Time For Change

A Response/reaction to Mr. Krause's Experiment

2009-09-08T09:30:00.001-07:00

No, Anne and Karl aren't the only ones reading your posts at AHS. And, maybe surprisingly, you aren't the only one trying this experiment at AHS. I'm going to "Cliff Note" my experiences here, but would love to talk more with you about how it is going. Some of this is for you and some is for me as this seemed like a good place to write out thoughts.
For the last 8 years in Law, an elective 2 day a week course that examines criminal law in Colorado, I have set up the course almost exactly as you seem to have done. The only "real" grade has been the cumulative project that asks students to utilize the processes, procedures, and examples provided through class and apply them to their experiences with law. For some, those experiences are first hand. For most, they come through the experience requirement (insisted on by students about a decade ago) that requires that each student do at least one of the following: (1) act as an attorney in our Mock Trial where they spend eight weeks working with local defense attorneys and prosecutors as they prepare for a trial held before Judge Gerald Rafferty in his District 18, courtroom, (2) go on a ride-along for a night with Arapahoe County Sheriffs, or (3) spend a day at a criminal court sitting in on trials and hearings. Obviously, the first option requires the most time, but it is the one most want to do. Many students do all three. The project then asks them to utilize their experiences to make conclusions regarding our system in Colorado from the perspectives of citizens, taxpayers, teens, jurors, participants in the system, potential victims, etc. Along the way, there are a few other “point moments” so that there is something to be seen by parents and an eligibility quest. But as stated in the course expectations, numerous discussions with students, and at Back to School night and conferences, all we do is geared toward one project of choosing a path and showing what you have learned. Rarely do I have a student who chooses to not do one of the experiences (which counts for 10% of the grade, thus, not doing one is a choice to get a B). Rarely do I have students not step up to the plate with a meaningful project. Rarely do I have anything but As. These aren’t gifts in the end as the students tend to see the positive nature of this challenge. Given that you have juniors, it makes sense that none of your students have yet to have seen this experience and I cannot wait to have students next year that have already experienced your class.

A few years ago, I decided to take my challenge to the A.P. Government course. Unfortunately, my master plan fell on its face in A.P. Government. Or maybe it was just “that” year. Or maybe it was because of some other realities. In my mind, A.P. (at least government) is an old school program that, at its heart, only requires students to regurgitate the info they have explored. At best, they ask for some analysis. In an attempt to do more, create relevance, and find ways to apply what we learned, I had grandiose plans of a class that would see the tests as a means, not an end. They would see learning for learning. And in the end, the AP results would follow. After a decade of A.P. averages ranging from 3.6 to 4.3 and scores that rarely if ever fell below a 3, I felt confident that I could still do the “easy” work getting them ready to regurgitate while they interacted with the political world. The grade was more or less guaranteed as an A due to a reliance on test corrections to relearn material, essay corrections to work on writing, and the “relevance” project that all but a few did very well on. But test results plummeted to an average that was unacceptable and twice as many 1s and 2s in one year than I had seen in a decade. So back to the drawing board with the help of the class that, in my mind, understood politics and issues, but could not do the detail work of A.P. government.

Things like readings quizzes were suggested to get them to read more and better. They suggested note-taking strategy sessions and then point-based tests of how ell they take notes in and out of class. They suggested that laptops ONLY be used with specific focus and not for regular note-taking in class due to THEIR inability to focus on details while they multi-tasked (even when the multi-tasking was positive!). They suggested that the relevance project go away because, for some, it was so good that it took all of their limited time and focus.

Some suggested to me that the real reason for the failure in government was that I had expanded my classes from 24 in one section to 170 in five sections. And while that does mean a wide range of abilities and experiences and probably a smaller percentage of “government geeks” in the course, I refuse to believe that these students couldn’t continue to perform as prior classes had. I had always had non-traditional honors students (ie. students that hadn’t come through our honors/AP classes) in the class and they had done well. Based on the positive changes (tests results bounced back to where I would hope them to be – although we’ll continue to push for better) last year, I have another conclusion. A.P. Government wasn’t the place for my experiment. Not yet. I still believe in limiting the focus on the grade and still do some game-playing with it to help them see it as a means and not an end. Yet the semester grade still occurs half way through a full year course that has a true cumulative test. So for students and parents, that semester grade is more than a means. And they overwhelmingly told me that I had to make it so that the A was not a given in order to push them harder.

I hope your experiment works. I hope it catches fire. Maybe with more of a culture developed around that type of challenge, I will be able to revisit it later. But for now, those well-publicized test results leave me doing it a little bit at a time.

Good Luck.

I've been thinking...about 21C

2008-03-13T08:02:00.000-07:00

I’ve been thinking a lot about 21C. I’ve looked back on a number of great conversations, some cool new tools that were learned, some incredible teachers that I’ve watched and listened to, a couple of great opportunities to discuss the potential for education with peers outside of AHS, and the application of much of this into my classroom. And, for the most part, I look back on a positive three years. With everything good comes struggle and frustration. Otherwise, how would we ever know what was really good?

After Friday’s 21C conversation and some follow-ups with a number of people, I have found myself with lots to say…so I returned to the blog. Before I address the issues and concerns I have, I suppose that I should start with the belief that I am a natural optimist, usually able to find my glass at least half full (of what, others can debate). I try to find the positive in situations that sometimes aren’t. Even if the whole is not positive, I try to fond the pieces that are.

Many people I admire and respect (and some others I know little about) are choosing to not continue with 21C for a variety of reasons. As I listen to their reasons for doing so, I find some things I with agree, some that I understand, and some that I personally have a little trouble with. What I do know is that their reasons are real. It is what they feel, believe, and think. Failure to acknowledge the value of those thoughts might minimize their decisions in a simple manner, but will lead to far greater trouble down the road.

So what have I heard?

People are tired and/or worn out. Why? For one, many of those who are part of 21 C are involved in many things. Many are leaders in their PLC. Many are coaches and sponsors of numerous activities. Many are parents. Many are leaders of other groups at school or in life. Some even have a social life AND work out. Our plates are full. And many are prioritizing so that they can be better in fewer commitments. But not all. Many of those people will still implement ideas and tactics in their rooms. Many will continue to have conversations that reflect the philosophies and tactics they liked from 21C as they influence their PLCs, curriculum revisions, etc. Maybe those avenues are actually an appropriate next era for 21C.
People are struggling with the 3 hour meeting commitment that has asked them to leave their classes on a somewhat regular basis and sometimes give up a free day. Agreed. Most of us don’t like leaving our classes (which is not necessarily the norm across education if you have friends in many other places). And most of us could probably list the places we wanted to be rather than back at school last Friday after conferences. But few of us were willing to commit to ongoing sessions that met after school either. And few of us have common off-hours. So what were the options that gave the time that many beg for? One of the loudest issues I hear as a negotiator for LEA is “We need time to do things well.” 21C people were some of the few people in this – or any – district that were given time to become better. It was my hope that we would not create a format of 3 hour meetings next year. It seemed as if our conversation ended up proposing 3 hour meetings with 2/3 devoted to an area of interest (a positive move) and 1/3 devoted to whole group or something along those lines. I had hoped to do something with a little more flexibility for individuals to create “projects” around those areas that might allow the 2/3 part to happen at different times, depending on the group they are committing to. I still think there is some value in large group time also. Do I fully understand what this would look like for 30-45 people? No. That would have taken more work. But for some, it might have been a preferred option that would free them up to the larger commitment.
People felt that if they were going to miss 3 hours of class, then they needed to leave the 3 hours with “take-aways.” And many felt that there were fewer take-aways this year. Why? Mission-Vision-and-Goals, oh my. I try to see both sides on this one. On one hand, I, too, was completely burned out by the conversations surrounding the DuFour book. To have them in one group is tolerable and usually useful. To have them in multiple groups, often in the same week, became tedious. On the other, 21C needed, in some way, to develop the ideas. Some have said, “Why didn’t we do that in year 1?” Good point, but it was stated very clearly during Year 1 and even into Year 2 that the mission was not yet clear, that the groups would need to develop their mission, vision, and goals rather than just blindly follow Karl or CIT. We had some ideas, but really didn’t know what direction things would go. Year 3 was probably the right time. It was poor timing given PLC work. It probably took too many days. But it produced some good discussions and work. And it did finally put words to what, I think, most felt we had become and where we might go.
People seemed to suggest that this year lacked the personal relevance – especially as compared with Year 1. I don’t disagree. Almost everyday during our first year, I felt connected to the topics at hand. I felt the conversations could be directly applied to what I was trying to do. Often, the conversations put words and titles to things I felt I had been trying for awhile. They gave me permission to continue to try things, usually with support from people who study methods. I get frustrated some with this complaint as there have been attempts for two years to try and place some of this responsibility on the whole group (at least for Cohort 1). Yes, people did take on responsibilities of presenting topics or ideas. But rarely did Cohort 1 members demand or request conversations, topics, or tools. Rather than say “this would be valuable to me…can we do it?” it seemed to be easier to let Karl or CIT make the plan. A couple people have said that they tried, but felt shot down when they made suggestions, therefore they stopped. I hope that I never gave anybody that impression if I responded to their ideas. I might not always agree or want the same things, but I hope that I valued their suggestion. I do think that the whole group deserves to share the blame if the year lacked relevance.
Our timing of the conversation was bad. Not just because it came the morning after conferences. More because we are in that time of year that I’ve been alluding to in my classes. The school year is like a marathon. Some start fast, some don’t. Some end fast, some don’t. Some compete throughout the race, others choose their moments. Some fail to even start. But all who start tend to hit a wall. While my knees don’t allow me to train long enough to try, I’ve heard that all marathoners will hit a wall (mile 18 or so?). We had this meeting at a time of year where we (like our students) have hit that wall. Some let the pain win and stop or struggle to the end just begging to finish. Others fight through it and finish strong. Many of us are in a fairly negative mindset anyway and spring break can’t happen soon enough. Would discussions and choices be different at some other time?
Some have said that they simply want a year to step back, think about what they learned, and try stuff in their rooms. Good. But I do wonder how much easier that can be with a group to help you fight through ideas, figure out the technology, understand the problems, and offer alternatives. Multiple heads tend to outthink the one. What if this intent was honored in the set up we create next year? Unless people intend to completely shift away from 21C ideas in their classrooms, isn’t there some way to get people the opportunities for collaboration that allow this individual need to be honored while maintaining the integrity of the whole?
I saved this one for late in the post as this is the one that I’ve had to rethink and am wary of interpretation. But… Some people have expressed the sentiment that 21C has become elitist and arrogant. This seems to be based on the perception that 21C is moving ahead while others are going to be left behind and that, at times, there might be less tolerance for those not willing to move into the 21 century. Some will say that it seems like we are discounting the very good work of those who came before and are insinuating that they were no good. On one level, I find it hard to not conclude that those who fail to change with the times in any arena get left behind and no matter how hard individuals might fight to stop change, change happens. And, therefore, any of us who are still teaching owe it to our students to change with the times. CSAP might not require that our students move into the 21st Century, but life will. Old skill sets that most of us mastered as students and teachers are not the same skill sets needed today. A focus on information (which is quickly becoming trivia) is being replaced with a focus on skill. Methods that were effective for me as a student at Heritage in 1985 reach an increasingly smaller proportion of students. Some say it is the student to blame? In my mind, that only attempts to excuse us from accepting the responsibilities we have as teachers. And in my mind, this discussion does not lead to the conclusion that those methods, tactics, teachers were bad. They were right for the time. Legends in this building were legends because they were the top teachers in the eras they taught. My hunch is that many of the teachers that weren’t legends (or were legends for negative reasons) were probably still teaching to the era that proceeded the one they were teaching in. This is no different from other professions. Would great presidents of other eras be the right candidates today? Would the talents of athletes from past eras translate equally as well into the current game they played? Would an individual like Martin Luther King be as effective if the “perils of CSAP” was his focus? I hope that people interpret this as valuing the teachers of the past. I bet that many of those legends would have relished the opportunity to lead into the next era. My Dad was one of those, but he will be the first to tell you that he would have to be very different today and because of how much work that takes, he is happy to leave it to the next group. Too bad we age and seem to always get replaced by younger people with new ideas. New ideas might be better. And sometimes they aren’t. But new ideas are always needed in order to keep up with change.

This post is probably longer than all of my posts this year combined – maybe even over three years. Many have probably stopped checking to see what I think. I am fully committed to the ideas and goals of 21 C. But I also recognize the very real problems people have with continuing. I hope that those that leave carry some of the ideas forward. I hope they continue to examine whether what they do for students is as good as it can be. I hope their sentiments do not stop new people from jumping in. Most seem to speak of the value of the first year and the challenges that get presented. I hope those that leave will share the value with potential joiners and not just complain with them. And I hope that whatever we create for 2008-09 will give us what we seem to be looking for.

Are all roads actually leading to the same place?

2008-01-23T09:12:00.000-08:00

Over the last 15 years, how many conversations could have been overheard in this, and probably any other, school that revolved around the multiple philosohphies that pushed our work and how often they seemed to be in conflict? At any one time, we seemed to be following many roads that rarely converged at any point. And sometimes the road we went down one year was quickly replaced the next just as we were ready to implement something of potential value. This, at times, created a culture that said, "So why care? Let's just keep doing it how we do it because it was working already." But I look at the last 10 or so meetings I have been in PLC, Department, Department Chair, 21C, Mentor, Mentee, Faculty, Negotiations - and other than realizing that I have too many meetings, it does seem that there is commen focus, common theme, common questions, and common purpose. Certainly, each are at different places on the road, but they seem to be on the same road. CSAP and NCLB might be standing alone. (Maybe we are becoming a highway rather than just a road and they are more speed bump?!) Essential Learnings, Skills vs Content, Curriculum Revision, Daniel Pink, Constructivist Teaching, Mission and Vision and Goals, the Meaning of the Grade, Collaboration, 21 Century Learners, Lions and Tigers and Bears, oh my. All seem to build on each other rather than in opposition with the others. After some of my time with people from other LPS buildings, not all schools are in this position. Other pressures, like enrollment and CSAP problems, get in the way. With others, their perceived success might blind them. Are all here on board? No ... not yet. Are there growing pains and disagreements and "issues?" Always. But are there discussions of value, opportunities for risk, changes for the better, and most importantly, students who benefit? Certainly. And, of course, there will always be the Ollivettis (Sorry for the spelling of it!) who refuse to move with the times, questioning progress, believing that the old way fits always. I hear that Ollivetti made great typewriters.

November...Already???

2007-11-01T08:23:00.000-07:00

So here we are, November 1. In my mind, the "Constructivist Culture" should be in place. Students should be taking ownership of their learning. Students should be helping to create the relevance. Students should be directing my teaching.

So are they? Yes and No.

Students, at least overtly, do not seem to be grade focused. They seemed to take the test wit the corresonding work on corrections as a learning tool rather than a proving tool. Our discussions have been generally positive. Their blogging, for those who are doing it (not a requirement) has been powerful at times. Some are asking questions to direct me. Some are finding new items for me to discuss. Some are creating their learning in a way that also will have AP success. They seemed to take self-evaluation on essays seriously and as a learning game, not as a grade game. Some struggled with my request to tell me what they wanted me to look for in their essay, but we'll develop that.

But...

I just had a conversation with a student who started by discussing the week she had just missed to visit colleges. She mentioned that she sat in on a class, Poltical Science, and said that they seemed to be doing what we were, but the professor was different than I am. He lectured more. She thought it was easier to know what he wanted the students to know. I asked if she thought the students were addressing the questions they had. She felt that it was more important to focus on what the teacher wanted. We discussed how and why I differ with her perception of education. I think I failed to sway her.

The student had not done well on her first test. She struggled with understanding the vocabulary (AP Government tends to have an exam that relies heavily on the vocab) and then applying the vocab. She struggled with seeing the trees and the forest. She admitted that she (like far too many of her 17-18 year old peers in the class who will be voters next fall) pays no attention to current events. When asked if she watches any news, she alluded only to a story about masked thieves in Arapahoe County. It was a story that had obvious relevance to her, but had no connection to our course. She admitted that English was more of her thing, partly because she could relate to the books. I asked if paying attention to current politcal events might help her do the same in Government. Maybe.

I'll be starting a new experiment soon to somewhat foce this relevance building. Students in the first unit, one that is largely philosophical and lends itself to discussions about their ideologies and issues they are passionate about, seem to build their relevance. Once we start talking institutions and processes, they struggle with it. So...each student will choose a domestic issue that they have interest in watching (environmental policy, education, welfare, military spending, etc). They will research it a bit to see where their issue sits at the moment: what are the major issues and what are the developing issues. Then for the rest of the year, they will use their issue as the base for their analysis of all institutions and procedures. Thus, the issue is their tree that they will be able to hang all other information. When we study interest groups, they will examine those that address their issue. When we study media, we will see how their issue has been portrayed. We will look at the party platforms on thie issue. We will track how voters tend to feel about and respond to their issue. We will watch Congress to see how they are addressing the issue in subcommittees, committees, and floor votes. We will look for evidence of the president's position and tactics with the issue. We will examine the bureaucratic agencies that enforce the lawa regarding their issue. We will track how bills become laws by tracing a bill on their issue. We will see how the Supreme Court has ruled regarding their issue. The risk is that students will be very competent on their issue, something that will not be tested by the AP Exam which will test to see if this methods works to aid in understanding everything else.

Am I frustrated? No. I have four sections, twice the number of last year, and four times what I had for the previous ten years. I have a wide range of interests and abilities among the 115 kids. I have have very passionate participants, quiet observers, and a few distractors - who at times make me laugh and at other times... I don't have to divide my planning between US History and Government, I can focus my efforts. And while I miss teaching certain history topics, I love the time I have for government (and law) to make changes I have wanted to make. I have more time to think about ways to develop a department schedule that will help others to do what they want or need to do. I've had time to discuss interesting cross-curricular posibilities (having 1 section of students take me for government and then Gaffney for English so we could teach a governemt/political themes duo course...hmmm).

Life is Good.

Rome fell apart.

2007-09-19T12:19:00.000-07:00

As Karl said in his response to my last post, "Rome wasn't built in a day." No, but it fell apart on Monday. I do think that I am up to 3.75 out of 4 buying in to culture, but .25 finally caused the vein-in-forehead-bursting moment.

Building culture: something I spoke about in Atlanta and at Copper Mountain, something I said I do well when we asked C1 what they were good at. And something I continue to struggle with all of the time. Cultures sometimes conflict. Right now the conflicting cultures are one of being interested, driven, questioning, constructive collaborators with the other being one of fancy notebook coloring, shoe decorating, giggling, uninterested, I-want-people-to-notice-me middle-school-lunch-behavior creatures. So what do I really think?

Well, because of an expereince my son had, I was giving the latter group the benefit of the doubt even though their issues were beginning to get in the way of the rest (and their culture was spreading). My 1st grade son loves to draw. One of our phenomenal art teachers at Arapahoe told me that he seems to see the world through the eyes of a visual artist. He has a great attention span and a strong recall of details. One day last week, his class was watching a video of Johnny Appleseed. During the movie, his teacher asked him to stop drawing. Being the 1st grader wanting to please his teacher and being worried that he would be a yellow light (or even a red light) as opposed to the desired green light, he stopped drawing and felt he had gotten in trouble. As he told me his story, he showed me the picture he had been drawing. He had drawn the movie. As he described his picture, it was obvious that he had simply used the picture to take notes. Is this a gender difference? Is it a style of thinking? Is this a young mind creating their learning - soon to be fixed by those who say stop? Is this the moment he stops drawing like my expereince with an un-named teacher at Newton who created a strong dislaike of doing art in her art class? When I discussed this with his teacher, who is part of a group of elementary teachers who seem to be adopting some very constructive approaches, she was surpried by my find and open to the potential that maybe we should foster this type of thinking rather than squelch it.

So I go back to my classroom and thought, gee, maybe they are still creating their learning and I failed to stop bad culture that was upsetting classmates as it was tough to focus beyond the goofy corner. So I took the chance and determined that my son's issue was not the issue in my AP room. The students might not last the week in an AP program that is still a privilege, not a guarantee. Hope I haven't turned into my 7th grade art teacher.

Maybe I should take up drawing again.

Creating the culture

2007-08-31T12:39:00.000-07:00

Last year, I felt that a culture of learning developed over the first three weeks in my A.P. government classes. I had two classes of 36 and 38 and, for the most part, the "What do you believe?" discussions helped lead to a class culture of participation and analysis where we felt comfortable asking the next question, opening new perspectives...in other words, we were students.

So how do I feel today? I have 4 classes, none as big as last year. I thought this would make this easier to accomplish this year. And I feel half right. Two sections are there - willing to share, listening as well as talking, taking arguments to new areas, allowing me to explain when they are unsure. One is close. And one section isn't in the ballpark. A student from that class approached about changing sections as she feels it, too. The culture is instead one of "Nothing said by others has any relevance to me." Some of this is ceretainly led by two girls who seemingly have no interest in anything but their personal discussions and lives. This, like a cold, has spread to neighbors. I know that I am supposed to recognize the multitasking abilities of our students. But this class isn't going to "see the gorilla." Not unless I allow them to leave class and go to the zoo! It is early and I realize I'm close to 75% success at building the culture. But seeing what their peers are capable of doing, it still frustrates me. Guess it is time to find a new tactic.

New and Improved...or Just New?

2007-08-13T10:05:00.000-07:00

As I sat with my leg propped up on ice, with a laptop actually sitting on my lap, I started formulating what my classes would look like this year. And like most changes, I am left questioning whether the changes are new or do they start to get the students and me to new AND improved places.

Given a need to still prepare AP Government students for a national exam that is based on simple vocabulary, will they be ready for that exam if I am much more concerned with them becoming political participants and contributors. I'm not as concerned that they know the title of a concept - yet AP is. I'm not as conerned that they have memorized key cases, but can they use any case to help them build future arguments? SO how do I merge the two and still be effective with the more "old-school" AP requirements as I hopefully push/pull them into the 21 Century lifelong, continuous learner in a world-wide Personal Learning Network?

Blogs, Wikis, and Podcast Oh My. Should be an interesting year!

Our field trip to another high school...

2007-04-20T17:14:00.000-07:00

While I was disappointed to not watch students engaged with education, I came away from yesterday's field trip to the tech and science charter school in Denver with lots of questions.

Does their principal's comparing restaurants to schools make sense? We do choose to go to the Mexican restaurant rather than the Mexican/Italian/Chinese/American Deli Bistro because its ability to specialize tends to create better food. As teachers, would we truly become better if we specialized more (ex. 5 Government sections rather than 2 history and 3 government)? Would we become more innovative if we could focus on fewer preps? Or would we get tired of making the same dish 5 times a day? As one who loves cooking and has faced limited opportunities to do so with my broken arm, I know how bored I am with my cuisine lately. Would that be me in my fifth attack on the issue of federalism?

If a Gates funded school seems like they will have to find funding sources, how can we afford to make the huge changes needed here? Simply getting power to rooms is an issue before we actually power up any laptops. Will our community cough up those types of resources even if they will purchase persoanl laptops? Is a school our age and size really the right building to retro-fit the new world into? Can their architect do the remodel????

Time to go watch an old school production of The Music Man and see if my son's trombone holds together and daughter's smile leaves her face. And as I am watching the creative forces on stage, I'll be remembering the principals discussion of only serving the important 17 dishes rather than the full menu of opportunities. Where does drama fit into his dream?

TGFC

2006-10-10T09:32:00.000-07:00

TG for Constructivism.

Time has been more of an issue for me this year than most. At school, life is fairly "normal", but at home the time I used to have has disappeared...much like some other things in my home. Changing my teaching takes a great deal of the time I have. But, for me, much of the time is simply thinking and reflecting. That can be done on a bike, in the pool, in the car, in the shower. By putting more of the "action" on the students, I find that I have found more time during my workday. I know that others are experiencing the opposite. Some are collaborating more and my focus is on two classes that only I teach. Maybe I just got lucky with kids that are willing to take ownership, raise their expectations, and accept the responsibilities I have shifted to them.

Or maybe this constructivist thing simply works.

Is it about technology?

2006-09-13T02:25:00.000-07:00

Recently, I have had a number of discussions with people (some of them after I read their blogs...and then went and talked to them) that seem to focus on the tech piece of 21C. I hear Parnellisms often. I hear frustrations and sometimes laughter regarding the pitfalls when internet goes out or the server is down or the bulb is burned out or... I hear that maybe we are just another educational fad. I hear very real problems with a lack of time to learn the tools. I hear that Karl goes too fast and therefore, technologies aren't always understood. I hear that we have presented so many new tools (AND I KNOW WE HAVE ONLY SCRATCHED THE SURFACE OF WHAT IS OUT THERE) that it is difficult to develop comfort, let alone expertise, with any of them.

And in each conversation, I find myself saying "But it isn't about technology." It is about a constructive approach to teaching that hopes to change the perspective of the student from one that is content with doing what was asked to one that demands more from themslves and us. All of the technologies are simply options to try and stimulate that change in them. Given that I do have the luxury of 36 laptops which places so many of these new tools at the fingertips of my students, many might be surprised at how little they have been used SO FAR (don't worry yet Karl that you choe the wrong room!). I am choosing ONE class - A.P. Government- to focus my attention on (as I have a student teacher in US and Law has always been "different"). That to me is DOABLE. I am not stretching my time too thin by trying to do it all at once and I am devoting my energies to really rethinking how I do everything in those two hours. WHile the topics we have covered are similar to what I've started with in prior years, the methods are not. For one, I have always planned out my classes with a series of questions that are created to make sure that students "create the lecture" as they responfd to my questions. So while student participation has always been the key to the "distribution of knowledge", it was done through my very direct and planned out guidance. It was good teaching. It worked well by looking at my results. So WHY would I change? Because it wasn't working for ALL kids and my class had become predictable. Some knew they could rely on others to do their thinking for them. Some admitted to their tactics that kept them out of discussions. Some were bored. And for some, it just didn't work. For three weeks, I came to class each day with a single question. Questions ike "What do you want to know about politics and why?, "Who will be the Presidential candidates in 2008 and what are their chances for impact?", "What do you believe and why?", "Define power", etc. These had been topics before. But never before had I watched conversations like I am watching now. In two rooms of 36 and 37 - where I would have predicted a higher percentage of nonparticipants based solely on numbers - I am watching MORE kids take part. I am watching them push the conversation further than I ever did with regards to both depth and breadth. The conversations don't stop when the bell rings as they can't stop blogging (oh look, he finally talked about technolgy). For three weeks, I have think I have developed a constructivist culture. And now they are ready for laptops and wikis and who knows what else. Because now they are begging for more. They are going farther when I get out of the way. SCARY.

So when I talk to those who are frustrated, all I hope to do is to help them see the potential for constructivism when technology sometimes clouds the vision. Technology won't matter without a shift in the culture of learning. It won't work if they aren't thinking first. Whether the "toys" work as expected or not, at the end of the day, it only helps us all learn how to move to plan B by problem solving.

So far...

2006-08-28T09:02:00.000-07:00

So far, the start has been interesting. I'm watching my student teacher take my US kids from Day 1. The tech and constructivist pieces are emerging and I get to watch the student reactions in two gender-specific classes. This will be a fun experiment.

With AP gov, I've waited to use the laptops until some others (Smith and Kakos) had ironed out some detials for me. As I have 36 and 37 in the two rooms, I wanted to minimalize the "how to" issues as much as possible by learning from others and by having a few students who could also be reosurces. Even though the laptops have stayed locked up, we have had a number of great discussions based on their questions, comments and findings. As they have been leading what we do, I have had to be prepared for anything...being aware of the possible pros and cons of about 40 potential presidential candidates rather than the few who I think are legitimate contenders as one example. Constructivist teaching is harder on some levels...being prepared to go in more directions. Yet it is more fun and productive. I've orchestrated these same discussions in the past, but have never had more students bringing in more info to discuss.

Today,I'll show Karl's presentation and see where it takes us. I hope to swing it to a new role of government discussion.

A new start...you have no idea!

2006-08-14T16:20:00.000-07:00

So what do I want to share? As I become a new teacher this year, challenging myself to move beyond what I've done in the past, utilizing our newfound ideas and toys, challenging myself to find the new and better way to enjoy more success; I find that I must do so in my life also. It is he 21C challenge that I hope will help me to maintain focus and passion at a time that I will struggle to do so outside of these walls.

Summer...almost

2006-05-02T20:15:00.000-07:00

I keep thinking of what I need to do this summer so that, next fall, I am closer to being the teacher I hope to be. SO many ideas, so little time to really get comfortable with changing what has worked in the past. I'm sure there will be no distractions this summer to help me procrastinate...never mind, I'll finish later.

A needed vacation, but now...

2006-04-02T13:10:00.000-07:00

After a short, well-deserved break I've come back to "school-think" today. I've spent an hour or so catching up on Karl's blogs (most of which I thoroughly enjoyed - really) and procrastinating so that I don't have to start the grading process. But I've also been reflecting.

My 4 year old son and I enjoyed three days snowboarding (me)/skiing (him) in Vail as my daughter was at school and my wife at work. Adam skis as often as possible - about 20 times this year - and is getting pretty good. He followed me into an Experts Only area, exercised some caution (at first) and descended into the back bowls. The lift operator was fairly surprised to see him, asking his age, and then making Adam feel ten feet tall. On the way up the lift, I thought about how Adam got to that point.

1. He developed an interest in learning how to ski because his sister was doing it and that meant she got to spend more time doing something with Mom and Dad AND she liked it.

2. He had a series of teachers. Some pushed him to get better and challenged him to do new things which helped him get better quickly. (Quick plug for A Basin - about half the price of other areas and much more likely to get the kids off of the beginner hill quickly! Avoid the touristy resorts for lessons as they keep young ones from pushing themselves.) They helped him find fun in the challenge.

3. His parents let the teachers teach and then allowed him to show what he knew and were excited about his success. (And yes, liked to brag a bit!)

4. His parents let him take risks.

So what is my point (other than my hope that he has a better attitude than Bode Miller)? Isn't that what we want education to be. Students, we hope, will have the desire to learn. They will find their passions. They will take risks. They will look for new ways to apply their knowledge and skills. They will work to improve themselves. Their parents will be supportive. And we, as teachers will simply provide them the tools for them to be successful, motivated them to take risks, help them fix their mistakes, and prepare them to enter that Experts Only terrain we call life.

How do we do this in an environment that they didn't necessarily choose to enter? We make sure that they do have a positive role in that environment to at least create meaning from their learning. We make our actions and topics relevent to their experience. We introduce them to tools for tomorrow, not yesterday. We let them teach each other and US. We accept that they, and we, will crash sometimes and hope that when they/we do, they/we jump up laughing as we realize it was still worth the risk.

And then we finish with the Lobster Bisque and Espresso Gremolata at Sweet Basil... or at least Adam and I did.

Conferences - A New Frontier

2006-03-06T13:03:00.000-08:00

"Grades are a means, not an end." The catch phrase for my evening. Every discussion that did discuss grades (and there were many that didn't discuss grades at all) followed that discussion. I've tried this over the past few years, but it hadn't gone over as well as it seemed this time. Maybe it was the letter I sent home explaining my philosophy. But I've done that befroe, too. Maybe we are changing some culture.

Grading Categories

2006-02-17T12:05:00.000-08:00

I finally have grades and, thus, I needed to finalize my categories. It was fun to create something new that actually does, I think, what I used to think I was doing. We'll see how well the new is understood by students and parents. I might have made a mistake by including all expected assignments. It helped me get a handle on what it would look like at the end of the semester, but I fully expect the emails regarding "how come my kid doesn't have a grade for..." Goal #3 has been partially completed.

21 Century Goals - at least for Spring 2006

2006-02-04T12:57:00.000-08:00

Although I have done a great deal of thinking (usually on a run or ride, in the pool, or on the chairlift - my "downtimes") about my goals with constructivist teaching/learning and technology, little of that thinking gets recorded...especially in the form of a blog. And while the goals haven't been written, they seem to be part of what I' doing. So let's backtrack some.

Goal #1 - I want to incorporate my new found technologies to better allow for and stimulate the discussions that mnay of my A.P. Government and Honors U.S. students want to have. With a department focus (in US) and an A.P. need (in Government) on common pacing, I struggle with balancing their desire to ask tangental questions. I love the conversations these questions create and I foster their creation. However, I am almost always behind when it comes to my pacing goals, the US pacing goals, and the AP pacing needs. In an effort to better balance the needs/desires on both fronts, I will utilize blogging on a voluntary basis starting with A.P. Government during the 1st 6 weeks, and then adding it to US during the 2nd 6 weeks. I will experiment with various prompts (mine and theirs) to help incorporate more students into the process. I am not comfortable with making it a requirement (yet) as that seems counter to the purpose. We'll see how I feel at the end of the semester.

Goal #2 - I will incorporate at least one new constructivist, in-class activity to one of my classes every 6 weeks. Although I think my style of classroom is fairly constructivist, a discussion with Kyle Matson helped me realize some things. After the FishBowl presentation, he commented that my room operated like that anyway without the formality. However, it only operates that way for the stuents who engage themselves or who are pulled into the discussions by me. Therefore, I want to offer a more formal version of the FishBowl in each of my 3 preps at least once this semester. I am searching for the topics that will benefit the most from that approach.

Goal #3. - I will change my grading categories to better reflect my intentions and, hopefully, enhance their understanding of the grade and thei learning. Tony's presentation has helped me narrow my focus. As I have NO grades as of today (for various non-lazy reasons), I haven't formalized my thoughts into the program. My categories will be finalized by February 8, and evaluated throughout the semester.

There, if it is written, it must be so...

Baby steps

2005-12-20T08:52:00.000-08:00

I appreciated the time to think, reflect, and discuss at yesterday's meeting. As we listened to Kristen's activity and Rob's Russian issue, I found myself making some additions-subractions-changes to my US course. I especially loved hearing of the creative efforts - something many of her students did with me as freshmen with the Holocaust project. Their talents are humbling. Crosby's work this semester has set me up with about half of next semester's students to be able to jump right in with some ideas. I hope I'll be able to utilize her students to teach the "newbies". I'm excited to begin the new group with these new methods and ideas in place from the beginning. As Sean Kenney said in an essay he did for me, the hardest part of change is always the first step. Few risk taking them. But, the rest get easier and better.

In the words of Bill Clinton...

2005-12-16T12:52:00.000-08:00

I did not say that I would blog with that woman... OK. I said I would be better and I lied. I have enjoyed reading the student blogs as they have made me think about how to structure questions to get the most out of blogging. As we get ready for the last week, and then the first week, the number of things I want to add next semester starts to overwhelm. How do I need to change my course expectations sheet so that I have the "instructions" I need to make it all work? How do I structure a fishbowl? What do I want to include on my RSS list? What do I keep from the old curriculum in US and what do I add that gets to take advantage of our new tools? I think that the best way to figure it all out is to take a break, snowboard, eat good food, play with my kids, and hope for the constructivist bug to bite me in my sleep so that when I wake, my 3 courses are planned and perfect. And then...

I promise...

2005-11-19T13:01:00.000-08:00

I promise to be better at keeping up with blogging.

As far as the grading discussion went, I was motivated to examine what I am doing. I know I probably talked too much during his presentation and our subsequent discussion, but I was fighting to process the philosophy with the practical how to as we went. My initial thought was that Tony's method does what I have been trying to do, but in a much more usable manner. I knew that I intended parents to see my Homewrok category as the "responsibility" category Tony has. But parents didn't see it unless we discussed it at conferences. I knew my Homewrok Check and Test categories were directed at content mastery, but... And my participation category was more of a "good kid" category as points were lost for not bring =ing materials to class rather than awarded for truly participating. I don't think Tony's method is a radical change (although I hear that some of the articles he has shared to the other groups push the envelope!). I think Tony's is a practical change that will, more or less, be a different way of inputting my grades as opposed to a philosphical change. I will struggle some with the appropriate % for categories, a bit with what to label the categories, and very little with why I am doing it.

Possibilities?!

2005-11-14T09:07:00.000-08:00

I attended the A.P. workshop this weekend and was a bit pessimistic abouts its value given the lack of a weekend I was going to have. But...it was great on a number of levels. Although my students have enjoyed some success and I am comfortable with how I do it, I found a bunch of new approaches - many of which are constructivist. AP has been my least constructivist course due to the amount of necessary coverage of material. But I found myself changing my activities, readings, and "lectures" based on some great ideas. I also found myself "arguing" with a teacher (one who was very impressed with his voice and ocabulary, but with a stunning lack of grasp on government/politics!) who insisted A.P. should by lecture-based. The 3 AP Govt teachers from Creek (15 sections!!!!) seemed to enjoy the battle.

Additionally, a teacher from Hays, Kansas, was there. Hays has gone to all laptops for students. He raved about the possibilities, suggested some necessary programs to include, discussed the pitfalls and how to combat them, and left as a great resource for me for next year.

How did Hays, KANSAS!!!, get so progresive in a state of...never mind, it isn't the time or place to go there?!?!

A new course?!

2005-11-02T10:16:00.000-08:00

I am excited for a change I got approved (tentatively) today. The course that I think most about is my AP government course - a 5 day a week, one semester course with much more to cover than I have time for. A course with so much more potential to examine and play, but rarely enough leeway with required content to allow it in a fashion I was comfortable with. Next year, I get to change to a full year, 3 day a week course that gives me more days to play, but not at the expense of "coverage." In that arena, I am not comfortable giving up the coverage. Now I get to plan for constructivism to hit hard and can leave some of my fears behind. Plus, with the passage of "C" I no longer worry about losing some of our options due to budget cuts!

A Real First Post...

2005-09-16T13:12:00.000-07:00

Potential! A dangerous word. What we are starting to examine, experience, try, discuss has tons of potential. Like the students in your room, athletes on your field, actors on your stage, we have tons of potential. But what will we do with it? Will we devote the resources, energies, and time to make the potential turn into greatness?