Posts filed under ‘Curriculum’
Want to Change STEM to STEAM? BUY ART!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We are in the golden age of turn-of-the-21st-century art. Really. My husband and I are art lovers who spend many hours of our free time each week visiting artists in their open studios, pop-up exhibits, or openings. It can be the most exhilarating experience to find a new artist or piece of work in the unknown zone of urban guerrillas in transition neighborhoods or the warm glow of nurturing artist lofts. The downside? Seeing the un-purchased work still hanging on the wall years later as brilliant artists struggle to keep their studios and their dreams alive.
In the Renaissance, the convergence of math, physics, art, and music brought European society out of the dark. And the philosophers gave us hope and angst. So it is for educators as we realize the need to nurture the minds of our young with STEM studies even as we feed their souls with Art. Uh, is there a problem here? Yes…the artists are still going to starve.
The schools of art are doing their part. The students are expanding their horizons and developing into wonderful artists. The arts community has collaborated to create safe harbors for creation of new art, critiquing one another’s work, and displaying it whenever and wherever possible. Local politicians, cultural councils, and corporations try to support these communities. However, the missing element continues to be the buyers of art among every day citizens.*
Art collecting in the stratosphere is not the real world, yet that is where the publicity lies. In reality, local work from very talented artists is accessible geographically and financially. Some buy one work a year for a lifetime of joy around their dwellings. For others, there is a great work that is the one-time purchase and the centerpiece of their decorating. The biggest part of the market, however, remains the underground network of bartering among the artists themselves while their day jobs sustain them and their families.
Demand stimulation is the theme for our decade. Just wanted to put in my plug for the artists. Please, go to open studios and buy art. You will find something you love, and it will make you very happy.
*(Or the local museums with megabucks expansions, but that is a topic for another day…)
The End of Pedagogy Wars
A dozen or so years ago, there was a glimmer of hope in academia for teaching diverse learners in the mainstream. Learning styles were analyzed and some number (usually eight) of unique approaches was defined for reaching the whole class. Theorists designed units of study that combined these approaches, ranging from independent reading to full-scale construction projects. What happened?
Since the introduction of the New Math in the 60s, educators have been drawn to pedagogical fads. Staunch supporters of all-or-nothing swings in teaching methods have ruled content areas, and a throw-away culture has had its way with the tools of the trade. These single-minded approaches always failed to meet the needs of a segment of the student population. Eventually they would get discarded – baby with the bath water. Given enough time, as any veteran teacher will assure you, each was resurrected, once its antithesis had been explored and unanimously dropped for its own short-comings.
Debates over pedagogy have continued to treat many decisions as binary, and persuasive dialogue has quickly devolved into the usual Good versus Evil dichotomy. While this would seem to be wrong intuitively, research often has supported the conclusion that the most recently released version of teaching was better. What could be wrong with that?
The paradox of the short-term blip in achievement in responses to any new strategy accounts for part of the problem. Essentially, students who were receptive to a particular strategy would internalize it and activate it independently with repeated exposure; less receptive students would be neutral or worse. Over time, the strategy would grow stale, and any valid innovation would have a better chance of stimulating learning, especially if it hit the mark with children who were underserved by the previous technique. All the same, confetti would fly heralding the discovery of the new magic bullet for education woes.
The greater flaw has been the limited bandwidth for learning styles, processing speeds, and vehicle preferences. Pedagogical swings or biases have prevented access to meaningful lessons for some of the students all of the time. A more robust model of student engagement and choice could keep the whole menu of learning strategies in the mix with less risk of overexposure. Versions of “broadband” learning, such as the Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model or Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, have appealed to academics but found limited success in K-12 schools. I suspect that early innovators had difficulty implementing them within the context of technological support and traditional classroom management.
Today, the time is ripe to revisit the case for teaching every child by design. Technology has become ubiquitous with a wide variety of platforms and applications. Accountability for special populations has exposed shortcomings in inclusiveness of education systems. And scrutiny of teachers has led to a mixture of sharp criticism as well as heightened support for valiant efforts. A longer vision will allow us to exploit these challenges and opportunities for our own growth.
Truly student-centric education will rely upon further evolution of classroom resources and redefinition of the role of the teacher. The new classroom must be technology-rich and multi-purposed, or students must have access to alternatives in the form of dedicated activities rooms or virtual learning opportunities. Teachers will need to release control over instruction in favor of milieu design, coordination of the learning workshop, and guidance of student decision-making, as well as observation and feedback. Educators need not worry about discarding teaching methods. Let the children try them all to see what works. Best practices match strategies to learners; they should never limit the field.
Reinvention of the teacher is not a personal quality issue so much as an opportunity to diversify skills and take professional risks. Knowledge cannot be personified in a single teacher, nor can complex lesson plans be developed and applied in isolation. Collaboration and interdependence among educators will be crucial. Deep knowledge of content and pedagogy will remain essential; however, the ability to work in a team and foster self-advocacy in students will be equally important. Individual variations arising from professional experience, style preference, or demographic factors must be seen as sources of insight rather than divisiveness.
Symphonies Simplified
Great music for new musicians may be out there if we could get the community of performers to share their translations.
In a recent Education Week article, Peter DeWitt’s guest blogger, music teacher Michael Albertson, shared his frustration with the dearth of sources of music for beginner instruction that is authentic for high school students. Oddly enought, this reminded me of a tour I once took through the Boston Ballet’s studios.
One of the most intriguing revelations on the tour was a music studio in which someone was translating a symphony into a single melodic rhythm for the piano. The purpose was to distill the music to be played by the full orchestra into its essence for purposes of choreography and dance rehearsal. Suppose one were to use it for the reverse – a simple piece to help beginners connect to great orchestral music.
With the accelerated evolution of technology, the procedure I described must be way out of date – not even *last* year. However, there should be a treasure trove of work out there that could be a joy to hear on any instrument…even played by a beginner. Any sources out there?
Bait & Switch?
Or How to Gain New Standards without Losing Accountability
NCLB has our backs against the wall. An escape hatch is in sight with the Common Core and its related assessments. The urge to latch onto the new approach prematurely will not enhance its implementation. Nor will it benefit the children who are being excluded in strong schools or lost in the mayhem of chaotic schools.
One cannot adopt the current draft of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and quickly swap out NCLB accountabilities. Any new set of standards must evolve over time to reflect the shared vision of a global village as large as the US. Beta testing of new assessments necessarily will trail the solidification of these standards against which to judge performance. In the meantime, our children cannot wait. So, how do we achieve a national curriculum while keeping our promise to the children who have not been served?
Ironically, success with CCSS hinges on short-term extension of NCLB. There is a perception of urgency for adoption of the Common Core. One real reason for this collective unreality is the closing window on leaving children behind. As NCLB puts our backs against the wall, we can either work even harder to educate the children, or we can rally around the Common Core and NCLB waivers. True proponents and false prophets of the Common Core both are banking on the latter.
CCSS authors are legitimately pleased with their work. As realists, however, they also see the need for an orderly transition from NCLB to the Common Core and new measures of accountability. Undermining NCLB with waivers, however, falls short as an interim strategy. Once in place, waivers will allow a huge, collective sigh of relief. Let off the hook, educators will be back in their comfort zone, happily debating pedagogy and the details of standards and their corresponding assessments indefinitely. This loss of momentum will be devastating to another generation of children at risk.
High stakes tests for NCLB are real. Assessments related to the Common Core are analogous to vaporware. Adopting CCSS today has nothing to do with accountability to our students. Nor will the industry move quickly to encumber itself with new performance measures once freed from them.
Scientists and Other Critical Thinkers
Educators may not abdicate responsibility for STEM education. All the scientists in the world cannot do their jobs and teach the children in K-12 schools. But a relatively small cadre of volunteers can create a pipeline of promising young scientific thinkers from every demographic whom they would call their own.
Seems like all scientists are from Missouri, the Show-Me State. This need for evidence of student preparation is driving a two-pronged approach to STEM improvements in education. One is highly visible, but not scalable, mentoring by scientists for future scientists in extended day programs throughout public education. The other is a systematic development of capacity in math, science, technology, and engineering within every school. Neither will succeed without the other.
Scientists are the new elite across the globe. They are brilliant thinkers who make things that the rest of us take for granted. They go to elite schools, they have the power to change the world, and many have amassed incredible wealth. Yet, they jealously guard their gates. The barriers to entry in science go beyond academic challenge and achievement. The scientific community sometimes seems skeptical to the point of chauvinism when considering newcomers.
Educators need help opening doors for their students; they also need help integrating 21st century STEM innovations across the curriculum. Many students have limited access to the world of scientific discovery beyond electronic devices. All students need opportunities for exploration that fosters deep mechanical and intellectual engagement, crucial building blocks for higher order thinking. To remedy the situation, a number of successful after school programs have brought professionals from the scientific community to introduce real world problem solving opportunities for students. As partners, these corporate citizens share content knowledge and skills from applied math and science with support from teachers who offer pedagogical awareness and classroom management.
Students who develop analytical and critical thinking skills through their work with mentor scientists should see benefits in all areas of their schooling. However, this will not single-handedly save schools or close the achievement gap. What it should do is provide evidence that the children CAN achieve at a higher level and overcome barriers to access to higher education and careers. Armed with higher expectations and new allies from the field, the schools themselves are ultimately responsible for their own success and long-term survival.
Boys and Girls NEED to Run Around
PE classes and open spaces have become scarce at the same time that academic accountability has risen. What has been lost in the transfer is the place for recreational activity in the learning process.
The Trouble With Boys has percolated up to the surface of the dialogue in education. It has been suggested that schools are designed for girls, hitting gender bias as an issue, and suggestions quickly go hyperbolic to the point of total school redesign with same sex tracking. However, the real gender difference is how children are socialized to deal with boredom, fatigue, and distraction. Boys move around, girls quietly lose focus without obvious behavior problems. Both genders suffer academically, but educators look for the Problem Child…not the problem.
Maybe we don’t have a problem with boys. Could be that boys AND girls have a problem with us, and at least one element may not be so hard to resolve. PE classes and open spaces have become scarce at the same time that academic accountability has risen. What has been lost in the transfer is the place for recreational activity in the academic process. Children who have time for physical activity return to their studies with greater focus and stamina. Boys AND girls could benefit from short activity breaks and reintroduction of kinesthetic electives.
Engaging lesson plans are well established among best practices in the classroom. In addition, it is well documented that student centric spaces that allow for movement during learning support the kinesthetic learner. However, the need for recreational activity as the cerebral intermezzo between lessons may have been underestimated. Further, shortened lunch times and shifting of sports and other physical activities to out of school time prevent children from having intellectual and emotional downtime when they need it. Being natural problem solvers, the children try to get what they need for themselves.
A child who is acting out cries for help. A child who grows silent goes unnoticed. Both need a remedy. I am not suggesting that recreation is a total cure. Yes, there are intractable problems that need closer study. However, we should try the simple solutions when we can, and the return to play as a way to enhance learning is needed for children of all ages.
Thoughts on English Language Learning
In the world of multiple intelligences, linguistics is NOT one of mine. However, I try to pay attention to any dialogue on language acquisition or management of English Language Learners (ELL). After many years of listening to proponents for bilingual education, full immersion, or sheltered immersion programs, I have designed a couple of hybrid models for 1st year ELL students.
The first, CharterAmericas creates a community center based charter school that assimilates the speaker of limited English with a very strong primary language. The program celebrates the intersection of the cultures of the Americas and provides a combination of bilingual and sheltered immersion learning. Further, it seeks to engage the local community in a shared value of multilingual language fluency.
The second, a Cultural Studies program, focuses on native language instruction of topics across the curriculum to students with very little understanding of English and significant gaps in knowledge from very significant absenteeism. In this latter program, the goal for students is to achieve foundation content knowledge and improve skill in language arts while studying their own culture and native tongue.
Common themes with both programs include…
- Strong language arts studies in the student’s native language
- English taught as a foreign language credit
- Emphasis on native language for new academic content, English instruction for rehearsal of familiar concepts
- Living arts content in English with vocabulary training and hands-on learning opportunities
Option 1: A charter school that serves as a one-year intensive academic transition program for newcomers with modest English proficiency. The school is part of a community center that serves the extended family as they adjust to life in an English-speaking world.
CharterAmericas
Languages of the Americas, Year 1 ELL program
Language Arts – Primary language at grade level with learning standards comparable to ELA. This course is intended to develop deep knowledge and appreciation of reading with comprehension, writing by genre with appropriate mechanics, and vocabulary growth in the students’ native language.
Co-teaching at Grade level with interpreter – in English + primary language translations with after-school tutoring in primary language
- Math
- Social Studies
- Science
Electives – bilingual with English vocabulary learning standards, oral and written assessments, and performance tasks for content
- English I as a Foreign Language credit
- The Arts – fine art, music, drama, dance
- Living Arts – Culinary arts, fashion, woodworking, handyman
- Technology – Keyboarding, Office Software, Graphics, Web Design,
- Health and Physical Education
Community links
- Lifelong learning – tutoring support after program completion
- Whole family success planning (ESL, career counseling and training, adult education)
- Leadership series – multilingual lectures, debates, cultural events
- Part-time interpreters from community
- Feeder schools in local district
- Universities with cultural links – Latino and/or Caribbean studies
- Performance series – student and community productions
- Support services – counseling, health links
Languages supported
- Creole
- English
- French
- Portuguese
- Spanish
Historical Habits of Mind
Came across a wonderful set of “habits of mind” for historical thinking that was developed by the Bradley Commission on History in Schools on behalf of the National Council for History Education. Building a History Curriculum: Guidelines for Teaching History in Schools was published in 1995 and continues to be influential in curriculum design. Highlights are provided below.
|
Historical Habits of Mind
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
