Disruptive Technologies in Public Schools

Over spring break, I read "Disrupting Class" by Clayton Christensen. I found the book to be a fascinating read and full of insight regarding the future challenges that will be faced by public education. Over the next few blog postings, I will try to summarize the main tenets of the book as well as provide some commentary that I hope to be both relevant and thought-provoking.

Christensen did an excellent job of challenging the current structure of public schools, which he argued "mandates standardization". He posited that most all teachers would agree that different students learn in different ways. Yet, in our current structure, we seldom take these learning differences into account. Instead of customizing learning, we practice "batch learning." He summarized this on page 29 by stating

If we agree that we learn differently and that students need customized pathways and paces to learn, why do schools standardize the way they teach and the way they test?

He goes so far as to say

The students who succeed in schools do so largely because their intelligence happens to match the dominant paradigm in use in a particular classroom--or somehow they have found ways to adapt to it. (p. 35)

In other words, most mathematicians have strong logical-mathematical skills. Therefore, most math teachers, math classrooms and math textbooks (which are written by mathematicians) will be geared towards like learners. Such a design potentially leaves the other types of learners behind (i.e. linguistic, musical, kinesthetic, etc.).

In advocating for a different type of learning system, Christensen stated

...the current educational system--the way it trains teachers, the way it groups students, the way the curriculum is designed, and the way the school buildings are laid out--is designed for standardization. If the United States is serious about leaving no child behind, it cannot teach its students with standardized methods. Today's system was designed at a time when standardization was seen as a virtue...Schools need a new system (pp. 37-38).

This analysis by the author leads me to a variety of questions. How does District #1 go about meeting the individual needs of 2,200 students? What are the potential ramifications if we don't? Given limited resources, is such a system cost prohibitive? How does such a model fit into the standardized testing requirements of NCLB? How would parents respond to such a system which would look radically different from their own educational experience?

In future posts, I will discuss how Christensen addressed many of these questions through his plan for moving from our current system based upon standardization of instruction to a system that is "student-centric" in nature. In the meantime, I would be interested in your thoughts on this topic.

Preparing Students for the Future

I recently read the following at the Scientific American website

Sometime early in this century the intelligence of machines will exceed that of humans. Within a quarter of a century, machines will exhibit the full range of human intellect, emotions and skills, ranging from musical and other creative aptitudes to physical movement. They will claim to have feelings and, unlike today’s virtual personalities, will be very convincing when they tell us so. By around 2020 a $1,000 computer will at least match the processing power of the human brain. By 2029 the software for intelligence will have been largely mastered, and the average personal computer will be equivalent to 1,000 brains.

Although such advances in technology are both exciting and scary at the same time, this passage struck a nerve with me for a different reason. As an educator, it made me question how well we are doing in preparing our students to thrive in this type of environment. In the year 2020, our youngest students will be completing their educational careers in District #1, so it is not that far away. Have we started to think about the social and economic challenges these students will face upon graduation? Have we thought about what changes we need to make to curriculum and instructional pedagogy to prepare them for these challenges?

In short, are we teaching them the way we were taught, or are we teaching them for the world they will encounter upon graduation? I would be anxious to hear your thoughts on this challenging subject.

20/20 Highlights Impact of Economy on Students

I just finished watching this piece from 20/20 highlighting the impact the economy is having on students in the United States. What a powerful message to educators across our country!

When a high school teacher realized how many of his students' families were in financial trouble, he encouraged them to make a video presentation about their trials and tribulations. It is one of the most moving 8 1/2 minutes you will ever see. In fact, President Obama referenced the video in his recent speech on education.

There were two aspects of this class project that I found to be particularly thought provoking. The first was obviously, is our school system doing everything we can to help students in economic need? Are we being tenacious enough in identifying who these needy students are and diligent in assuring they receive the help they need? What is the role of the public school as a social service agency? These were all thought provoking questions that I struggled with while watching these students pour their hearts out on video.

However, I also found myself drawn to the teacher who cared enough about his students to allow them the opportunity to share their feelings with one another. He saw a learning opportunity and served as the classroom facilitator in completing this project. Not only did his creativity and caring allow these students to realize they shared a common bond, but they also got to meet President Obama! In the 20/20 video, the emotion these students showed towards their teacher was indeed powerful. His students knew that he cares about them, which is an essential bond in any successful classroom.

Vision for the 21st Century

I recently read a blog posting from LeaderTalk, which highlighted a quote from Peter Senge's, "The Fifth Discipline".

"The gap between vision and current reality is also a source of energy. If there were no gap, there would be no need for any action to move towards the vision. We call this gap creative tension."

During my graduate work, I remember reading this text and spending a class period discussing this quote. We talked about our vision for public schools, and the challenges we would face as leaders in trying to make that vision a reality.

Bringing a vision to reality is the never-ending challenge of school administration, but it is what has always kept me motivated and energized. When I took over as superintendent five years ago, I had a definite vision of excellence and continuous improvement that I wanted to instill in our organization. Over the past five years, thanks to a very dedicated faculty and staff, we have made amazing strides towards the achievement of this vision. However, that was five years ago, and now that we are further into the 21st century and competing in a global economy, I wonder if the means to achieve that vision need to change?

I would be anxious to hear what you believe the vision for District #1, or public education in general, should be and some ideas on how you think we can get there?

What Students Want From Their Teachers

I recently read this article by Alan Blankstein, who is the President of the HOPE Foundation. In this article, he discusses the importance of believing in the potential success of all students, and never giving up on even the most challenging student. However, what I found most interesting were the results of the various surveys and focus groups that have been conducted to find out what students really want from their teachers.

Based on these surveys and focus groups, here’s what students ask of their teachers:
1. Be prepared and organized. Even low-performing students don’t like to lose instructional time (Ferguson, 2002; Haycock, 2001). They like and need organization, as well as a high-demand/high-support environment.
2. Make teaching relevant. This is particularly true of students who don’t see college as their future. These students need the highest-caliber relationships with and level of instruction from teachers. These are the students who challenge us to the highest level of professionalism.
3. Show them how to do it. Students with greater needs require engaging curriculum, structures of support, and pedagogies that meet their specific needs. Assigning homework to students who have not yet mastered the knowledge on which the homework is based is unfair. Those students whose parents can crack the “homework mystery” will do fine, but the students who need support most will not.
4. Don’t give up! Too often, in the rush to cover material, teachers feel compelled to move on before all students understand it. This is like the bus driver who pulls into the station late, complaining that he would have been on time “if it weren’t for all those darn passengers.” Indeed, students are passengers not to be left behind.

Importance of the Fine Arts

I recently read this article summarizing a research study on the positive impact music study has on reading ability.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090316075843.htm

This study serves as another powerful reminder of the importance of the fine arts in the total educational experience of a child. In Friedman's "The World is Flat" he advocates for the importance of the fine arts because it allows kids to make the connections between the right and left sides of their brains. He argues that simply knowing facts or processes does not prepare a child to compete in the global economy. Rather, that child must be able to use those facts and/or processes to creatively come up with new ideas. Experiences in the fine arts help kids to develop and practice their creativity.

As schools continue to cut costs and work to meet the requirements of No Child Left Behind, it is important that we continue to weigh the importance of the fine arts in the total educational experience.

Tecnology and the Classroom

The technological tools that are available to transform our classrooms into 21st century learning environments are becoming more plentiful and user friendly by the day. I recently came across this video on youtube which takes students on a 3d video tour of ancient Rome via Google Earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqMXIRwQniA&feature=PlayList&p=F892E75A1A0A04CB&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=11

As a former geography teacher, I was enthralled with the possibilities this has as a classroom learning tool. Twenty years ago, I had students go to the library and research the architectural grandeur of ancient Rome, but now kids can actually interact with these structures via Google Earth. Think how much more powerful and engaging this type of learning experience would be for our kids.

In education, we hear a lot about the integration of technology into the curriculum, but what does that really mean? Does it mean using an Elmo or LCD to project our classroom notes as opposed to an overhead, or does it mean using that LCD projector hooked to the Internet as a tool for "just in time" learning? Does it mean having students complete a powerpoint presentation instead of a research paper on a country in Africa, or does it mean using Skype to actually communicate with students in that African country? Does it mean having students use the Internet to Google search websites on a particular topic, or does it mean using a wiki for them to create this resource in an interactive manner? Does it mean hanging teacher worksheets and assignments on a website for students to reference, or does it mean creating an interactive blog for students to communicate and ask questions of their teacher and other students in the class?

These are the questions we must begin to answer and the challenges public education faces as we try to prepare our students for the global economy of the 21st century.