Facebook is weird

The other day Alec Couros Tweeted about facebook and its weird new "tool" that allows you to reconnect with people you have not connected with in a while. He pointed out that people were angry because facebook was asking them to reconnect with people that are now dead.

Well, this happened to me yesterday. This last August one of my former students passed away in a car accident. She had just graduated. She was going to be a carpenter. Her name was Megan, and I have had a hard time accepting her passing.

I found out about her accident on facebook. In real time. One status update still haunts me. One of her best friends wrote: "Megan, they are saying you were in the car and you are gone....please let this not be true, I don't know if you are okay or not". Another person wrote (I think it was her relative): "dude, I think she's gone".

That last statement hit me hard. I was getting bad news in real time. I was also watching people react in real time. Facebook statuses soon echoed her name and the news everywhere. People created memorial groups and used facebook as a way to cope.

This next part was foreign to me. I have never had someone younger than me and close to me die before. And it was a really hard thing for me to accept. Although facebook provided somewhat of a grieving process for some, I found it difficult. Megan still has a facebook profile. I saw that people were writing on her wall and found myself checking her profile. It makes it harder for me to accept the fact that she is gone.

And now this. Yesterday, under suggestions, I saw that facebook had suggested her as a friend to reconnect with. I do not even know what to think about all this.

Jump off the bandwagon?

We've all heard it..."it's the new bandwagon". Odd statement. What does it even mean? Well, at least in education, here's what I think.

We educators use this term a lot. Maybe because there are a lot of new "bandwagons" to jump on. But what are we really saying? Yes, the term is used to describes something new. But it is more than that. We use it to describe new things that we are not yet sure of, or not yet familiar with. And I'll go even one step further. We often use it to describe things we do not agree with, or do not have the time, energy, and patience to look into. We use it as a cop out. It's our way of saying "I am not willing to look into this or consider it". We simply write it off as the "new bandwagon".

Why do we do this? It's not because we're lazy. It's not because we don't get excited by new ideas. But here is why:

1. Traditionally, a "new bandwagon" means more meaningless paperwork handed down by administration.

2. Many teachers have been in education a long time and (sadly) do not see a need for change. We think the system is just fine the way it is.

Yes, there are a lot of "new bandwagons" out there. And no, we do not have to jump on every one. But, we should at least take time to inspect the bandwagon. To see if it could help us or hurt us somehow. If we don't, we're doing our students an injustice. So please, next time you catch yourself saying "it's just the new bandwagon" realize that this is a cop out and that the education system needs more from you.

Face Time

What I am about to say hear is not anything new. It is not anything even remotely new. It is just me working through my own thoughts. A process of reflection if you will. I have been thinking about this post for a while now. I guess it's finally time.

Betcha thought this was going to be something controversial, something interesting. You were wrong. Anyway, I am a teacher that uses technology as much as possible. I get excited about new ideas. I try to bring technology into the classroom in order to make education relevant for our students. I feel that our schools are drastically out of date. They are physically and technologically out of date. Students are connected in ways that we are not. Technology is part of their lives. Or is it?

How many times have I just assumed that students are doing something (e.g. texting, facebooking, etc..)? A lot. How many times have I been wrong? A lot. Oh, don't get me wrong, they are doing these things....but maybe not to the extent that I think they are.

Last year we had a baseball game at school. Students from varying grades participated. I hit a couple home runs but that is beside the point. During that time I did not see one student with a cell phone. We were having fun. We were connecting in a personal way. I thought to myself: "self, maybe you focus on technology too much. Maybe you need to focus more on personal connectedness as well". I could have had students answer an academic question before receiving their pitch. I could have done all sorts of stuff. It was something cool and fun, and it was without the use of technology. Sometimes I forget this side of education.

This summer I was with my wife at the West Edmonton Mall. I saw a lot of young people texting while walking. They weren't even paying attention to the friends they were with. Suprisingly, I also saw a lot of dads texting while dining with their families. Two different generations, both missing out on the world around them because of their cell phones. I stereotyped, both groups were connected - one to a huge network of friends, the other to a network of work and respnosibility. In either case they were missing out on the personal relationships right in front of their face. Sometimes I forget this side of education.

This is a common argument against technology. Students spend too much time on devices and not enough "face to face" time. This was a concern at the beginning of this year when my new school rethought our cell phone policy. It was, previously, no cell phones in the school. It is now, no cell phones during class time. I argued for this. This is how our young people function and connect. I do not fully understand it. I fear that "face" time is being lost. I do not text a lot. I do not need to know what my friends are doing throughout the day. However, this is a reality for my students. Why keep them from it? Shouldn't we try to find an educational avenue here? After all, it is what our students are familiar with. Our students are functioning in ways that we do not fully understand. We are not being relevant to their realities. We need to rethink our system and ourselves. We need to ask ourselves questions and reflect. Maybe technological devices are replacing face time. Maybe there is more to this than just negative connotations. I never forget this side of education.

Higher Expectations

Last week we took our Outdoor Ed class to Kananaskis and Banff. We went hiking, tented in below freezing weather, endured a snowstorm and went whitewater rafting. One of the teachers who helped (and by helped I mean did most of) with the hiking plans had lived in the area. She is a maniac. We nicknamed her little Hitler. Her hikes were hard. The first day we hiked through 2 - 3 feet of snow to get to a frozen lake at high altitude. The second day we climbed a mountain - a very steep mountain. Our first hike was 15.4 kms round trip. The second was a little shorter. It was hard (especially with an ankle sporting some torn ligaments).

The thing I came away with - we need to have higher expectations for our students. This is nothing new. We have heard it over and over. This was the first time I have truly witnessed the effects of having those higher expectations. The students were challenged - they could have given up; they could of complained; they could have said "this is too much"...and they might have been right. But we expected them to do it. And they did. And they were extremely glad they did. They had a strong sense of accomplishment. And they had tons of fun. Plus they weren't going to let "hop-a-long" beat them up the mountain.

One female student had, in the past, had a near death experience with canoeing. Her life jacket got stuck on some branches in a set of rapids. She almost drowned. Yet she came whitewater rafting - and she even did the cliff jump into freezing cold water...actually everyone did! She was glad that we had pushed her to do it. The most interesting part - the high expectations were easily transferable. Students started having higher expectations for themselves, and for each other. All this accomplishment and a highly successful experience just because "Little Hitler" believed in us. Thanks Little Hitler.

In Summary

This goes with my last post.  It is a question I have.  Is there such a thing as summative assessment?  And if the answer is yes, are we looking at education all wrong?  

An idea: there is no such thing as summative assessment.  Or at least there shouldn't be.  Isn't it our hope that students will continue to learn...and expand upon and deepen their skills?  Then isn't all assessment, in terms of our students, formative?  Summative assessment exists only for teachers.  It is a way for us to wrap things up.  But do things need to be "wrapped up" (okay, I know you're thinking it...there's a good Sex Ed. joke here).  Seriously though, what if we viewed all assessment as formative.  Would it mean that we would be much more connected with the grades below us and above us (does this include post secondary)?  Anyways, just a thought.  I haven't explored it too much yet, but it is an interesting concept.

Leaving a Paper Trail

If somebody asked me "what is one thing you need to work on as a teacher" I would probably say assessment.  Most teachers might agree - assessment is a very difficult area.  I was talking with Gary Ball a little while ago about the benefits of PD.  One of the questions among our division seems to be: how do we, as teachers, grow through PD but not be out of our classrooms too much?  I am not sure there is a definite answer to this question.  Well, yes there is.  If we did PD on our "own time" rather than class time...but then there is the question of "do we get paid more?"  Anyways, I am a bit off topic.  I have missed a lot of school this semester, mainly due to PD.  And while I have grown immensely as an educator because of this PD, I feel my classes have maybe suffered a bit.  Gary simply asked me: has what you learned transferred into higher learning for your students.  I responded a most definite yes!  And here is my problem...how do I prove it?

One of my flaws lies in feedback.  Translation - I am horrible at handing assignments back in a timely matter.  But flawed as my system may be...it works incredibly well.  I monitor student's progress throughout the year.  I note which skills they have mastered, which skills they are having trouble with, and factors that may have inhibited or encouraged success in the past.  I have regular conferences with my students.  I remember everything they have done and constantly "refer back" in our discussions.  We have an open forum in which assessment and success are constantly discussed.  Yet, when it comes to paperwork - I fail drastically.  However, I am finding that if I do "paperless" assignments (e.g. online learning), I am much more efficient.  So I have started to explore this further.  Although my system does need a lot of work, it at least is starting to achieve what I am aiming for - for the students to be focused on learning rather than grades.  

And I  guess this is a problem that I have struggled with - the way we traditionally think about assessment.  Assessment should not attempt to have students complete assignments - it should attempt to allow students to demonstrate their skills through numerous ways.  The biggest problem I see: grades.  I would rather not give them.  Assigning grades is too subjective and realistically, not meaningful at all.  What is meaningful is an in depth analysis and discussion of student's demonstrated skills.  Teachers focus too much on marks, and so do students.  Again, I don't want students to focus on their grade - I want them to focus on their learning.

Last week I attended a "First Steps Writing" training program.  We were given examples of students work and then told, in groups, to assess and classify students into their writing ability group (based on a rubric).  For the most part our groups agreed - but sometimes we didn't.  While we were doing this exercise I realized something.  This is what I want assessment to look like.  Even assessing in groups, the rubrics were still subjective.  But I believe we did a better job because we collaborated.  I did not take the papers back to my classroom to "mark".  Instead we discussed the student's skills.  It was the collaborative discussion focused on learning that was meaningful.  We did not assign grades.  We simply wanted to figure out what skills students had demonstrated, and what skills they needed to work on.  This is the kind of report card I want to hand out.  And this is the process that we need to use.  Just one more positive aspect to PLC's I guess.  One problem, students still need marks to go to University - I am not sure what to do here.

Final thought: I enjoy using sports analogies for assessment.  Professional hockey players practice certain things.  They, and their coaches know exactly what they need to work on.  They have goals.  More importantly, they receive constant feedback.  They watch footage, they conference, they collaborate, and they either get more or less playing time.  A player always wants his/her coach to let them know where they stand - what they need to work on.  This is what I should be doing with my students.  I need to get my students to, like the hockey player, take a deep interest in their learning...and I need to provide constant feedback.  Which I do.  But I am not good at maintaining a paper trail.  So maybe my problem is not so much assessment, but accountability.  I don't know - your thoughts?  Feel free to be blunt and honest.

A Day at the Rink

There is something I have been wondering for some time now.  It is something that I have tried writing about, have had conversations about, and still cannot come to a conclusion.  Everytime I have had a conversation or tried writing about this topic, I could not seem to figure out what I was trying to say.  I guess it's more of a questions - are we really the experts?

What I mean is, are we the educational experts?  Many would argue yes.  We have been trained in the fine art of education.  And our level of expertise varies widely.  We arguably reference ourselves as somewhat of experts.  We throw out names like cabers at the Highland Games.  Everyone knows who the big names are, and what they are doing in terms of education.  

But like I have asked before: where are the students?  Could they be the potential "experts" that we seem to be searching for?  I am not sure if our students know what they want, or need to learn.  I am not sure if they have any answers for best teaching practices or innovative education.  I am not sure if they would be able to help guide education in a much needed new direction.  But then again, I am not sure that anyone has ever asked them.  Sure, we've had brief conversations with them and maybe even included them in a conference or two - but have we really asked them?  Have we asked them on a continual basis?  Have we asked that them to help guide us?  Have we asked them to be educational consultants?  

We could argue that they, unlike us, have not been trained in the fine art of education.  But I think that that might be the beauty of it.  They have not been trained to educate.  We look for ways to teach, they look for ways to learn.  They are the ones who want and need something out of the system.  They are the ones who stand to gain, or lose, from ideas.  Why shouldn't at least some of those ideas be their own?

Don't get me wrong...I love the way that educators are sharing.  And to the extent that we are sharing.  But sometimes I question the dynamics.  Are we sharing what we are doing to pursue higher levels of learning?  Or are we doing it to advance our own names?  I often hear "you should see what this teacher is doing with his/her students!"  And yeah, I usually get excited...but is this the right way to approach it?  Why do we just assume that it is the educator who is doing the amazing thing(s)?  Aren't his/her students doing amazing things as well?  And why do I never, or seldom, hear about the students that are initiating the amazing thing - why is it always the educators?  I had this conversation with Gary Ball today.  He perhaps put into words (better than I could) what I was getting at: "Oh God!  We are hockey parents!."  Do we ever push our students to pursue things they are not interested in?  Sure, but we are getting better.  If a player excels on the ice, does the parent accept (partial) credit?  Do we accept credit for our student's success?

I started questioning our edblogosphere - most of what I read or hear refers to the amazing things teachers are doing with their students, and not vice versa.  Then I came across a blog post by Eldon Germann.  In it he referred to a previous blog post by Alec Couros.  It talked about an unfortunate incident he ran into with sharing photos on Flickr.  There were many comments left and one in particular caught my attention.  Aaron Dewald wrote: "I was in a discussion with my dad about this. He’s 54, I’m 29. He finds it amazing that I’m willing to put pictures of me, my family, friends etc… wonders what the world is coming to. I do it because that’s how I grew up. I do it because I like to connect and share."  It made me wonder once again - are we really the experts?  Our students are growing up in times that we, try as we might, do not understand.  Some of us are on the cusp of these times (regardless of age).  But our realities are different from that of our students.  No matter how hard we try, we may not be equipped to be "experts" of those realities.  Perhaps we need more student experts.  And perhaps we need to listen to them...closely.

And then I finished reading Eldon's blog.  He had shared Alec Couros' topic with his Grade 10 class.  But, rather than share we he had done with his students, he shared what his students had done.  He featured their blog responses on his blog.  It was suddenly no longer about what he had done with his students, but simply what his students had done.  It was no longer about the hockey parents, but the players.  After all, it wouldn't be much of a game without any players.  

Sitting on top of the blog bubble

9:10 a.m. - Everyone in the gym can feel the excitement building.  Students quickly shuffle back and forth from side to side.  Suddenly everyone seems to move fluently with the sound of the basketball dribbling down the court - everyone except me, I do not move fluenty.  In comes a student half my size - here's my chance, I go for the block but he fakes to my right.  Luckily I stopped his elbow with my jaw.  So here is the premise for this upcoming blog post...call it building background information.  

Actually, this post has nothing to do with basketball.  I am just thinking ahead and using the elbow to the jaw as a potential scapegoat in case people greatly disagree with me.  What I do want to discuss comes from an experience I was part of a few months ago - E-journalism.  As I have already mentioned, it was an eye opening experience.  Students from different schools working together in a projects based environment with multiple teachers as guides.  This, I thought to myself, is what education should feel like all of the time.  However, something was "off".  Not everything was 100%.  We were covering a conference held for teachers about how to use technology to enhace student learning.  Although I had an idea of why I had an "off" feeling it wasn't until I watched the video featured in my last blog that I realized what was missing - the students.  Well, that's not true.  The students were there.  They were covering the conference.  David Warlick came and talked to the students.  He even hosted a panel discussion with the students.  So why do I say the students were missing?  Read on.

I didn't see any students being part of the other presentations.  Our E-journalism team showed videos during lunch, but we had mixed emotions about the response.  Overall, we felt like teachers in a disengaged class - many people seemed to not be paying attention.  Why do we do this?  Why do we as teachers hold conferences that are really about our students, yet not include our students?  Shouldn't we be listening to them?  Are we the experts?  Are they?  Do they know what they want?  Do we know what they need?  I don't know.  But we sure have a lot of "experts" and most of them are not students.  

Even now I am still having difficulty processing my thoughts.  All I know is that our students were covering a conference that was all about them, about teaching them and connecting with them.  A lot of people at the conference were our "tech" and "collaboration gurus".  You would think that it would be easy for our students to get immersed.  And it was.  And it wasn't.  Like I said, David Warlick came up and talked to our students.  He talked to them for quite some time.  And it was an interesting conversation.  Donna DesRoches was part of our team, and an organizer - but she found time to come up and "visit'.  Gary Ball showed up, so did Ryan Hackl.  Mark Kowalski came and helped us with our Mac problems.  But that was it.  Well, not exactly.  Students set up intereviews with keynotes...so they spent some time with those people as well.  And now I'm no longer sure.  Maybe there was more engagement than I thought.  

I guess it's kind of like my ideas about blogging.  I love blogging, but it's hard.  I mean, why do we really blog?  To converse with others.  To bounce ideas, to collaborate, etc...  But I am finding that it is time consuming.  I love reading other people's blogs.  And commenting.  I love when other people read my blogs.  And comment.  But does it benefit our students?  I think so...most of the time.  We are sharing ideas, and defining them, and redefining them.

But I think that there is a blog "bubble" and this is the part that is hard.  In this blog bubble are the more prominent bloggers.  We know who they are.  They are amazing.  And all of us secretely want to become part of that blog bubble.  But are we running the risk of losing our way?  And what I mean by that is: is anyone else worried that it might not always be about the students, and about education - but rather about us?  Are we focused too much on being in that bubble?

The skills they need...

This video was apparently shown at the last admin council meeting.  It was brought to my attention by my administrator.  The first thing I thought was "this kid is awesome".  Then I thought how valuable it was that he was being coached and taught these skills.  Then I was amazed at his message to teachers - here was a young boy telling us teachers what students need from us.  And this seems to be a current trend - I think we are doing a better job of listening to our young generations.  Ideally, we need to mesh experience with fresh ideas.  I love the fact that this young boy was the keynote speaker.  And then something dawned on me.  Despite all the PD events I have been to, I have not seen our students or other young people a part of it.  I have not yet, at any of our "teacher" conferences, seen a keynote speaker younger than myself.  Something is wrong here.  

Anyway, I showed this video to my Social Studies 30 as means to spark a conversation about current education systems.  To be honest, their response surprised me.  They didn't even seem that interested in the message that was being sent.  They were, however, interested in how that message was being sent.  Comments like "this kid could be the next President" were common.  Bottom line: they were amazed at how well prepared this young boy was to address a large crowd, and how fluently and intellectually he did it.  They were amazed at his public speaking and analytical skills.  They wondered about his education - and said that the skills he was learning would pretty much guarantee that he will be "successful".  The bell rang and my students slowly filtered out of my room - and I wondered if I was helping students develop the skills that would ensure their success later on in life.  If I compared the education I facilitate to the education this young boy receives....well, I think I would feel inferior.  

NOT Acceptable Use

In my last post I questioned our approach (as educators) to what we believe to be acceptable use (in terms of technology).  Basically, I am not quite sure that we are "on the same page" as our students - that we are missing amazing educational opportunities.  I used an example in which a teacher asked a student in my class to get off youtube.  That teacher was Gary Ball.  Now Gary and I have a great relationship and the example I used was meant to probe into deeper issues.  I used this example because Gary has a firm grasp of technological use and is really an innovative and progressive thinker in terms of technology.  I knew that Gary and I could talk about what happened and use it to benefit future education of our students.  This is one answer - to have collaborative relationships with your colleagues so that you can figure out best educational practice.  Anyway, here is a snippet of Gary's response.

I don't really like the idea of letting every teacher make their own decisions on THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. The problem is that one classroom has the potential to affect the entire network. One classroom all on Facebook has less of an effect on all of us. We need to be consistent on an issue like this.

Anyways - I think that the discussion needs to continue. The real answer is more bandwidth - but until then we have to find some way to cope with our students educational needs and the limitations of our system.

I found this interesting - one because I didn't expect this to be Gary's response, and two - because what he says has some interesting implications.  Gary's argument is realistic.  He disagrees with leaving it up to individual teacher's discretion for one reason and one reason only - the "limitations of our system".  What we do online drastically affects other classrooms online.  This is because of bandwidth.  If a teacher is giving "free time" on the internet everyday, although that is an issue administration would deal with, it affects everyone.  I talked to Gary and had him clarify his reasoning.  Sadly what he says is true - we need to "find some way to cope with our students educational needs and the limitations of our system".  Now, we both disagree with this, but it is our reality.  What we would argue is that the limitations of our system are also limiting our students educational opportunities.  We need to change this and NOT be okay with it.  I have heard that more bandwidth is high on the agenda for the upcoming year.  Thankfully we are part of a progressive educational division that is in tune with the future of education.  

Acceptable Use or Accepting Use

Bell rings.  Social Studies 30 filters out the door.  And I am confused.  Why?  Glad you asked.  I showed my students a program they can use to create their own myths and legends (thanks Donna DesRoches!).  We have been learning about sweatshops etc.. and I thought this online program would be a good way for students to demonstrate their understanding of the issue.  So, we started making an example story together (it really is a cool website, seriously, go check it out...I'll wait) and the enthusiasm level in the room was quite high.  They started making them and I have to say that I wasn't quite prepared for what happened next.  Although they didn't finish, they were doing an excellent...no masterful...no absolutely fantastical job!  They were exhibiting a deep, deep, understanding of the issue - and being more creative than I had anticipated.  Wow, either this was a great opportunity for them to demonstrate understanding in a fun and super engaging way or - I am the best teacher ever and their learning is all thanks to me.  Yeah, #1 is more accurate.  Anyway, cool website - tons of potential...I will put up a video analyzing it in a little while.

So I told you that story to tell you this story.  Often, and I know it's hard to believe, learning takes place beyond our control.  Meaning: no matter what we try to "teach", students might find something else to learn.  This happened to me.  Everyone was engaged in the myths and legends lesson.  They were excellent...no masterful...no, well you know.  Two girls at the side of the room happened to wander on to youtube while they were creating their sweatshop story. Now, here's where my confusion lies.  Students today are extreme multi-taskers...this we know. And I don't mean like I can pick my nose while driving my car multi-tasking...they can do many many different things at once (like pick their nose and do their hair).  But seriously,  I think this is a huge issue in education.  And you know who's making it an issue - you, me, us.  We have before us a generation of students that can work on several different tasks at the same time and we are not capitalizing on this amazing talent.  We squander their skills. We create policies that ban multi-tasking behavior (no youtube, no facebook, no bebo, etc...) We ban multi-layered learning (no youtube, no facebook, no...), well, we allow it - but only on our own terms.  I know that we are not doing a very good job of being relevant in our student's eyes.  We ask them to operate in ways that don't make sense to them.  When they are at home working on something, or doing learning on their own, they are free to multi-task as they please.  Yet when they come to school we tell them that they are not on task.  But what if they are?  And what if we have trouble understanding this?  Maybe we need to pay better attention to our students.  This is something I have tried to do.  

A while back we were conflicted about our acceptable use policy.  Some teachers wanted to ban social networking and video sites (what, then, is the point of having the internet?), others wanted to police it, others didn't care.  A good argument was made - we are not teaching our students anything by banning them from sites...we need to teach them how to use the internet responsibly.  And I whole heartedly agree.  For awhile I was "get off facebook", "no youtube during class time" etc...  Not because I agreed (which I didn't) but because it was the general policy of our school.  Then we decided to teach them to be responsible - and all sites were open (within reason).  I should mention that we have always allowed youtube, bebo, etc... if it is being used directly for educational reasons.  However, I wasn't quite sure what our new use policy was (and am still confused).  I think that we decided that it would be up to teachers to "police" use.  That internet management is tied in with classroom management.  I am okay with this.  A gray area does exist though. - who deems what is educational?  Next paragraph.

Back to my story, the two girls at the side of the room...remember them.  Well, they're on youtube - I know it and they know I know.  You know how they know I know - because they aren't being secretive about it.  They let me know they're on youtube.  Most of my students enjoy listening to music while working on projects - they know that if it is okay with everyone in the room, it's okay with me.  Nobody had an ipod or mp3 player so they decided to use youtube.  Okay, so right now you might be thinking that "hey, that's not educational".  And you'd be right...on the surface.  What if I told you that music provides a background noise that my students actually think boosts their productivity (seriously, we have had many conversations about how and why).  Well, maybe that's a weak argument.  And maybe there was no real educational value to the youtube music video.  And maybe I should have done what I have done many times in the past and told her to shut it off because it is not related to her assignment and is eating up bandwidth and blah blah blah.  But like I said, maybe we need to pay more attention to our students.  So I listened.  The two girls starting having a conversation about music - more specifically new music; actually, new music videos; actually, which new music videos are the best and why; actually, what makes these new music videos the best and why.  They were talking about camera techniques and all sorts of stuff.  Here they were, sitting in my class - a class that I have designed to facilitate and foster critical thinking and analytical skills, and they were using those skills in a context relevant and interesting to them, on their own!  I pulled up the myths and legends program - can we add audio...yes we can! Sweet!  I learned something too and now everyone is more excited - plus two girls at the side of the room have just exhibited some amazing critical and analytical skills.  All because of a youtube video.  Now I could have told them to get on task - or I could have listened, which I'm glad I did.  My eureka moment was short lived however, when another teacher walked into my room, saw the one girl on youtube and told her to get off because it was eating up bandwidth.  She tried using her analytical and persuasive skills but to no avail.  Plus, she gave some lip - we'll have to work on respectful arguing.  

This has been my longest post yet.  And why?  Well I guess I'm trying to work through my own thoughts - but really, I'm looking for some answers.  The teacher that came into my room was not wrong for kicking the girl off of youtube (other than that he should have realized that I was probably okay with her being on it so in my eyes, there was some learning taking place).  But there is no way he could have known that some learning had taken place - he wasn't there for the background information - which is why I believe a "left up to teacher discretion" policy might be the best policy.   However, as often happens, it became a power struggle.  Now why is this?  Why do students protest?  If they knew what they were doing was wrong or saw it as completely off task they would be less likely to argue.  They probably argue because a) what they are doing is fun and engaging, and b) we are asking them to operate in ways that do not make sense to them.  If they are more interested in something other than my class - why is that?  Is my class boring to them?  Is it not relevant?  How can I use the tools they find relevant to help them learn?  How can I do this while following acceptable use policy?  Ultimately, how do we teach students in a way that best suits them.  Maybe they work better when they are allowed to peruse brief distractions.  Maybe they work better when they have multiple things on the go - maybe this makes them feel more involved and connected (today I had a student facebook chat her friend in another school about how to survive a bear attack because this is the project she was working on for my outdoor ed class).  But here is the big problem - bandwidth.  There is not enough of it.  Especially at our school.  What's it like at your school? Realistically, this is what people use the internet for.  And we can do all the listening and tuning in we want - but if the fact remains that videos and social networking sites eats up too much of our valuable bandwidth....

If our means don't meet student needs, what do we do about it? 

Some Questions

What if...
our curriculums are wrong?
our concept of traditional skills, standards and content are wrong?
what I learned about teaching English in university only 4 years ago has drastically changed?
kids can communicate just as clearly through shorthand text messages as I can in a formal essay?
we refuse to acknowledge any of this as plausible?

What if...
we are too self-centered and egotistical to think that things can change drastically in a short amount of time?
we are too ignorant to realize the entire planet is shifting and education is stuck in neutral?
we are too stuck in a model of what we think content areas should look like and include to be advocates for elaborate change?
I don't know how to keep up?

What if...
we think that kids should be learning what we learned?
we compare ourselves to our students?
we compare students from last year to students today?
we are stuck in a bog hole of stale ideas but view ourselves as fresh?

How do we.....
give students appropriate skills?
come to the realization that although we are the experts...we know very little?
we keep up with change? (and don't say some things never change?)

A few days ago Dan Meyer wrote a blog titled "In Defense of Digital Media". He said that although "[his] preference is also for the real thing over a digital simulation of the real thing" sometimes "digital media is preferable to the real thing". One example:

The real thing is too mathematically noisy for classroom use. Jason prefers a real demonstration of projectile motion using bottle rockets to my use of online simulators but that introduces acceleration and wind resistance— mathematical noise — into the system. Let's not romanticize the real or the digital. They are both deficient. They both require a cost-benefit analysis.

This got me thinking - how much of what we do is romanticized. Yes, we would love students to experience certain opportunities in the flesh...but how much of that is actually a benefit to student learning? But then I thought - we are educating students for a future that we know very little about. What are the most important skills for them to gain? Isn't mathematical noise a good thing (I am not a Math teacher)? Don't we want our students to be problem solvers in a real world context...shouldn't they be creative and face a variety of situations in order to prepare them for life outside the closed model system?

And then I thought - are we a closed model system that tries to avoid "educational" noise?

Lions, Crocodiles...and the WTO?

This video has been circulating for some time now - for those of you who haven't seen it it is a video that captures an extrodinary set of events. I had heard that it was going to be made into a National Geographic documentary and I guess that is true (look here). If you haven't yet seen the video, watch it first before reading on.



Wow! A complex video, and story, in so many ways. Not only are there evil villians (the lions and a crocodile), but also a happy ending (maybe not for the predators but certainly for the water buffalo). And then of course there are the people watching.

Okay, intersting...so what? Well, as teachers, we always look for a learning opportunity. I was excited by this video, it interested me immensly...but now what? How can I use it? Well, it just so happened that in my Social Studies classes we were discussing what I like to call the 'big fish, little fish" topic. I offer a comic strip that shows a big fish about to eat a medium sized fish who is about to eat a little fish. The captions read (from big fish to little fish) "the world is just", "there is some justice in the world", and "there is no justice in the world". Now, for you Social Studies teachers you immediately understand that we will go on to talk about power and justice in the world...for you Math teachers, well...there are 3 fish. I next offer the comic strip that shows a big fish about to eat a little fish; the little fish then whistles and all his little fish friends show up and together - eat the big fish. The comic strip is called "organize" and the lesson is taken from the book Rethinking Globalization (check out their website...it is a great organization).

Given this context you may begin to understand what an opportunity a video like "Battle at Kruger" offers for extended learning. We began to use the Battle at Kruger as an analogy for the world in relation to power struggles and justice. Who might be the big fish and medium fish (e.g. lions and crocodile). Oh, I see, well the lions could be the United States and Canada and the little fish could be India or Pakistan etc... Students then came up with some general analogies that I really liked. The lions and crocodile could be "developed" countries, transnational corporations, or world organizations (such as WTO) and the water buffalo could be "Third World" countries and governments. The people on the safari could be us. You see, the water buffalo finally realize that they are powerful through numbers and fight back. The people on the safari simply sit back and watch - they do nothing to interfere (and some eventually benefit from the video). We had been talking about sweatshops. Students applied this to the video. If Third World governments worked together to demand better conditions etc... the lions and crocodiles would have less power. And what about us, the safarians, what should we do? Anyway, students eventually developed their own in-depth analogies of the situation. Had it not been for this video I would never have thought of using the animal kingdom to connect learning of power and justice with a deeper context. But I guess that is the joy of teaching, finding those things that really connect and solidify student learning on a deeper level.

Podcasts

Well, I have been playing around with the idea of podcasts for some time now.  I finally figured out how to use them in a meaningful way...here is a short clip of the first Pow-Wow mix my students ever made...they did it in about 15 minutes.  Now, I can either embed a player for everyone to listen to...like here - 

Powered by Podbean.com

Or...I can embed it to be downloaded (or so I think).  This would mean that other students could download songs (or even videos) we created and play them in their ipods.  Am I right? Any input would be greatly appreciated...Eldon, if you read this I'm looking at you.

Download this episode (right click and save)

Give me your ideas!

Here is a video one of my students made about a game called "Pos or Not".  I am beginning to see a huge advantage to having students do things like this.  It is interesting to see that while she guides us through the game she also engages with the material.  As she addresses topics she points the mouse to the part where she is talking about - too bad Jing doesn't let you highlight and draw on the screen while recording (Voice Thread?).  Perhaps the biggest benefits, are that her video has provided a model for other students as well as for herself.  After posting her video on her blog she started analyzing and critiquing herself - what could have she done better, what did she do a good job of - oh, she needs to speaker louder, etc...  Anyways, this is the first time I have had my class do something like this and I am super excited.  If you are way ahead of me in doing stuff like this with your students I would love to hear for you and gain some insight.