The Future of American Education?

I recently had the opportunity to read Yong Zhao’s Catching Up or Leading the Way.  The book was an interesting look at our past, current, and future educational system in relation to that of our countries, in particular, China’s.  The premise of the book is that though the American system has its share of challenges, it isn’t in quite the hot water that we believe it to be.  The premise of the book is interesting, and parts of the book itself are intriguing.  In this simple short review, I want to focus on a few items, and then, if you like, you can read it yourself and let me know what you think.

Zhao does an excellent job of condensing American education into a few short pages and he focuses on the many policies and initiatives that have brought us to where we are.  This isn’t a history lesson by any means, but he approaches our educational growth from a “policy of fear” in a very intriguing way.  The first few chapters were quite informative.  I did question a few items Zhao mentioned early on.  First, he states that the American system is a true example of contest mobility because students are not sorted early on into different tracks.  As a classroom teacher from 2001 – 2011, I couldn’t disagree more.  Tracking in some sense started in our school as early as the sixth grade, and in many districts in my region, math and science are tracked as early as seventh and eighth grade.  That’s early in my book.  In addition, while this book was written in 2009, I wonder whether the claim about there still being a lot of support put behind the ideal of an “American Dream” exists.  How has the national economic crisis and media impacted this?  I would be curious to find out if most students (and most Americans) still believe the “American Dream” is attainable for everyone.  I would hope so, but I’m seriously left wondering.

Zhao’s chapter on China is wonderful.  It gives a great sense of why China is attempting to “Americanize” its educational system, and what led the Chinese down that path.  He uses this as a great juxtaposition to ask, “Why then is America going the other way?”  It was very well done.

I was less enthused by the following chapters and felt the book took a terrible turn.  I found it challenging to read and very repetitive.  In fact, it began to sound a lot like every other globalization book on the market.  I’m curious why Zhao took this route as I was very pumped up by the first few chapters only to be disappointed by the next few.  Zhao talks too much about the virtual versus real worlds, and the impact (or not so much) of job loss and overseas employment.  His claims are worth mentioning, but the three or four chapters devoted to it weigh the book, and its message, down tremendously.  In fact, by the time Zhao attempts to tie everything together, I was so tired of reading about globalization, that I couldn’t bring myself back to the true point of the book, where America is and whether we’re heading in the right direction.  It was a shame.  There are some intriguing aspects to these chapters, though.  For instance, his segment on core assumptions of globalization and keys to “globalization education” are great discussion points for contemplating how schools can truly engage the next generation and beyond.  In addition, I really found his proposed indicators of “input-oriented accountability” (a more “big picture” approach to measuring school quality) exciting.  I also gave a thumbs-up to his emphasis on personalized learning and the simple fact that today it pays for education to be “global.”  No one can argue with that.

Sadly, despite all these intriguing ideas, the book seemed to become an advertisement for the services of Michigan State University (Zhao’s place of employment) towards the end.  While I would hope that Zhao did not mean it to be this way and was just citing information he was professionally close to, as a skeptic and good “bias-finder,” it really seemed to be a conflict of interest.  I was also shocked with the research he cited showing no difference in effectiveness between online and face-to-face instruction.  Anyone research or study these areas that can confirm?

All-in-all, while I’m glad I finally got the chance to read this book, I’m disappointed that I didn’t enjoy more of it.  With a premise that solid, the book should have been much better.

As always, let me know what you think.

Update on the Next Generation Science Standards

On Friday I had the opportunity to attend the Celebration of Teaching and Learning (CTL)  in New York City.  It was a wonderful conference.  I attended a workshop put together by Brookhaven Laboratory first thing in the morning and then listened to the plenary right after (Sal Khan ended up being a much more dynamic and humorous speaker than I thought he would be).  In the afternoon, I heard the sobering data from the MetLife survey that teacher satisfaction has dropped fifteen percent to forty-four percent in the last two years.  With all that is going on in education today, that is frightening, but not entirely surprising.

The most intriguing session for me, however, was getting an update on the development of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).  I've been following the process as closely as possible since the release of the NRC's Framework in July, and this was a great opportunity to hear what was cooking behind the scenes at Achieve.  The session was run by Stephen Pruitt (of Achieve fame), Heidi Schweingruber (force behind the Framework), and Peter McLaren (of the CSSS).

Dr. Schweingruber began the presentation with a description of the Framework.  She did a nice job of bringing all those who have yet to read the Framework, or to read NSTA's "Reader's Guide," up to speed.  

 

I apologize in advance for the terrible images.  The Hilton was stingy with the wifi ($25 bucks, come on now), so all my tweeting and pics came from my Droid.  The image above shows a simple correlation between the Common Core standards and NGSS.  This was very cool to see, but wait, it gets better.

Before turning over the presentation to Dr. Pruitt, Dr. Schweingruber shared the determinants for disciplinary Core Idea selection.  What separates out the included from those not making the cut?
According to this list, an idea would only be listed as a core idea if:

•  It had broad importance across disciplines or was a key idea in one discipline 
• It provides a key tool for investigation or problem solving
• It directly relates to the life experiences of students or important happenings in society
• It is teachable and "learnable" over multiple grades

She noted that while this "rubric" was tough to use at times, it did help in making the Framework more about depth than breadth.

Dr. Pruitt then shared how Achieve has used the Framework to begin drafting standards.  While "shifts" is becoming a tremendous educational buzzword (add that to your education bingo card), Dr. Pruitt shared the shifts in the NGSS (as of now).  While the pic above is horrible, the shifts include looking at standards as performance expectations, correlating the NGSS with the Common Core State Standards, and integrating science and engineering.

What was really exciting to see was a sample standard!  Dr. Pruitt made clear that this was only a sample, and may not look anything like the draft or final versions.  Still, it presented some interesting food for thought.  Here's the lowdown:

• Performance Expectations will be written in such a way that each of the three Framework pillars are incorporated (Practices, Cross-cutting Concepts, and Core Ideas).  An example could be: Students will analyze data (Practice) to determine that kinetic energy is proportional (Cross-cutting Concept) to the mass of a moving object and that it grows with the squaring of velocity (Core Idea).  
• Colors will be used in the standard document to help readers see how the three pillars are incorporated.
• Correlations to Common Core State Standards will be included below performance expectations to provide for a seamless method for tying relevant standards together (interdisciplinary party, anyone?)

Other intriguing items of note?  The first public draft should be out by April 30th (a month later than originally anticipated), and in this first public draft, performance expectations will be broken down by individual grades for K-5, and then in bands for 6-8, and 9-12.  Achieve is looking to design pathways that states could use to allow for standards to be met in either a grade-by-grade or band format.  In this way, regardless of the states needs, they would be able to integrate the standards into their programs.  Personally, I'm more a fan of having four distinct bands (K-2, 3-5, 6-8. and 9-12) as I think it affords teachers and curriculum designers with more flexibility.  But, I won't knock either option until I've tried it.  I'm anxiously awaiting the chance to provide some feedback!

Mr. McLaren wrapped up the presentation by sharing ways that states are getting involved in the standards process, and just as importantly, how the average Joe and Jane can get involved.  One item he mentioned is that even though the talk has been about the twenty-six "lead states" (of which New York is one), all fifty states and D.C. are putting forth plans for standard release.  He shared his card with all attendees and even sought me out after the presentation to make sure I had all my questions answered.  All three were excellent presenters and great to briefly chat with after the presentation was over.  

This is the first time I've had the opportunity to attend the CTL, and have to say that the four sessions I was able to attend were quite intriguing.  I even had the chance to pose with good ol' Snoopy (note that I in no way endorse MetLife :) ).  

 

Geeking Out

I think it is healthy for everyone to "geek out" every once in a while.  You know what I mean.  To simply take some time to explore or experience something that you find very interesting, even if others might disagree.  For me, that is reading/watching/experiencing science fiction and comics.  I've been a collector of Amazing Spider-Man comics for many years, and I've attended my share of Comic Cons (never in costume, however, that's not my style).  I also really enjoy science fiction films and books, and just last year I started collecting Star Wars Galaxy cards (nerd alert).  I haven't collected cards of any kind since I was much, much, younger, but being a Star Wars fan, I was intrigued by the excellent art depicted on the cards.  I consider myself a pretty "skilled" person, but art has never been one of those skills.  So, I'm amazed at what these amazing artists can do with pen, pencil, marker, and paint.  Their love for what they do is evident in their artistry, and I hope that my love for education and science is just as visible in what I do on a daily basis.

A few nights ago I had the opportunity to geek out with a few packs of Star Wars Galaxy cards.  It was an incredibly relaxing and enjoyable experience.  While we all might geek out in different ways, we all need to spend time doing the things we truly love (as nerdy or geeky as they might be) to recharge our batteries, exercise our minds, and feed our souls.  Whether we want to admit it or not, we all need to embrace our inner geek.

If you're interested in seeing the results of my latest geek session, check out the Star Wars Galaxy video review and pack break I put together: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zBYIlpC65o

It's All About the Training. . .

As a classroom teacher up until a few months ago, I was always split on my opinion of professional development.  I had loved some teacher training sessions, and endured others while gritting my teeth and watching the clock travel ever so slowly.  So, it was with somewhat bated breath that I ran my first training session this past Monday. 

One of the large parts of what I do in my new job is assisting other teachers with the use of our K-6 inquiry-based science program, SCIENCE 21.  I almost always attend the trainings, but never run them (we have consultants who have taught the curriculum or helped develop it in the past).  So, even when I attend as “director,” I’m truly attending as “learner.”  This training was different, however.  As the Regional Science Coordinator here, I, along with another colleague was training a group of twenty teachers on the administration and “grading” of New York State’s Elementary-Level Science Test (ELST).

The ELST requires a decent amount of setup so we began by unpacking a number of boxes filled with equipment.  I had done this before at the 8^th grade level, but this was my first time setting up the 4^th grade test. 

This is an example of a PD session that folks attend because they have to, not because they want to.  That can be a major issue for presenters at these types of sessions as adults can be even harder to engage than children.  In fact, most participants don’t arrive excited, or particularly engaged.  So it falls on the presenters to work uphill from the start.  Happily, my co-presenter and I made a great team.  His experience in leading this type of training and my science content knowledge and recent classroom experience meshed quite well, and I was pleased to see the positive feedback we received on our evaluation forms.  Discussion about grading methods was good, and teachers enjoyed taking the test and rating various student responses.

This session taught me quite a bit.  First, the years I have under my belt as a middle school educator have prepared me quite well to present in any given situation.  It should be a requirement that anyone entering a “public-speaking” profession spend a year or two teaching first (an “unlikely-to-occur requirement,” but an important one, nonetheless).  Second, just like with students, an interesting topic can be made dull and a “requirement” made intriguing simply by the way it is presented.  Finally, this type of work will need to be a part of my position moving forward.  As I’ve been out of the classroom for a few months, I’ve realized how much I miss teaching.  I love my position and with some training/teaching built in, believe that I’ll be as professionally fulfilled as I can imagine.  Building more training into my schedule should be something I can arrange quite effectively once I get a few more months under my belt.

I’m happy to report that my transition from teaching young adults to teaching “less young” adults was quite positive and I’m excited to do even more of this work in the future.  After one session, I’m already starting to see a number of similarities and differences between teaching these varied age groups.  I’m excited to report more on this as I gain more experience working with adults.

Setting the Audio

One of the goals of SCIENCE 21 (www.pnwboces.org/science21), the elementary science program I direct, is to provide teachers with a plethora of resources to utilize with their students.  Recently, a number of teachers have inquired about creating audiobook versions of the “readers” we have previously created (see below for an example).

We’ve already made the readers available online by saving the pages as Publisher files, and then converting them to .pdf files (here’s one as an example: http://pnwboces.org/science21/Readers/GKU3Newts.pdf).  In this way, teachers can use the hard copy versions of our readers as group read-alouds and have the .pdf files up on interactive whiteboards or separate computer terminals for students to read together in groups and/or explore individually.

When I was asked to put together an audiobook, I wanted to make sure that I was able to utilize the files we had already created and would be able to format the audiobooks in such a way that every classroom could view and listen to them. 

So, I decided to design .ppt files with built in audio on each slide.  The creation was simple but time-consuming.  I migrated the images and text from Publisher, resized them to fit the slightly modified .ppt slide area and then began the process of generating audio (see below for a screenshot of one of the .ppt slides).

We have a recording studio on campus and I utilized Adobe Audition (a very user-friendly product, by the way) in the studio to record me reading each of the pages.  I created two versions, a standard one where I simply read the pages, and an extended version where I supplied a number of critical thinking questions as well.  I saved the files as .mp3 extensions to reduce the file size, and then embedded them in the .ppt.  To make the audiobook easier to use, I set the audio to play on each slide shift, and moved the audio “button” out of the visible field of the slide, so it would be less likely to be deleted or moved. 

We then placed both versions up on the web for teachers to review.  We also created a short survey about the books to get a sense of whether teachers felt they were more likely to use the standard or extended versions.  So far, feedback has been extremely positive and I’m excited to be able to offer additional curricular resources to our users!

Want to check out the audiobooks for yourself?  Visit http://pnwboces.org/science21/Teacher_Resources.html and then click on “SCIENCE 21 Readers and Audiobooks.”  Listen to the two samples provided for the “What’s in the Box?” book, and let me know what you think!

Learning (and "Unlearning") Every Day

My daughter is a little over a year and a half and she's a spitfire.  Every day she amazes me and my wife with what comes out of her mouth, and what actions she takes.  As an educator and scientist at heart, I'm always amazed at what she learns, and what she doesn't.

Take colors, for instance.  My daughter is at a stage where she loves picking up objects and telling me what color they are.  She readily identifies yellow, orange, blue, red, pink, etc.  However, she refuses to call orange, "orange."  Why?  Not a clue.

Or consider counting.  We count together up to ten, but she never says eight.  In fact, every number beyond seven is "nine."  What allows a person to build conceptual understanding but prevents them from tearing down "blockages?"  I find it all so interesting.

So interesting, in fact, that I ran a quick test with my daughter this week (the armchair scientist's work is never done).  As we were driving home from my daughter's daycare on Thursday, I started counting off by odd numbers, interested to see if my daughter would insert the evens.  After a few practice rounds, she did (of course leaving out eight).  The speed that she picked this up was amazing to me.  What was even more amazing is that over the last three days, anytime we ask her to count, she now only counts in even numbers.  In effect, by trying to teach her a new idea, I somehow made her "unlearn" the other numbers she seemed to know!

The connection to education (whether working with pre-K'ers or high school students) is that we all inherently have concepts and ideas that come to us very easily, and misconceptions that can arise at the drop of a hat.  As educators (and certainly parenting is all about education) it is our job to identify what comes easy (nothing provides challenge for those who "get it" better than encouraging them to assist others) and what just seems to be "blocked."  We also must do our best to not create gaps in understanding by trying to teach new ideas that others might not be ready for or that might confuse cognition.  What do we do to help when those obstacles seem to just pop up?  Well, that seems to depend quite a bit on age.  Based on my experience, I've provided a few thoughts below.

For the really, really, young, repetition and practice can often provide the push to overcome any misconception.  Since conceptual understanding of all things is occurring at a breakneck pace, ideas are constantly being relearned.  It's like continuing to add a new coat of paint.  Eventually, it looks just right.

For elementary level students, unpacking challenging ideas in truly concrete ways is helpful.  Small, discrete, ideas provided with ample time to explore in a variety of learning modalities is key.  So is avoiding creating misconceptions yourself as ideas "set" at this age often have a way of "sticking."  Explaining that plants conduct photosynthesis and animals conduct cellular respiration to a third grader "glues" the idea that plants do not conduct cellular respiration into their scientific consciousness.  This erroneous idea, like others, becomes much tougher to remove as students get older.

For secondary and post-secondary learners, the idea of metacognition is paramount.  Once students can truly think about their thinking, they can begin to explore why certain concepts challenge them, and what they, in fact, can do about it.  The self-motivated learner is what we hope all our students (and even ourselves) will become.

Finally, for "adults" collaborative opportunities keep learning fresh, and help us to see ideas from other perspectives.  Since we often get further set in our ways as we age, nothing works better to loosen these restrictions than engaging in evidence-based discussion with others.

The key, of course, is to always keep learning (and to strive to "unlearn" that which is not "correct").  We see it in the very young, and this trait of "learning everyday" should be something everyone sets on their daily "To Do" list.  While certainly a lofty goal, it is one that can be reached and never exhausted at the same time.

By Any Given Standard

It’s tough to engage in conversation about education without bringing up “standards.”  Standards documents mean different things to different people in different locations, and the recent move to put more emphasis on national benchmarks is one that will help to level the playing field in a number of content areas.  But, at least according to standards writers, not all content areas are created equal.

Take the recent creation of the Common Core State Standards.  This tremendous initiative brought forth English Language Arts and Mathematics standards that have been adopted by close to our entire nation.  Students, teachers, and community members now have common documents to utilize to map student progress.  While some states may utilize these documents in slightly different ways, the message is clear: a third grade in one part of the country should be able to exhibit the same skills as a third grader somewhere else. 

Science educators, being the analysts that we are, realized that there would be no better time to push for new national science standards than when education professionals were seeing the benefits (and challenges) of the Common Core State Standards.  So, over the course of the last year, new science standards have begun to take shape.  Last July a framework for standards creation was released, and standards are currently being penned.  While only twenty or so states have signed on so far, this initiative has the potential to be “game changing.”  While it is too early to speculate on what the actual standards will “say” (the first public draft should be released sometime this winter. . .see the “current” timeline below) the new national science standards will contain three “main” parts:

• Core Ideas: The content piece, but with fewer main ideas in more detail (depth over breadth)
•  Scientific and Engineering Practices: A set of skills that when combined with the core ideas will allow teachers and curriculum designers to put together excellent performance expectations.  And yes, you read correctly, Engineering will be a part of these new standards, occupying a scientific pillar alongside Life, Physical, and Earth and Space Science (engineers rejoice)!
• Crosscutting Concepts: In an effort to help users further see the benefit of interdisciplinary exploration, the standards will focus on themes that can help educators “connect the dots” from one discipline to another.

Sounds good, right?  Of course, the proof will be in the pudding.  The last set of national science standards was released in 1996, and since then, much, both educationally and scientifically, has changed.  I, for one, am excited to see what transpires.

(This timeline shows what current standard writers assume will happen between this past summer and next fall.    Image property of Achieve, Inc. and taken from http://www.nextgenscience.org/.)

On a less positive note, that seems to be all that is in the works for national standards development (or at least that is currently known to the public).  Social Studies?  Art?  Music?  Health?  Are they any less worthy?  Not even close.  Of course, with the continued push for, and emphasis on, strict Mathematics and English Language Arts testing, it isn’t really a surprise that these content areas are the “focus.”  Still, in all fairness, if we expect our students to have a well-rounded education, then it only makes sense for us to devote just as much time to those content areas that haven’t yet had a strong “push.”

Finally, since a portion of the work I do  involves using my content and policy knowledge to keep districts up-to-date with science education happenings, I've had the opportunity to share a number of presentations on this topic with curriculum leaders in my region.  If you're interested, let me know and I'll be happy to share.