What Have I Learned? A Response to the REAL Gary's Post

What is the most recent thing I've learned as a teacher? I've been mulling that over since Gary wrote his post and put out the "challenge". I guess I have to haul out my "dirty little secrets" about why I wanted to become a teacher in the first place.

Way back when (1976) when I finally finished my first degree (Arts 4 year, sociology) I began to re-ponder the question..."What do I want to be when I grow up?" I'd had one disastrous (for me) year in the (now defunct) College of Home Economics (I wanted to learn interior design). I'd always said I didn't want to become a teacher; however when I sat down to look at my career options one of the things I always like to do is learn. It seemed to me at that time that teaching was a logical choice to meet that need.

Even though teaching has been difficult (I'm a pretty hardcore introvert) it has met my need to learn (and learn and learn....). Teaching is never dull. If it becomes dull (for me) it means I need to learn something new which has meant going back to university ... in 1981 -82 to study special education, and in 1994 to start a masters in educational communications.

Sometimes I wonder if I'm teaching something new just for the sake of meeting my need for novelty as opposed to being a truly innovative teacher. Am I meeting my students' academic needs or are we just mucking around in the unknown for the sake of doing it? Is it even ethical to depart from the "tried and true" in order to forge new pedagogical territory? My step-daughter has just finished five semesters of medical education; her studying arsenal includes piles of flashcards to prepare her to write multiple choice exams.

. I know I have to follow "the curriculum". My experience and what I have learned from my studies in grad school don't always match up to what "the curriculum" tells me to do. Teaching ro me is a never-ending series of questions, and experiments in order to teach my students effectively.

Inspired by the TL Summit and Cool Math Teachers...

This morning as I was driving my 1 hour drive to Hafford, I had a "ping" moment. My students could take definitions from their geometry unit and with the help of a drawing program create slide images to explain these geometric concepts. I could import them into Windows Movie Maker, or just put them on a Google Docs slide show and post it in our blog.

Yesterday, I had all my students copy a portable program that cannot be named into their documents folder. This program has draw tools that can create circle pies. While the student creates them, he/she can see the exact angle of the pie in a tiny window. I wanted them to have some practice creating and measuring angles, as well as learn how to use draw tools. (Never teach anything that doesn't go with at least 3 other things I always say; it's the wardrobe planning method of instructional design...but I digress).

Today with the same program, each student created a slide and we exported them to .gif. I learned that I had to save the documents to their accounts and then copy them to the homework file, rather than saving them directly the homeowrk file.

Kids said it was the most fun they'd had in a math class. I guess I'd better not do this again. School, especially math class, is supposed to be miserable.

Educational Reform = Societal Reform

I think education has become the scapegoat of society. Schools are expected more and more to perform the duties that only a whole, well-functioning and integrated society can.

I remember some things learned back in my caveperson university days, an era when calculators had just replaced slide rules. I remember learning that schools are a reflection of the communities they serve. If this is true, (I think it is) then it is nearly pointless to ponder educational reform until social reforms take place.

It would seem in our society that we have compartmentalized everything, for example religion, food production, commerce, health care, families, child rearing, elder care, education of the young, safety. We have created experts and institutions for each of these social functions. These experts and institutions tend not to take any responsibility for matters not considered under their authority. The individual must deal with a dizzying number of experts and institutions in order to just survive from day to day.

Somehow in our 21st century world we are getting worse and worse at effectively meeting the needs of the people who live here. Society needs to function as a whole unit since a whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Until we world citizens can de - compartmentalize our institutions and learn to communicate and effectively problem solve together, I don't think anything will get much better, and probably will get a whole lot worse.

Apology to Dean Shareski

I need to apologize to Mr. Shareski. In the heat of an intense tekkie meeting I responded to an image projected by Donna D. and obtained via Dean's flickr. I meant to find the image to attach to my blog to complete the context...but my eyes are failing me and I couldn't see the projection and then I couldn't find the flickr image...and then we had to go home.

Without the image the post made it sound like Mr. S. himself had made the quote, when in fact, he had just posted it from somebody else. Thank you for graciously pointing this out to me in your comment. I am honoured that you would read "Life on the Lefthand Side". I enjoy your blog tremendously and have also enjoyed hearing you present at conferences. You make me think (I hope not just react!) For that I am indebted.
Pat

Personal Lerning Networks: A response to Donna's presentation

This is a response to our tekkie meeting and a comment posted by Dean Shareski that I can't find at the moment but it struck a nerve anyway...so I'll write about it.

I don't think personal learning networks are new. They are the way of the world.

I find Shareski's quote so arrogant. While "technology" is useful (don't get me wrong I LOVE it) I have to ask myself, What constitutes technology?" Isn't a note in a bottle a form of technology? A nail dipped in blood can be used to write. What does it mean "to advance"? Does one need a computer to promote learning and wisdom?

If one does not value learning, expanding one's own horizons, and questioning what one holds to be true, it doesn't matter how much technology one has and how many people one can connect with. Learning is a way of being, a lifestyle, a spiritual practice if you will. Technology, whatever it is, is merely a tool.

It takes a whole (global) village to raise a child doesn't it?

Friday afternoon, fourth class, second day of the second semester, first day second semester with this class. I had an unpleasant incident with two grade 10 students the details of which don't really matter.

What really matters is that the situation in which the students found themselves isn't the situation that most met their needs at that particular time. Neither of them wanted to do what I, the school, society, and possibly the other students wanted them to do. Their actions involved insubordination. The consequences needed to address that were provided by the administration (to whom I am extremely grateful).

Later on, I whined on Twitter, "If we are such an advanced society, why are we keeping kids in school when they don't want to be there. We have nothing better for them?"

The school cannot give either of these students precisely what it is they most need. To succeed in schools, students need to become skilled in time management and delayed gratification. Successful time management and delayed gratification become possible only if the child's needs for food, shelter, clothing, safety,nurturing, identity, love and belonging are adequately met. I don't believe that the school, on its own, can begin to meet these basic human needs. Schools CAN be part of a co-parenting of children with all the rest of the village.

For these two kids, and a whole lot of others, co-parenting from the village isn't happening. Until it does, some teachers and some students are doomed to play out the unpleasant drama we enacted yesterday afternoon.

Would This Qualify as "21st Century Skills"?

My grade 5/6 social studies class is ticked off with me. Really.

We are studying the geographic regions of Canada. We've already gone over what they are by reading a section of a book and making notes. We've even marked the notes together as a class.

As a follow - up, I've put them into groups of 3, given them short articles on the geographic regions of Canada from 2 different photocopiable activity books (which means that the printing is big and the headings and sub headings are large) and I've given them a frame (aka "note taking sheet") into which they have to put the correct information to complete the notes. In order to do the task, hopefully, a) they will work as a group; b) they will use headings and subheadings to help locate information; c) they will look for specific bits of information by skimming and looking for key words or clue words from the notes.

Yes we are using pencil and paper. Yes we are getting information from two different sources and putting it together. Yes maybe we are getting the idea that the information really DOES EXIST even though I can't locate it in 2.5 nanoseconds (Ms. Cone wasn't really lying after all.)

My experience with kids using the internet for locating information is that they have no, or almost no clue that they actually have to READ something beyond the first sentence or paragraph. Hopefully this kind of activity will translate into the development of better over all research skills so that they will use the internet (and other sources) effectively.

Wish us luck.