Feb 12 2010

Mastery Leaning versus Resource Constraints

Not to harp on a point, but there is another aspect of this conversation that I’d like to open for discussion. It is all well and good to talk of mastery learning, as I do, or Vygotsky’s ‘Zone of Proximal Development’, as you do. I passionately believe that the philosophy and practice implied by both concepts is powerful, foundational and essential for elementary school education.

The issue I’d like to raise here is resources. I spent two days a week in kindergarten last year. The developmental differences were all too clear. Even with three adults in a room with twenty students, the requirements of meeting the individual needs of all these students was overwhelming. Best efforts were made to bring all of the students along, but the tempo of the curriculum also required moving on after a time.

I wonder how one balances the need to tailor education to each student and their developmental readiness with the scarcity of teaching resources (i.e. time and teacher attention)? This may not be the place for this discussion, but I am concerned by the gap between the my heartfelt philosophical committment to bringing each child along and the imposed demands of standards and reaching a certain aggregate (i.e. class-wide) level of learning over the course of the year.

There are a few logical responses. One would be requiring extra learning time with lagging students, either during free time or after school. Another strategy would be tiering workgroups by ability so as to concentrate attention on groups with similar learning needs and developmental readiness. I am curious what thoughts or experiences anybody might have as regards this challenge.

Feb 11 2010

Kindergarten and Developmental Readiness

This is a subject near and dear to my heart. There is a clear collision in modern American kindergarten between increasing academic demands and serious developmental differences between students. This four to six year old period is a time of major development, particularly in areas around writing, reading and reading comprehension. There are large differences in developmental capability amidst kindergarten students.

In addition to the variability between individuals, there now appears to be a systematic variance between the sexes. Research tells us that the language center development in the average 5 year old boy is equivalent to that of an average 3 1/2 year old girl (Sax, 2001, p. 5). We wouldn’t expect a 3 1/2 year old girl to master the academic demands of kindergarten. Yet in assigning expectations based on attendance of kindergarten, regardless of individual developmental readiness, we are doing the equivalent in many cases.

Kindergarten can be a critical period for students. It is their first introduction to formal education. It is a time where they begin to form opinions and expectations of themselves in an academic context and of school as an institution. I feel it is essential to provide the most positive, supportive experience to kindergarten students. Part of that experience must be a clear recognition of their individual developmental readiness and the necessity of finding academic success for each student during this time. Some of this burden falls upon the parents and their preschool advisors to properly evaluate a child’s readiness for modern kindergarten. But necessarily much of this burden will fall on kindergarten teachers to provide this positive experience. Understanding the developmental landscape of this age group can make that task clearer, if not easier.
References

Lenroot, R., Gogtay, N., Greenstein, D., Wells, E., Wallace, G., Clasen, L., Blumenthal, J., … Giedd, J. (2007, March 17). Sexual dimorphism of brain developmental trajectories during childhood and adolescence. NeuroImage, 36(), 1065-1073. Retrieved from http://www.boysadrift.com/2007Giedd.pdf

Sax, L. (2001). Reclaiming kindergarten: Making kindergarten less harmful to boys. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 2(), 3-12. Retrieved from http://www.boysadrift.com/Sax_APA_2001.pdf

Feb 11 2010

Mastery Learning and Assessment

I believe that each child has the right and capability to learn the course material. My instincts are to incorporate principles of mastery learning into the classroom. Mastery learning says each student doesn’t move forward until they’ve demonstrated mastery of the current material. Since much of the curriculum is additive (dependent on prior learning), this has the added advantage of making sure the student is adequately prepared for each section of curriculum as it arrives.

Mastery learning requires frequent assessment. But in mastery learning, the relationship between teacher and pupil is subtly different. Because the goal is mastery, the student (and teacher) must commit to truly learning a body of knowledge, not simply being present while it is taught. To the extent that this is true, assessment changes from an onerous task to a useful measure of progress towards a goal. Teacher and student are eager to understand how complete comprehension and retention have been.

In addition to protecting the student’s right to learn, frequent assessment is efficient. All too often, teachers move forward in the mistake belief that as subject has been taught. This confusion between presenting the subject and it being absorbed leads to much surprise and frustration. But not so with frequent assessment. Likewise, assessment is a kind of teaching, a kind of drilling. Like flash cards, frequent assessment develops the habit of learn, test, repeat. This drives the knowledge home at the same time as it assures that comprehensive comprehension is achieved.

Feb 11 2010

Critical Brain Growth

What factors must you consider for classroom instruction and management in relation to periods of critical brain growth?

There are a number of ways child development should impact classroom instruction and management strategies.

First, in some cases development is very difficult or even impossible to accomplish outside of a certain time frame (the “critical period”). This long observed phenomenon has been scientifically documented in humans or other animals in such varied areas as motor systems, visual systems, the auditory system, the somatosensory system, the taste/olfactory system. It also occurs in “multimodal functions” such as imprinting, stress and anxiety, sleep and language (Hensch, 2004). To the extent this is true, it is obviously essential to provide the appropriate stimulus at the appropriate time. Likewise, and more frequently, development may be most easily accomplished in certain time frames (the “sensitive period”). Again, teachers and curriculum designers need to be aware of current research and incorporate that knowledge into classroom stimulus.

Second, these critical periods of brain growth are reflected in major changes in capabilities (Bee & Boyd, 2007, p. 97). As a teacher or curriculum designer it is important to understand the developmental growth taking place in children of the relevant age. It is a kind of abuse to ask and expect children to perform tasks (educational or behavioral) which they simply lack the capability to perform. This knowledge is complicated by the fact that children enter these periods of growth at varying times. Also, the year or more age differences of children in the same grade further exacerbates this capability differentiation. Thus, some students may be fully capable of a task while others many not be. The ability to perform assigned tasks also has knock-on implications for the sense of self-worth of the students and their social status. Teachers need to be aware of these factors and monitor the classroom accordingly.

Finally, there is a nutritional component to many stages of growth (Bee & Boyd, 2007, p. 96-97). While there is a limit to what school officials can accomplish in this regard, giving students the knowledge, opportunity and support for proper nutrition is often overlooked and quite helpful.
 
Having said all that, I agree with Bee & Boyd, “Most neuroscientists agree that it is far too soon to form conclusions about how knowledge of brain development might inform ‘brain-based’ teaching strategies for students of different ages” (2007, p. 96). I think that thinking about ‘critical stages of growth’ and other neuro-biological concepts with regard to school aged children is best done in context with other developmental theories. It is absolutely essential for teachers to understand human development, especially as regards behavior and learning, but applying this knowledge in the classroom is best done with a very broad brush rather than a surgical scalpel. Observing each individual student and their learning experience, in the context of a wealth of developmental knowledge, is the way to help each child achieve full potential.

References
Bee, H., & Boyd, B. (2007). The developing child (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Hensch, T. K. (2004). Critical period regulation. Annual Review Of Neuroscience, 27, 549-579. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mnh&AN=15217343&site=ehost-live
Wikipedia. (2009). Critical period. Retrieved February 11, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period

Feb 3 2010

Literacy and the Male Brain

From the Gurian Institute:

Literacy and the Male Brain: The Path to Success

 I received this powerful email from Dr. Norman Johnson.  I hope you will find its perspective a helpful one as you advocate in your communities and in policy debates for our boys and girls both.  Thank you, Dr. Johnson.


-Michael Gurian

 Dear Michael,

I saw an article in the media regarding how much boys have become victims, especially Black boys, in regard to being so far behind girls in literacy.  I was glad to see that the Gurian Institute is helping to move the dialogue forward, into areas of NEED rather than victimology.  Of course, boys in general tend to be behind in literacy (one and one half  years behind girls on average, with the Black boys’ average deficit tending to be wider), but how we talk about it does really matter, I believe.

As a Black man in his seventies, a professor, a child advocate, and a Gurian Institute Trainer, my perspective is this:  when boys/men had no or few school competitors, boys tacit language and literacy issues went unnoticed therefore unattended to.  You may remember that in the not so distant past, boys and girls may have both gone to school, but girls were tracked into home economics, secretarial science, teaching, nursing and social work. They weren’t even sent into administration for these areas. Consequently, very few girls were in the academic fast track with boys.  When educational quarantines on girls got lifted (circa 1960), girls started to bloom in school. By the late seventies, boy/girl disparities in literacy started showing up.  Now, decades later, educators, parents and others are asking:  “What is going on?  Why are boys so far behind?  Did boys all of a sudden become dumb?”  This is especially asked about school failure rates for boys of color.

Boys did not become dumb.  Competition revealed, however, that the language and literacy platform on which schooling is and always has been built actually favors girls.  Competition revealed this, and helpfully so.  Fortunately, we now can understand many of the natural differences through an emerging body of work in neuroscience.  It’s crucial that educators and the educational system take advantage of this science. Your work and the work of the Institute in training teachers in how boys and girls learn differently is important here.  Teachers need to know how a boys’ brain and a girls’ brain acquire language, math, science, and other subjects both similarly, and differently.

Nobody is a victim, and I’m glad you don’t teach that.  But we are in a new era.  Teachers and educational systems that don’t understand the needs of boys and girls will fail large numbers of their students.  I’m glad the Gurian work is leading to increased training in both boy/girl issues, and issues facing students of color.  When teachers understand the brains of the boys and girls they teach, every kid can be a winner in school and subsequently in life.  No boys and no girls need be considered victims.

Thank you,

Dr. Norman Johnson

Jan 30 2010

Abraham Lincoln

This is so tough. Family issues, work, pregnancy, gangs, drugs. How can school begin to compete? Especially if the essentialist impulse assumes the students will sit like machines having their heads filled with knowledge, however irrelevant or tedious.

Schools are at a huge competitive disadvantage, competing to provide these children with a future. Treating their interests, desires, and common sense with disdain is hardy a winning strategy. What they need (and we need) is to redefine the curriculum for relevance and stimulation. This is not to say the ‘fundamentals’ get left out. Rather, the fundamentals need to be taught in a context that holds the attention of the students.

A school principal, retired after 30 years, told my wife today that one of the very few things that Abraham Lincoln would recognize in our society today is the structure and philosophy of the school curriculum. This is sad at many levels. We have learned so much and the body of knowledge has changed so much since then. We have changed the relationship between society and the individual since then. We are attempting to educate a much large portion of our society now. Most importantly, the competition for the attention of the students is so much more fierce and sophisticated.

The world has changed. The successful curriculum will respect the needs of the learners.

Jan 30 2010

Axiology v. Epistemology

I agree that axiology is a crucial element of education. I was inclined to argue that morals, values, character and ethics are more significantly needed in secondary schools. But, it occurred to me, if it isn’t taught in elementary school, many high school students will be beyond its reach by the time they encounter it. So, yes, it is an essential part of what teachers teach.

Having said that, for me epistemology is primary. With apologies to Yeats who said, “Education is not the filling of the pail, but the lighting of the fire” (“Famous Quotes”, 1998-2010), I think filling the pail is bulk of what teachers do. To do that, to fill the children with knowledge, they need to know “the way learners come to know the ideas they learn” (Kauchak & Eggen, 2005, page 208). Once they have a clear vision of that, teachers can work on “lighting the fire” of inspiration.

References

Famous quotes by William Butler Yeats . (1998-2010). Retrieved January 26, 2010, from http://www.famous-quotes.com/author.php?aid=7889
Kauchak, P. & Eggen, P. (2005). Introduction to teaching: Becoming a professional (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Jan 30 2010

Caring

 Is caring more important at some educational levels (e.g., elementary versus secondary) than others? Why or why not?

Caring is important at all educational levels. People of whatever age benefit from connection, support and compassion. Young students need caring even more. They are still developing physiologically and neurologically until well into high school and usually beyond. They are also developing emotionally at the same time and benefit strongly from a safe, supportive, even loving environment. Learning is about strengths, weaknesses, success and failure. It is also very much about resilience. Resilience is fueled by unconditional love and support. Caring is the foundation of healthy learning.

Different ages (and different children of the same age) will need different kinds of support and caring. But each child will benefit from being ‘seen’ and being cared for. In many cases, sending a message that the outcomes at school matter to the teacher might be the only positive messages about school success the student receives. It might be the only message of the student receives that they matter. Fortunately, this is not usually the case, but it is difficult to imagine that anyone wouldn’t benefit from knowing one more person cares about them.

Of course, children of different ages will respond differently and will need to be cared for differently (as will each individual regardless of age). Elementary students are more likely to be open to overt affection and caring. Moving into adolescence, there will a tendency to posture an independence, a growing up. But the need will remain and the caring will be received and honored so long as it doesn’t compete with the student’s need to individuate. I have less recent experience with and knowledge of high school behavior but from what I can remember peer group becomes the dominant factor. I’d imagine that the caring needs to be reshaped into a subject driven relationship. This is to say that teachers care for high school students by caring for their work and, by extension, caring for them as creative individuals.

Caring is essential for teachers and for all of us. It’s a cold rock we live on. Caring is all we really have.

Jan 30 2010

Demographic Hiring

What are the pros and cons of making hiring decisions based on demographic needs (e.g., the shortage of males in elementary school, females in social studies)?

This is a tricky question.

As a society, we are correctly uncomfortable making decisions which place more importance on a demographic fact over the personal qualities embodied in an individual. I agree with Chief Justice Roberts that “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race” (Cato Institute, 2009) but I would change “race” to “impersonal demographics”. If we study the individual, we will have access to all the demographic information as well. Demographic information should not be lost or ignored but it should be placed in the context of a unique human being.

So, for example, I would not be in favor of establishing arbitrary ratios of teachers to students by demographic. However, it’s easy to see how teachers who share demographics can be more effective, all things being equal. There are cultural behaviors, beliefs and communication styles that can be more easily understood and integrated by a person of similar culture. There are experiences, impulses and characteristics that may well be best understood by a person of the same gender. For each category of demographics there are synergies. In each demographic, there is a corresponding possible benefit.

Likewise, merely providing solid role models in familiar demographic packages could be a more powerful example than one of dissimilar demographics.

There’s also no question that a mix of things is always educational. We learn more from our differences, from new things and in a comfortable environment. So demographic diversity amongst teachers is powerfully good.

So, the pros are that teachers of similar demographics can possibly reach students more effectively and provide more powerful role models. The cons are that it’s the person, not the demographic, that teaches. To be blind to the person behind the demographic is to potentially reduce the quality of the education and harm the cultural fabric by perpetuating discrimination.

In conclusion, a teacher’s (or student’s) demographic information is important and useful. But it needs to be consider integrally with the whole picture of that person; their strengths, weaknesses, experiences, skills, character and passions. Giving the children the teacher who will be most effective with them is the goal. Demographics is part, but only part, of that.

Reference

Cato Institute . (2009). The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race Is to stop discriminating on the Basis of Race. Retrieved January 28, 2010 from http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/04/22/ricci-v-destafano/

Jan 30 2010

Increasing Complexity

Are the complexities of teaching likely to become greater or less in the future? Why?

It seems to me that the complexities of being a teacher will only increase. Our society is becoming more complex. It’s demands are greater. If the resources for schools continue to decrease, that creates a huge challenge of doing more with less. But when the resources increase again, there will be a great demand for change and improvement. The pressure for results will continue to increase but in a political system pressures to perform are usually accompanied by a host of factors which make improving outcomes harder. Technology will continue to evolve but that merely creates a steeper learning curve for the teacher and a disruption in existing teaching methods. Knowledge will continue to expand exponentially, driving change in both curriculum content and science-based teaching methods.

In my lifetime, not only will technology evolve but new technologies will emerge that will change our world in untold ways. Technologies that exist now will increase in power and impact. Cell phones alone have the power to change everything. Already I can make and practice flash cards on my phone. I can set the program to drill me with smart algorithms which adapt to what I’ve learned. I can be paged, texted or called. I can hear audio and watch audio-video. I can do calculations. I can even create documents, slide presentations, and spreadsheets. I can access the internet and it can access me. Each and every one of these attributes has major opportunities for school and learning.

I’m not sure if this is a saving grace or a tragedy but one other thing I am also confident of with regard to technology is that the actual uptake of the high tech possibilities will be ferociously slower than common sense would suggest. Yes, the technology speeds ahead but the world adapts to those changes at a very slow pace. We have already passed the famous fictional dates of 1984 and 2001 and in each case found ourselves significantly below the overall technology achievements imagined by the authors. That is the normal state of things. What could be done in the classroom and what is being done are very different. It seems like SmartBoards are the cutting edge at the moment and they are both not that high tech and wildly less effective than a proper use of that technology would allow.

So, yes, the world will keep getting more complex and teaching will keep getting more complex. But teaching at least will only move forward at a pace that the average human brain can tolerate. Sometimes I wonder if that’s true of the world as a whole…