iTeacher

In the essay “At School, Technology Starts to Turn a Corner” (New York Times, Aug. 16, 2008), author Steve Lohr describes a contemporary model for 21st century education that embeds technology into project-based learning.  The “New Technology” teaching method is gaining momentum and is currently deployed in nine U.S. states.

The New Technology method transforms classrooms from lecture-and-textbook models into active, inquiry-based learning centers.  Students conduct research to tackle real issues and answer complicated questions.  They meet state standards and benchmarks by getting out of their seats and completing practical tasks.  According to the article, students in active, project-based classrooms perform better in class and on standardized tests.  They own the information because they had to discover it themselves through guided activities.

An excellent video from the New Technology Foundation website documents a math teacher at New Technology High School in Napa, California who starts her teaching units by looking at the state standards and then brainstorming how she can create real-world, hands-on applications for her students.  It would be a seriously fun math class where students get out of their seats, conduct experiements and work collaboratively.  Quite different from the textbook-and-lecture math classes I received in high school, from which most of the information sits in a dusty region of my brain known as the medulla iforgotta.

As you may have figured out, I am a huge fan of author and lecturer Sir Ken Robinson, who speaks about education transformation through creative engagement and an awakening of the arts. I recently discovered another inspiring lecture, called Changing Paradigms, which Sir Ken gave in June at the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce. The lecture lasts 55 minutes, but it is an hour well spent. Robinson is inspiring, humorous and very informative. He hits the nail right on the head if you ask me. Here’s the link to the video:

Changing Paradigms

I just read an article in Education Week that is sure to stir up controversy amongst educators. The article, entitled Proposal Would Replace Classroom Textbooks with Computers, discusses a bill in the Arizona legislature that would allow school districts to seek issue bonds from their community to purchase computers rather than textbooks.

Are the days of the textbook numbered? Digital and online educational resources surely have a lot of advantages over traditional textbooks. They are limitless in number. They can be instantly updated. They can allow for interactivity and collaboration. They don’t deteriorate or get lost. They provide numerous viewpoints on topics. Textbooks seem pretty archaic when compared to digital resources.

The only real problem I see in eliminating textbooks is that of equity. When course material is provided digitally, all students require a computer and internet access. Arizona is making efforts to overcome this financial burden. I wonder if more states are doing so.

Assuming we can provide access for our students (no small feat, I know), are there any other significant arguments against the proposal of migrating from printed course materials to online resources?

This month’s Education Week has published an interesting article entitled ‘Soft Skills’ in Big Demand by Catherine Gewertz, which discusses a new approach to learning being adopted by many schools to help incorporate the ’soft’ or ‘applied’ skills now in demand in the 21st century work force.  According to the article:

“In an increasingly global, technological economy, they [policy and business leaders] say, it isn’t enough to be academically strong. Young people must also be able to work comfortably with people from other cultures, solve problems creatively, write and speak well, think in a multidisciplinary way, and evaluate information critically.”

Schools are adopting applied learning outcomes, such as interpersonal skills and oral communication , to which students are assessed in all curricular areas, including mathematics and science.  The article discusses an algebra class at Sacramento New Technology High School, where instead of solving problems out of textbooks, students study and solve problems of real-world issues.  Students in this project-based class are evaluated on citizenship and ethics as well as their math skills.  Combining subjects, such as geography and English, have allowed students at this school to study multidisciplinary topics in greater depth.

It is refreshing to see pioneer schools taking a proactive role in preparing their students for life in the 21st century.  I believe ’soft skills’ are even more important than academic skills because they are the skills of life, and they are the skills we must use everyday.

Already a fan of Sir Ken Robinson’s work, I came across an inspiring video on Edutopia’s website. Entitled Creatively Speaking, this lecture was recorded at the Apple Education Leadership Summit in April, 2008. In this lecture, Mr. Robinson discusses the need for curriculum reform that recognizes the changing dynamics of our global economy. He argues that our current education model is based on an industrial-age economy. In the Information Age, we need to tap into children’s creative and problem-solving qualities in order to prepare a generation of students who can think on their feet and adapt to an ever-changing work force. The video and an accompanying article can be found on this Edutopia link. (I couldn’t get the video to embed here.)

I came across this video on Tim Holt’s Intended Consequences blog.  It has some excellent quotes from educational visionaries who are working to steer us in the right direction as far as preparing this generation of students for life in the 21st century.  Great stuff.

I just read a fascinating article in The Journal entitled 21st Century Teaching and Learning: Assessing New Knowledge by Dr. Ruth Reynard. The article discusses the evolving role of teachers as they respond to new demands of the global, hi-tech, inter-connected world. Dr. Reynard states:

Much has been discussed about the new roles teachers and students play in learning environments created by using new technology and the types of skills required of students in this century. Those skills tend to be softer skills like team building, cooperative communication strategies, self-direction, and the academic skills of critical and applied thinking, new knowledge construction and collaborative learning techniques.

Dr. Reynard goes on to say:

… current educational trends based on standards and tests lean towards teacher-driven instruction, while the required 21st century skills of higher order thinking skills, application of technology, and adapting to change and workplace skills, among others, require new methods and new assessment measures.

To address the skill requirements of the 21st century, teachers should assess the process of learning rather than just the outcome. Evaluating the methods in which a student reaches an outcome should hold just as much importance as the outcome itself. As you can see, the content of instruction does not change, just the method of assessment. In this scenario, students still gain the content knowledge, but they also strengthen their own metacognitive skills. They learn how to think, not just recall information.

Recognizing and valuing the “how” and the “why” (ie, the thinking process) will help our students build the cognitive and problem-solving skills required to meet the ever-changing demands of the 21st century.

I just read a very interesting article in Edutopia entitled Reinventing the Big Test:  The Challenge of Authentic Assessment by Grace Rubenstein.  This article discusses the shortcomings of today’s high-stakes state proficiency tests.  According to the article, “The educational assessment tests states use today have two fundamental flaws: They encourage the sort of mind-numbing drill-and-kill teaching educators (and students) despise, and, just as important, they don’t tell us much about the quality of student learning.”

I couldn’t agree more.  Assuming the schools I currently work in are representative of the whole, teachers have lost control over how and what they teach.  The stakes are so high for children to pass the Ohio Achievement Test that the teachers are under immense pressure to focus their fast-paced lessons entirely on test preparation.  According to many teachers I talk to, this has significantly dumbed down their students.  Children are losing their ability to think critically about real issues (the ones that exist outside of textbooks) and to apply creative solutions to everyday problems.  As well-intentioned as the No Child Left Behind Act is, it is actually a major obstacle to the preparation of children for the demands of the 21st century workforce.

The article goes on to explore alternatives to standardized, multiple-choice, one-size-fits-all testing.  Some test makers are actively working on more authentic forms of assessment that measure a student’s resourcefulness and problem-solving skills.  These tests are more complex, more subjective and much more complicated to grade.  This, of course, makes them expensive to administer.

I suppose in today’s environment of hyper-accountability, we will never see the end to standardized testing.  We have gone too far.  The tests are here to stay.  The question is, how can we realistically improve or alter standardized assessment to reflect society’s need for accountability while also recognizing the need to prepare a generation of creative, problem-solving, critically thinking children?

I wanted to share with you an excellent commentary published in Education Week (April 2, 2008) by Andrew A. Zucker, author of Transforming Schools with Technology: How Smart Use of Digital Tools Helps Achieve Six Key Educational Goals.

The article, entitled Smart Thinking About Educational Technology, argues that educators need to stop thinking simplistically about educational technologies and begin thinking about how to use these digital tools well. Too much time is spent arguing whether or not educational technology improves student achievement, rather than focusing on how it can help us reach key educational goals.

Zucker proposes using a widely-accepted framework of six key educational goals to help concentrate our focus and meet multiple aims. These educational goals are not technology specific - they meet wider educational objectives. However, upon inspection, one can easily see how educational technology can be employed to help achieve these goals.

As I have always argued, educational technology is not an all-or-nothing notion. Productive pedagogy must always be the main focus. The use of educational technology can enhance learning in significant ways only when it is backed by sound pedagogy and wider educational goals.

For those of you who like to use videos to help promote the benefits of technology-infused education, I came across this one entitled A Vision of K-12 Students Today. Worth a watch, I think it is a good way to introduce a staff inservice about 21st century learning and integrated technology education.