Khan Academy does not have a Language Arts category. Why not? And how do we build one? What would that look like?
http://www.khanacademy.org/
http://www.khanacademy.org/
Monday, March 14, 2011
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Response to a post on the Lakewood Observer's Observation Deck forum. Pt. 2
Tim wrote,
"You seem rather mercenary to me when you bemoan “ridiculous state testing and subsequently ridiculous mandates of an outmoded education system tied to standardized testing that measures nothing of any value.” The reason I say this is because (1) you seem very passionate about adolescent education, (2) the way you just characterized traditional education is as a travesty, and (3) you do it anyways! “Nothing of any value?” Sean how do you support that for even a second? Especially when you do seem to have your student’s best interests at heart…."
My original post, as quoted by Tim above, was a bit of venting. While the image of a mercenary is appealing, (I do like the idea of stealth and sleek ninja-esque maneuvering as I grow increasingly older and more rotund
), my statement was more of an addendum than a central point. The simple fact, as I see it, is that the testing methods that we currently have in place to measure student and, by proxy, teacher effectiveness are woefully outdated and insufficient. These standardized tests ultimately fail to measure the skills that are needed as our kids go into a modern collegiate and professional environment. Rote memorization, simplified questions requiring simple answers, and a lack of application, evaluation and creativity are clearly problematic issues in our current testing system. To be fair and honest, the kind of teaching used in Montessori schools are a direct refutation of the kind of "learning" being measured on our state tests, and public education would do well to learn from and borrow some of the effective pedagogy that the Montessori model uses. I called the standardized test "outmoded" because, in today's internet age, access and use of information has grown vastly and is more reliable than ever before. I am working towards creating a change in our statewide assessment systems to more accurately reflect the skills and content that a modern citizenry requires. To this end, I have been involved in designing the Ohio Model Curriculum and served as a committee member for the Ohio Performance Assessment Pilot. Lakewood City Schools, particularly with the immense help of Melanie Wightman and other forward-thinking educators and administrators, has had a seat at the table as we work towards shifting to a more rigorous and relevant assessment model here in Ohio. Rather than being dictated to from on high, Lakewood has positioned itself as an important voice in creating valid and appropriate teaching and learning models and methods at the state level. I believe that the best follow-up to criticism is action to effect change. Lakewood City Schools is doing just that.
Tim, I do believe that there are travesties in our education system, and many of us are working to fix these things in the best interest of our students, teachers, parents, and wider community. I have put myself out here, as you noted, because I want to be open and proactive instead of secretive and reactive. I think that conversations like these benefit both the participants and the casual read who chooses not to join in the conversation. I know that I learn quite a bit from these exchanges, as well as live conversations with parents, teachers, students, and community members.
To go back to the union issue, Roy had asked if I was against the bill on principle or in a more specific sense. I don't see how I could split my objection into component parts. The principle includes the specifics. The general principles that I outlined in my previous post play out in specific contexts. With this current legislation, I fear that I will lose my ability to be a voice in the conversation. I fear that we will put in a merit pay system based on the outmoded assessments that I mentioned above. I dread the idea of having larger classes and fewer opportunities to meet with my students during my planning period. I am hesitant to embrace a change, though an improved model of teacher effectiveness is needed in some form, that measures teacher effectiveness in a way that will force more "teaching to the test", especially when that test doesn't reflect much of value in a wired and connected world of infinite learning resources. The world has changed, and our education system needs to reflect the important things that we are learning about the implications of a tremendous shift in the way that we live our lives, conduct business, and learn. Though the teachers' union has a long way to go to meet these needs and promote change, I would rather be part of the solution than give up or give in.
Lastly, I appreciate that our society provides opportunity for citizens to choose a private option. But let's not pretend that this option is available to everyone, or even most. I'm frankly not feeling like looking up the number, but we spend far less at the local level than the $10,000 to $20,000 per child that it costs to go to the school that you described in your initial response, Tim. If you make that kind of money and want to send your kid there, good for you and them. Perhaps if I had that kind of money I would do the same. Maybe I wouldn't. But I'd appreciate the choice. On the other hand, and perhaps too personally biased, I want to teach the kids that grew up like me. As the first member of my family to go to college, I now want to help other kids like me get through the same door. I love being a public servant, but I object to being a public whipping boy.
"You seem rather mercenary to me when you bemoan “ridiculous state testing and subsequently ridiculous mandates of an outmoded education system tied to standardized testing that measures nothing of any value.” The reason I say this is because (1) you seem very passionate about adolescent education, (2) the way you just characterized traditional education is as a travesty, and (3) you do it anyways! “Nothing of any value?” Sean how do you support that for even a second? Especially when you do seem to have your student’s best interests at heart…."
My original post, as quoted by Tim above, was a bit of venting. While the image of a mercenary is appealing, (I do like the idea of stealth and sleek ninja-esque maneuvering as I grow increasingly older and more rotund
), my statement was more of an addendum than a central point. The simple fact, as I see it, is that the testing methods that we currently have in place to measure student and, by proxy, teacher effectiveness are woefully outdated and insufficient. These standardized tests ultimately fail to measure the skills that are needed as our kids go into a modern collegiate and professional environment. Rote memorization, simplified questions requiring simple answers, and a lack of application, evaluation and creativity are clearly problematic issues in our current testing system. To be fair and honest, the kind of teaching used in Montessori schools are a direct refutation of the kind of "learning" being measured on our state tests, and public education would do well to learn from and borrow some of the effective pedagogy that the Montessori model uses. I called the standardized test "outmoded" because, in today's internet age, access and use of information has grown vastly and is more reliable than ever before. I am working towards creating a change in our statewide assessment systems to more accurately reflect the skills and content that a modern citizenry requires. To this end, I have been involved in designing the Ohio Model Curriculum and served as a committee member for the Ohio Performance Assessment Pilot. Lakewood City Schools, particularly with the immense help of Melanie Wightman and other forward-thinking educators and administrators, has had a seat at the table as we work towards shifting to a more rigorous and relevant assessment model here in Ohio. Rather than being dictated to from on high, Lakewood has positioned itself as an important voice in creating valid and appropriate teaching and learning models and methods at the state level. I believe that the best follow-up to criticism is action to effect change. Lakewood City Schools is doing just that. Tim, I do believe that there are travesties in our education system, and many of us are working to fix these things in the best interest of our students, teachers, parents, and wider community. I have put myself out here, as you noted, because I want to be open and proactive instead of secretive and reactive. I think that conversations like these benefit both the participants and the casual read who chooses not to join in the conversation. I know that I learn quite a bit from these exchanges, as well as live conversations with parents, teachers, students, and community members.
To go back to the union issue, Roy had asked if I was against the bill on principle or in a more specific sense. I don't see how I could split my objection into component parts. The principle includes the specifics. The general principles that I outlined in my previous post play out in specific contexts. With this current legislation, I fear that I will lose my ability to be a voice in the conversation. I fear that we will put in a merit pay system based on the outmoded assessments that I mentioned above. I dread the idea of having larger classes and fewer opportunities to meet with my students during my planning period. I am hesitant to embrace a change, though an improved model of teacher effectiveness is needed in some form, that measures teacher effectiveness in a way that will force more "teaching to the test", especially when that test doesn't reflect much of value in a wired and connected world of infinite learning resources. The world has changed, and our education system needs to reflect the important things that we are learning about the implications of a tremendous shift in the way that we live our lives, conduct business, and learn. Though the teachers' union has a long way to go to meet these needs and promote change, I would rather be part of the solution than give up or give in.
Lastly, I appreciate that our society provides opportunity for citizens to choose a private option. But let's not pretend that this option is available to everyone, or even most. I'm frankly not feeling like looking up the number, but we spend far less at the local level than the $10,000 to $20,000 per child that it costs to go to the school that you described in your initial response, Tim. If you make that kind of money and want to send your kid there, good for you and them. Perhaps if I had that kind of money I would do the same. Maybe I wouldn't. But I'd appreciate the choice. On the other hand, and perhaps too personally biased, I want to teach the kids that grew up like me. As the first member of my family to go to college, I now want to help other kids like me get through the same door. I love being a public servant, but I object to being a public whipping boy.
Response to a post on the Lakewood Observer's Observation Deck forum. Pt. 1
I'll start by saying that I believe in public education. While I have no qualms about the many fine private or charter schools, I've chosen to cast my lot in public education because I believe in the role that it plays in educating any and all of our citizens. Public schools work to educate the poor, the rich, the middle class, the able and those with special needs. I attended both private and public schools growing up (my father was in the navy and we moved a bunch) and I had good and bad experiences in both. This might sound odd, but as the son of a long, long, line of military men, and as one who didn't join the military because I wanted to be the first in my family ever to graduate from college, I have in me a desire to carry on my family's tradition of service to our country. It might sound hokey, but I teach because I want to serve.
Being a public employee, however, means that I am constricted to some extent in the kind of autonomy and latitude that is probably at work every day in the Montessori schools or thousands of other mission based prior schools (by mission I do not suggest to mean solely religious. Mission as in the mission of a Montessori or KIPP in their approach to curriculum and pedagogy). Largely, the mission of public schools is not created at the highest levels by educators, but rather, our mission is dictated by politicians and the interests (some private, some corporate, some altruistic) that they are beholden to. While the tides of political favor shift and go through their cycles, educators are often called to fall in line to the whims and demands of each passing fad or crisis. I don't think that this is very good for education.
My belief is that the teachers union serves as a vital check on the dictates of political popularity and interests. While I am an outspoken critic of some of the shortcomings of my union, and often agree with many of the criticisms that are put out there, I need the union to work towards keeping the teachers' voice in the conversation and to ensure that our education system doesn't become a direct wing of the government (I have many international teaching contacts and often discuss the abuses of education perpetrated by a centralized government in regards to state mandated propaganda materials and blatant misrepresentations of history in their course materials.) As I believe is the instance with the current legislation, sometimes the education system can become a pawn of political posturing and power broking. Some may argue that the left has done the same type of political maneuvering as we see today. And I believe that they are undoubtedly correct when doing so. To me, a need the union because I need a collective body to represent my interest as an educator, and WAY more importantly, to look after the best learning interests of our students.
Do I think the union needs some work? Absolutely, that's why I became involved more deeply with the union in my last two years. While I feel that I need a representative body at the table when big moves are made, I also recognize that I have the opportunity to work with my union to suggest changes, challenge assumptions and long-held practices, and to join in the chorus in such instances as I find myself in agreement and solidarity with my co-workers.
continued in Pt. 2
Original conversation on the Observation Deck
http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=142&t=9907
Being a public employee, however, means that I am constricted to some extent in the kind of autonomy and latitude that is probably at work every day in the Montessori schools or thousands of other mission based prior schools (by mission I do not suggest to mean solely religious. Mission as in the mission of a Montessori or KIPP in their approach to curriculum and pedagogy). Largely, the mission of public schools is not created at the highest levels by educators, but rather, our mission is dictated by politicians and the interests (some private, some corporate, some altruistic) that they are beholden to. While the tides of political favor shift and go through their cycles, educators are often called to fall in line to the whims and demands of each passing fad or crisis. I don't think that this is very good for education.
My belief is that the teachers union serves as a vital check on the dictates of political popularity and interests. While I am an outspoken critic of some of the shortcomings of my union, and often agree with many of the criticisms that are put out there, I need the union to work towards keeping the teachers' voice in the conversation and to ensure that our education system doesn't become a direct wing of the government (I have many international teaching contacts and often discuss the abuses of education perpetrated by a centralized government in regards to state mandated propaganda materials and blatant misrepresentations of history in their course materials.) As I believe is the instance with the current legislation, sometimes the education system can become a pawn of political posturing and power broking. Some may argue that the left has done the same type of political maneuvering as we see today. And I believe that they are undoubtedly correct when doing so. To me, a need the union because I need a collective body to represent my interest as an educator, and WAY more importantly, to look after the best learning interests of our students.
Do I think the union needs some work? Absolutely, that's why I became involved more deeply with the union in my last two years. While I feel that I need a representative body at the table when big moves are made, I also recognize that I have the opportunity to work with my union to suggest changes, challenge assumptions and long-held practices, and to join in the chorus in such instances as I find myself in agreement and solidarity with my co-workers.
continued in Pt. 2
Original conversation on the Observation Deck
http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=142&t=9907
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
First TedTalk released from the TED Conference 2011
Wadah Khanfar at the TED Conference 2011. Khanfar is the Director General for the Al-Jazeera news network. Everything that he's talking about involves new media tools, the kind of tools and ways of communication that, for the most part, we're not teaching much about in our schools. Twitter, Facebook, SMS, citizen journalism, flash mobs, and youtube videos just enabled a revolution against a totalitarian regime that had relied on old media (state-run newspapers, television, and radio) as a way to maintain power. As Khanfar says, these are countries with BILLION dollar armies taken down by a bunch of young idealistic kids with cellphones. Clay Shirky is so right.
Find his TedTalk here. It is seventeen minutes well spent.
Find his TedTalk here. It is seventeen minutes well spent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)