jobs of the future.

K-12 Administrators: 57%
Teachers: 47%
Parents: 47%
Students: 23%

This perception gap is a crucial indicator that we are not only failing our students in providing the relevant, inquiry-based, hands-on science education they hunger for, but that we are fooling ourselves about it. What’s worse?

Full report (PDF)

Sylvia

Share/Save/Bookmark

Technology Literacy and Sustained Tinkering Time

Friday, January 9th, 2009

Yesterday I was reading a handout by Dr. Stephen Krashen called 88 Generalizations about Free Voluntary Reading. It summarizes the research and benefits to literacy of Sustained Silent Reading (SSR), also called Free Voluntary Reading (FVR). You give kids books, and time to read them, and they read.

Dr. Krashen is an activist for giving students more access to books, more time to read, and less coercion to do so. His credentials are impressive: professor emeritus at USC, a linguist and expert on literacy, language acquisition and reading. He’s in the International Reading Association’s Reading Hall of Fame.

I have no trouble admitting that his articulate positions and research resonate with me.

It struck me as I looked at this list that it’s a lot like what I believe about children and computers: that student choice, plus time for unstructured access to lots of different computing experiences is crucial to developing literacy and fluency with computers. My vision includes a teacher or mentor modeling passion, collaboration, interest in the subject, and offering experiences that challenge students without coercion, tricks, or rankings. If I had to come up with a catchy acronym, I’d call it Sustained Tinkering Time (STT).

Picking through his generalizations about reading, it occurred to me that some of them are very applicable to students using computers, and some seemed not to translate too well at all.

Hallmarks of Free Voluntary Reading (FVR) (adapted by me from Krashen’s list)

  • Free access to lots of different kinds of books
  • Comic books and magazines are OK, hard and easy books fine, minimum censorship
  • The teacher reads too
  • No tests, book reports, logs, comprehension quizzes
  • Comfortable space to read
  • More often and short is better than long, but rare
  • For all kids, not a reward or remediation
  • Supplement with interesting experiences about reading - trips to library, discuss literature, conferences, etc. (not skill building)
  • Good readers tend to be narrow readers (they stick to one genre)
  • Look for “home run” books

So, looking at this list, there are some things that seem really relevant to the kind of computer fluency I would like all students to have. Wouldn’t it be great if students had:

  • Free access to lots of different kinds of books software and hardware
  • The teacher reads works on computer projects too
  • No tests, book reports, logs, comprehension quizzes
  • Comfortable space to read work on computer projects
  • and that this was for all kids, not a reward or remediation?

I’ve skipped over some hard questions…
But not everything seems to perfectly translate. In FVR, the students are allowed to read pretty much anything (within reason). But for technology, I certainly would hope that aimless surfing or watching random YouTube videos isn’t what happens.

Is this being hypocritical? Is this just a way for me to pass judgement on applications that I like and think are “important” vs. ones I deem trivial and a waste of time? If I say, “no games” - am I just doing the same thing as a teacher demanding that kids only read “good” books for SSR, and thereby undermining the process?

I know in my head what I’d like to see - mindful interaction with the computer, making good things, focused collaboration, working on projects. Something that rises above drill and practice, clicking on stuff, or just watching. But what about chatting? Looking at email? What about playing “good” games? If you want technology literacy, does it matter if one student becomes fluent in making Wordles and another learns to program?

What’s the verb?
What is it that the student is doing that’s equivalent to reading? If you show language literacy by reading and writing, you show technology literacy by … what? Computing? Touching a mouse? Technologizing?

There’s something I’m trying to capture here that goes beyond the mere physical presence of a child sitting in front of a digital device. I really think this elusive concept is at the heart of what many have been struggling with as we all try to define “technology literacy.” Especially if we try to make the definition more than a checklist of skills.

You can smell collaboration in the air (especially in middle school)
There are other pieces of Sustained Silent Reading that really don’t work for technology, like the “silent” part. Sustained Silent Computing sounds terrifying. When I think about the kind of collaborative technology experience I’d hope to see, the kind I’ve seen in too few classrooms, it’s anything but silent. It’s purposeful, joyful noise, and you can tell the difference. But how do you articulate that?

It’s simply not good enough to say, “I know it when I see it.” But I’m not sure what to call it without tying myself up in semantic knots.

Pinning these experiences down with precise language deadens them like a pithed frog. (I was going to say a pinned butterfly, but when you can use pithed frog in a sentence, I believe it’s mandatory.)

What do you believe about learning?
And even if we got the words right, would it actually result in improved technology literacy? Would the lack of coercion raise the general level of technology literacy or lower it? In SSR, if one student is reading a comic book and another a chapter book, do they influence each other?

And is that part of the teacher’s job - to offer other activities that generate interest in more complex work? To model curiosity and trying new things? To facilitate collaboration and challenge students?

Without technology literacy skill tests, lessons on tools, and assigned projects, will students take more risks and try more complex things? Or will they do the least amount possible? I think this boils down to what you believe about learning - is it natural or does it have to be coerced.

Depth, not breadth
If you’ve stuck with me this long, do you see the technology corollaries to:

  • Good readers tend to be narrow readers (they stick to one genre) - is this about depth? Letting kids explore one application or theme deeply rather than the usual if-it’s-tuesday-it-must-be-spreadsheets overview of office products?
  • Look for “home run” books - is this about helping kids find the thing they really like to do? If a kid LOVES Comic Life, do you let them use it exclusively? Does the positive experience then open the door for that student to attempt other things? Or does it narrow the range of what that student will ever figure out how to do?

Yes, you…
So I’m throwing this out there to you, the dozens of folks who read this blog. Does looking at FVR help with defining technology literacy?

What would Sustained Tinkering Time look like to you?

So many questions…

Sylvia

Subscribe to the Generation YES Blog

Share/Save/Bookmark

Games that encourage student teamwork and collaboration

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

Freechild Article | “Why Play Games…” By Adam Fletcher.

Here’s another fabulous article and set of resources from Adam Fletcher of The Freechild Project. The article is about playing games with students and youth groups to encourage teamwork, model constructive, collaborative behavior, and develop a shared sense of mission.

Games can be a catalyst that brings both cohesion and energy to any group, and a welcome addition to a teacher’s “bag of tricks”. Two categories of games are especially helpful in setting a tone of collaboration and teamwork for students.

Cooperative games emphasize participation, challenge, and fun, rather than sorting out winners and losers. These kinds of games teach teamwork, empathy, and trust.

Initiative games have players attack a problem and solve it. They teach leadership, problem solving, and collaboration.

“Why Play Games…” is more than just a list of games. It includes practical information about how to choose them, how to introduce them, how to create reflective activities that further magnify the impact of the game itself, and tons of additional resources.

Teachers who lead student tech clubs know that the success of the group depends on much more than tech skills. Teamwork and a sense of mission result in the “we” being more than the “me” and can take a student tech team to the next level.

This isn’t just for student clubs either. If you want students to unlearn the competitive habits that have been drilled into them and work cooperatively, these games will work in classroom situations too. Collaboration and communication may be “21st century skills” but having students play them out in game situations is a timeless idea.

Give this short article a read and I guarantee you will learn one new thing today! “Why Play Games…” By Adam Fletcher

Selected additional resources (there’s a lot more if you click on the article link):

  • Brand-new (and free) guide, So, You Wanna Be A Playa? The Freechild Project Guide to Cooperative Games for Social Change by A. Fletcher with K. Kunst. “This insightful new guide will help community workers, teachers, activists, and all kinds of people find fun, engaging, and powerful activities that promote teamwork, communication, and social justice.Click here for a free download.

Have fun!

Sylvia

Share/Save/Bookmark