I am the Batman

Just Kidding. I'm just a man who loves helping people. What're ya gonna do?

SPEAKING OF helping people, I just read a pretty interesting blog post from and edublogger site called "The Educator's Room". My first impression of this site was that it looked very professional and somewhat similar to a news or essay site like "The Atlantic" (of which I am a big fan). The central feature of the site is a series of rotating headlines from the previous few days. These have different authors depending on the topics, but most that I have browsed have experience either teacher, working with a specific tool, or both. This echoes the "newspaper" feel of the site. There are some ads and graphics on the sidebars, so it hardly even looks like a blog at all. I was obviously pretty impressed.

One of the blog posts I clicked on spoke about the differences between accommodation and modification in teaching. This post stood out to me because of these educational buzzwords; with all the practice we have had lesson planning, I hoped this might glean a little more perspective on ways in which teachers can plan to help students. The author, Teresa, has worked as a caseworker for several years before she became a special education teacher. She also has a son with autism, so she is well versed on both the parent and teaching sides of accommodation and modification. Teresa explains the difference quite succinctly in saying, "Accommodations level the playing field, while modifications change the field you're playing on." In other words, accommodations are slight changes made or additional strategies given to instruction to help specific students' needs. This hit a familiar chord in terms of the word "scaffolding," which we hear quite often in discussions about planning and the like. Accommodations may include using additional tools or aides to make the content more accessible for a given student, but the grading remains the same for all students. In contrast, modifications to instruction may merely help certain students experience the same curriculum but in a different way that suits their needs. This includes changing the vocabulary on assignments, lowering the reading levels of texts, or even changing the criteria by which an assignment is graded. This is a very different type of "scaffold," if I understand it correctly.

Though this blog post was short in length, I appreciated the clarity with which it defined and explained these two terms. It was a refreshing change of writing style compared to the often verbose stylings of some of the authors we are assigned in this program. As I was reading, a few questions came to mind in regards to some of these other pieces. I wrote a comment (first one! hooray!) to ask as much:

"Teresa, Thank you for the post. I am a masters student studying history education at the University of Michigan. In my classes, we talk a lot about scaffolding and differentiating, as you might expect. I was wondering what you think of these terms...How do they compare to "accommodation" and "modification"? Do you frequently use these terms when discussing your practice, and if so, how so? I am just beginning to get more guided and detailed practice planning lessons and assessments. To what extent you consider the accommodations and modifications for individual students when you plan lessons? Thank you!"

I have not heard back from Teresa at the time of original posting. Updates shall follow.

In any case, I hope to learn more about practical ways to scaffold learning (whatever that ends up meaning). It always sounds nice to talk about ways our practice can apply to students of all skills, abilities, dispositions, and backgrounds, but it is far more difficult to actually plan for these differences in advance and intentionally implement elements of practice that allow all students to succeed. In fact, I'm not fully convinced it is always possible--but I keep hoping and trying to learn. So far, the most important piece of successfully scaffolding seems to be getting to know the students and building trust with them so that they continuously give you their best even when your instruction isn't perfect (or perfectly tailored to them).

It would also help if I WAS the Batman. A kid can dream.

Macbook High School

My field placement at Ann Arbor's Skyline High School has been every bit of eye opening to the possibilities of public schooling I forgot existed since graduating from Birmingham's Seaholm High School six years ago. In many ways, the two schools are very similar. However, technology has changed quite a bit in just over half a decade. Having spent the past year in Detroit, at one of the lowest performing schools in the state, Skyline has indeed been quite the contrast and, occasionally, surprise. Not the least of which has been the computer inventory available to all students. I'm told they have some kind of deal with Apple.

When I was in high school, we had to reserve a computer lab weeks in advance or go to the library and share computers with other classmates. I think we may have had a laptop cart, but it obviously was not memorable. Skyline has no fewer than half a dozen carts of 30+ Macbook computers that teachers can sign up for on a Google doc online as late as the day of (if any are still available). My mentor teacher reserves a cart at least once a week for various projects and classroom activities. Today, she has the world history students finishing a PowerPoint presentation about Hinduism and Buddhism, and the US history students are analyzing primary sources and arguing for one side or another in a debate about workers rights in the progressive era.

But wait, there's more!

Skyline also uses Power School to input and display grades and attendance records online. Students and parents frequently check this resource from home, which has already led to several discussions with students pinpointing what they need to improve on and how they can. My mentor teacher also employs a texting service through which she reminds students and parents about upcoming assignments or special notes. All teachers are equipped with overhead projectors and laptops of their own, as well as a high-tech audio system that plays over the overhead speakers. They can reserve an "ELMO" wand that uses a camera to display paper on the LCD projector (my MT uses this often). Students also have access to computer labs and a comprehensive digital library in the media center. The possibilities are seemingly endless to a teaching novice like myself!

The results of my technology investigation were not altogether shocking given the obvious affluence and prestige of the Ann Arbor Public Schools. However, the discussion we had in class on October 2nd was a bit enlightening to just how fortunate Skyline is. I have not too quickly forgotten my own past experiences, but seeing technology used in the classroom is now just commonplace at this point in my placement. Yet the responses of many of my classmates suggest that I am the exception to the rule. Many observed that using technology at their schools, even when available, is simply not practical. This is very unfortunate to hear because many of the tools they described are not cheap. Schools should invest in technology, but with advancements coming every few months (weeks? minutes?) it is often not a practical use of the budget for struggling districts. Maybe Apple would help them out in exchange for some free advertising...

Posted from my Macbook Pro.

Tech Tools Not In Use

While our ED504 class meets only every so often, we have already seen two different presentations on technology tools and their potential applications to the classroom. I am somewhat ashamed to admit, albeit in hindsight, that I did not give these tools a proper consideration before determining they were of no use to me. Maybe it was the result of being in class from 5-8 after a long day of teaching at the end of a long week of being a student and the anticipation of the weekend looming. Perhaps it was that I was missing my beloved Tigers get, though unexpectedly to me at the time, obliterated by the pesky Orioles of Baltimore. I now reflect that, perhaps as my curriculum maps take shape in the future, I will find ways to use these tools. I briefly describe them here.

The first tool that was presented was the website "padlet." My classmates began their presentation with an introductory video that served as a tutorial for using the website. Immediately, I compared the tool to a blog with a lot of fancy bells and whistles. It reminded me somewhat of Blendspace, as well. Teachers can upload materials, links, or use it as a forum for students to post responses. I think that using this tool, instead of others that do similar things, is really dependent on personal preference. If a teacher regularly uses or wants to use these activities and resources in his or her class, then padlet is a fine vehicle for doing so. So far I am simply not one of those teachers. If I want students to respond to a poll, I'll send them a Google Form. If I want them to see some resources, I'll organize them into a slide so that I don't have to reserve technology for them to use themselves. If I want to post links, I'll share a Google Doc with them or make it available on my teacher site. I think that giving students access to something like padlet invites too many opportunities for distraction and inappropriate responses. Padlet, at first glance, was not for me.

The second tool demonstrated by my peers was "audacity." I have some familiarity with the program from my days attempting to become an amateur DJ. That week really flew by, and I haven't used the tool since. I'm assuming a lot has changed with its capabilities and user-friendliness, but my first glance from using the tool in class does not support my assumption. It's interface is still, to me, both busy and boring at the same time. I don't know how else to describe it. I also don't like that I would need to download it on to my computer, which is already pressed for space. But I'm just one guy. Our practice with it was admittedly entertaining, and my classmates raised some excellent points for how it could be used in a classroom. Most interesting to me was the possibility of recording a lesson for students who are absent. An audio file would certainly take up much less space than a video of a lesson, so there is some intrigue to that. I have only ever known teachers to compile a packet of missed work, so that was my own inclination. However, audacity may have its place in that regard. I will keep an open mind.

I don't know whether I will ever find myself in a position where I want to use these tools, but at least I now know they exist. I use technology every day, but my tendencies in the classroom are to put up images and directions on a slide to enhance discussion. I have liked many other uses of technology I have seen used in this program and the class, specifically, and I think it is highly likely I employ some of those. Specifically, many professors have used polls for do-nows and been able to quickly evaluate and discuss the responses. I have really enjoyed these. Maybe I am just a simple man, or perhaps I am resistant to doing things differently than I learned them, but I was not initially persuaded to put these other tech tools to use.

"Wait, People Gonna SEE This?!"

Recently, Dave Theune spoke to our class about a successful teaching practice he has recently begun using in his classroom to increase student performance. The secret: make them perform. It seems almost too obvious, but the reality is that most student performance is measured by a rather unconventional type of "performance", in which the only audience is the teacher or machine that judges the answers. This hardly necessitates the students perform anything. Theune is part english teacher, part drama teacher, so the idea came quite naturally to him. In recent years, he has invited parents to come into the classroom and witness their children demonstrate what they have learned. The response, he says, has been overwhelmingly positive.

On the surface, there are some concerns with introducing a perhaps "less academic" type of performance into the classroom. Teachers have been using papers and tests for years, seemingly for a reason. But one of Theune's secret is that he still uses those type of "traditional" academic assessment. He distinguishes his practice by merely creating a tangible audience to whom the student must present their work. For example, one of the events open to parents is a reading of the students' essays for one of his english classes. It is a simple addition to the practice of writing the paper, but now students know someone else will be hearing what they have to say. Perhaps they value the opinions of their parents more than that of the ominous red pen, but Theune has seen vast improvement in student motivation and quality of work when this element is added.

Shortly after he spoke to our ED504 class, I filmed myself teaching for ED511. After I checked to make sure no students had any objections to being recorded, I started rolling the camera. A group of football players, who rarely seem to prioritize world history and would much rather put their heads on the desk, sits at the front of the classroom. I placed the camera, merely for convenience and sound quality, right in front of them on the teacher's desk. When the camera came on, one student in the group shot up in his seat and immediately asked, "Wait, people gonna SEE this? Like, your professor gonna know what I did today in class?" I stifled a chuckle and replied, "I guess they will. Is that alright?" The student, who's teammates had now also taken an interest in my answer, said, "I just gotta be really good today, then. Can you cut the first part where I had my head down?"

When students have an audience, they want to do well. While my evidence is merely anecdotal, Theune reiterated this claim vehemently. He says he has only had a handful of students in three years of this practice who have chosen NOT to perform (the option is given explicitly to all). Teenagers, if I remember correctly, seem to like attention. It makes sense that my trio of tired jocks volunteered infinitely more answers the day I was filming than they otherwise have (which would be, for maths sake, approximately five to zero). It also makes sense that I have tried to make this blog post a good one because my peers will be reading this (hi, friends). Classroom performance doesn't require a stage or a spotlight, but sometimes students do.

Line?

Practice Makes Perfect

For the "connections across disciplines" assignment, my world history classmates have created a lesson plan that emphasizes the "doing" in learning while simultaneously fostering the construction of knowledge about a relevant topic. The purpose of their lesson, which occurs over two days of class including a homework assignment, was to help students "formulate an opinion." However, this is done in a different language. I was fascinated reading this for two reasons. First, it is extremely in line with much we have learned of the student-centered pedagogical approach, and employs a very constructivist style of teaching and learning. These are the frameworks that I have most appreciated and agreed with throughout this program. Secondly, their use of a student debate around the topic of using technology in the classroom is so unlike anything I would have done as a student in my own high school spanish classes.

Even though I am not still a practicing spanish student or speaker, I can tell that this group put a lot of thought into making their content-specific lesson one that could easily be applied in another classroom like my own. Much that we have read so far for this program has reiterated the need for history teachers to allow students to construct their own analysis and interpretation of an historical event. This same approach is used for the world languages lesson plan. Students are asked to articulate their opinion, which requires knowledge about the topic and the language they are studying. This is far more interesting than students merely receiving information about a topic; here they have to apply what they have learned to their own lives, if only hypothetically.

I also really like this lesson because it is so different from anything I would have been asked to do as a student when I took spanish. In my experience, world language instruction was limited to conjugating verbs and memorizing short topical lists of vocabulary. We rarely did any kind of cultural analysis, which meant that spanish felt all the more foreign. Here, students are exposed to the social and cultural norms that ultimately influence the language they study. 

My classmates were extremely thoughtful in their planning, as evidenced by their narration of the process and the justification of their decisions of what to include in the lesson. I especially like that students have some choice in the articles they read to research the topic. Otherwise, I worry about students with lower levels of comprehension ability being able to contribute and ultimately take away knowledge from this assignment. Obviously this is meant to challenge students at all levels, so that aspect of the lesson is great for making it self-differentiating. They also then allow students to reflect on the process at the end of the debate. This is helpful because students can self-assess where their skills are but, more importantly, how they think about and view the issue behind the debate. Technology is presumably pretty relevant for them so they would hopefully have something useful to say about how it felt having to negotiate their own beliefs with the side of the argument they were given. 

To my classmates: buen trabajo!

My Online Life

Today's presentations about the select online organization tools was surprisingly helpful. I say surprisingly because I already go out of my way to maintain a really organized life using online features, so I had somewhat discounted the idea of learning new things. Doing so would inevitably mean just moving all the work I've done into another program, I thought. While that may be true, it turns out the people who designed these things do actually know something about organization.

I have long been familiar with Google Drive and feel very comfortable using it. I create and share a lot of documents on there; and have found it especially helpful for academic purposes over the past few years. We also used it a lot at my job in City Year to share files with the other volunteers in our school. For that, Drive was extremely helpful. However, I don't see much of a practical use for it in the classroom other than making documents available to students to collaborate on, but this requires them to set up Google accounts and have access to collaborate either on school devices or at home.

Evernote is set up very similar to how I arrange my own bookmarks in my web browser. My girlfriend has been pushing it on me for a while, and I can honestly say that trying it was overdue. However, this is a case of where my own organization being SO similar might make integrating it unnecessary. That said, it does offer several features that a bookmark tab system cannot. These features include reminders, pictures, attachments, screenshots, text notes, and lists. It's really handy to organize a variety of things in one setting, and having it all automatically sync to a mobile device is especially nice. If I find myself wanting to tag more pages that I find with teaching resources or articles for students to read, Evernote is an extremely good option to organize those things. I am also toying with the idea of using it in my own studies to create notebooks for different days with the various CTools readings and document attachments all in one place. Unfortunately, use in the classroom may be impractical for this as well because of concerns over device availability.

Lastly, I was especially intrigued by the BlendSpace site. This was also the most confusing one to me because I have never seen anything like it. I will have to play around with it more to see how I could personally benefit from using it to organize my professional life. So far, I think i could see myself using it to merely generate ideas for lessons, even if I don't take advantage of the sharing options like making it available for a class to view and interact with. It seems to have a lot of resources and search mediums that are extremely unique and helpful. I hope to make use of this in the future.

Playing History

Gee's essay about educational video games (both of the formally educational variety and the casual, leisure variety) raised some interesting points about the cognitive processes used to complete tasks and levels in a given game. While I had not previously discounted video games as uneducational, let alone useless or mindless, I am also not traditionally of the opinion that gaming for pleasure and gaming with the purpose of learning can be united. What's more, I'd go so far as to say that I don't think video games are capable of teaching both subject-area knowledge AND entertain the masses. Gee demonstrates the procedural knowledge that can be developed, but how useful is that alone in one's real life (if the conversation becomes about using video games in the classroom)?

On the other hand, if we talk about the practicality of supplementing classroom instruction with explicitly educational video games like some of the ones we were able to test out before this class, the questions becomes: "is this game worth it?" Games take time; the seemingly positive interaction that is implicit in using an interface requires time to interact with, as does setting up characters and reading instructions. Is the added benefit of entertainment worth the possible distractions that could arise?

One thing Gee said that I really liked was that video games offer up low-risk scenarios in which students are able to fail with little consequence. This is definitely one thing that video games offer that cannot be rivaled in traditional classroom instruction. The closest thing is when teachers allow students to re-submit assignments or tests to improve their grades, but this requires more time and the student still received a quantifiable measurement of his or her failure. Video game failures result in simply losing one of many lives, or being asked to continue from a last-saved point. In this regard, video games have a lot to offer a classroom, even if just in encouraging a mindset.

I especially find the integration of video games into education impractical when considering how they would be used in my own subject area (history). While I am a firm believer that history is fully alive, relevant, and even changing, my existing knowledge of types of video games does not produce a meaningful use for them in a history classroom. I had the opportunity to try out a few of such games before class today, and I found them to be extremely boring and slow. The "interaction" that is supposed to be a strength of video games was mundane and limited; it really wasted more time than it added entertainment or procedural knowledge. The only tasks were to read a short bit of information and then answer a question, which is not much different from a traditional in-class assignment other than that students could do so by watching the animated character of their choice traverse across a room and back.  History can be shown to be all of those things I believe it is when history teachers use things like narratives and pictures to make the past come to life. Perspectives must be shown. Simply asking students to memorize knowledge the've read in a video game does not utilize the gaming interface nor enhance a history lesson.

Hopefully someday a designer more intelligent than myself will find a way to blend leisure and learning, but for now I don't anticipate "playing history" being a part of my initial pedagogical repertoire.

Self Assessment

Our time working with the Scarlett middle schoolers is now half over; our summer semester of classes more than half so. In just a few short weeks we will be placed in schools where into which we will integrate ourselves and, eventually, design our own lessons. And with lessons, assessments. That our students will take. For a grade.

As goes the popular sentiment that our students are the future, so too are we theirs (in a sense).

I'd like to take this space to reflect not only on today's and this week's discussions about assessments (specifically of the standardized variety) but also to address the fact that we are the future of the education system. We will be instrumental in designing in-class assessments and preparing our students for the bigger, state-mandated ones. We will be assessed, ourselves, in return. And we are already halfway done with our first term.

...

Ok, so we still do have nearly eleven months left, so there is hope. Besides, we will be getting more hands-on experience and personalized guidance once we actually begin working in the school, so there is also structure. The past two days' emphasis on testing and accountability have probably just shaken my confidence a bit. I can recall having new teachers at various times in my formal education, and many of them seemed fully functional and competent in spite of their [in]experience. Yet I can't help but think about how the assessments in our own futures as those inexperienced teachers are dictated in large part by those who are 1) not the people designing the assessments, 2) not the people implementing them, and 3) not the people who's careers are contingent upon their success. What are we supposed to do now to prepare to be assessed then? To what aspect of the profession should we devote the most attention and practice?

The obvious answer to me is on how to facilitate higher-level thinking. But then how does one balance that with SEL? How does one maintain his own content-specific knowledge? The state apparently doesn't care that we take the time to complete the PRE if our 16-year old selves scored high enough on yet another standardized test. It all just seems so arbitrary, and that the purpose of education--the purpose of school--gets lost. The students get lost.

What is getting in our way from being able to simplify the formal public education system and just have it be some Dewey-an utopia of student-centered social development and practical assessments? Why have schools become so politicized?

As I continue to go through this program, I will continue to assess myself and try to articulate some of these answers. But I know, as always, I'll have plenty more to learn.

A Process of Living

I took an intro to Education class my sophomore year at U of M that was instrumental in confirming my desire to teach and igniting the beginnings of a passion for learning about the education process. The process, I used to think, was limited to formal schooling and a few meaningful experiences out of the classroom that helped one become the person they are. I also thought it was somewhat static, and that therefore the point of "school" was to race to the end and then get the reward of a job. How baby-boomer of me.

Dewey, as I first read him four years ago in that intro class, was too brilliant for me. Too out there. I didn't really understand how what he was saying was different from my existing schema of the education process except for that he talked a lot more about personal relationships, which I didn't see relating. With the benefit of hindsight after completing a year of service as a volunteer tutor and mentor in the Detroit Public Schools, I now understand just how much "education" I was encountering in school that I wouldn't have considered so at the time. I was learning to socialize and have productive academic and professional relationships, I was strengthening my understanding of people and how they interact. Dewey was both radical and normal at the same time to a younger me.

Reading his creed for the second time and considering how much my perspectives have changed in just a few short years, I am drawn to the concept that we never stop learning. I think Dewey made that abundantly clear, but never as poetically as in the line "I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living." Therein lies the inspiration for this blog's URL. Education never stops, but society has dedicated twelve years at the beginning of our lives to formally partake in a politicized education process. Now, six years removed from that system, I am still trying to articulate my own creed. So far, Dewey's distinction is the only thing I am completely sure I would steal verbatim. Education is not a race, nor is it temporary. Everything after those twelve years is really just harder to observe unless you adopt a mindset like Dewey's. 

As a history teacher, I am also struck by his profession, "I believe that the school must represent present life." The present life did not come from nothing. Soon, we will all be living what are now just "future lives" which will have in turn come from the present. Thus, as we learn for the present we should also learn from the past. We can represent the present in terms of the things we have already witnessed and with a mindset focused on preparing for the future. Again, it is all part of the process. I hope this blog helps contribute to my own process of living as a teaching intern these next eleven months. I'm sure I will fail plenty, and learn a lot, and I will try to reflect about it here as I strive to become a great teacher. After all, any great thing I do is really just a series of small things (Van Gogh, in case you're wondering).