Reflections of the TZSTeacher

Week before last I listened to an interview with a teaching friend, John Hunter, about the premier of a documentary being made around him and a game he invented called World Peace. (See the You Tube Video here: John Hunter explaining his World Peace game. ) John is  a gifted resource teacher in my division and he described his job as one where he “sets up a situation so students have to stumble through the unknown and discover for themselves how to do it.”

His game is one that has evolved over the 30+ years he’s been teaching and he clearly is a teacher who doesn’t mind the students being in control of their learning. Heck, he even talks in this interview about supporting that, and that once the game begins, it is out of his hands. John is an amazing teacher, thinker and colleague and it’s a great pleasure to work in a system where I have relatively regular contact with him, even though he’s in a another school. If you are in Charlottesville, VA on February 21, 2010, please attend the premier of this documentary at the Paramount Theatre. I guarantee it will amaze and astound you and give you food for thought.

In this interview, John also speaks to the ease/relief/ability to be this creative because he works with kids who have already learned the minimum state standards, so they can explore these bigger questions of life. I think all gifted teachers have some of this feeling in us. Because of the students’ abilities with whom we work, we DO have more latitude in what we teach in many situations. That’s both a good and a bad thing.

It’s good because we can meet these very, very bright kids at the level at which they think without them being slowed down by thinkers who may not make the intuitive leaps they do, who may not have the background of information they do, and who may not have the confidence to challenge them as they think aloud. This experience isn’t about elitism, but about allowing students the opportunities to think with others who think at their speed, at the depth they do, and who question the world as they often do.

It’s bad because all teachers do not feel they have the latitude to teach this way with all students–to explore big questions of life and tie their lessons into essential questions that support students making those connections between topics, between concepts and between understandings that are universal and that deepen their understanding of the world.

I have a teacher in my  school, though, who is attempting to teach to that level with ALL of her students in math. This teacher has developed a structure that is based on the ideas behind the “Daily Five” in literacy. She has created a pie, divided into three pieces, which, after brainstorming with several folks, she decided on the categories Becky Fisher (@beckyfisher73) suggested, which were strategy, fluency and numeracy.

Of course these overlap, but by looking at each of these each day, and helping kids thinking metacognitively about these skills, they become more aware of their mathematical thinking and in turn, become better at it. She devises a set of three problems that revolve around big ideas in math and then the children self-select which of the three problem solving tasks they will work on for the week. By Friday they create a poster describing their thinking and explaining the way the solved the problem. That’s the numeracy piece of her pie.

The fluency piece is the arithmetical part of math–direct teaching and practice of basic skills, based on the Virginia Standards of Learning for 4th grade.

The strategy piece of her pie is worked on in several ways–through the posters the students create to show their thinking, the work they do as the week goes along and the classroom conversations that occur around their work. Students love the structure, they are free to develop their own strategies to solve the problems, they talk about the connections between the various problems and they self-select into the groups that sometimes stretch them, sometimes allow them practice and sometimes allow them to lead the problem solving process.

Big picture thinking and teaching and learning–why doesn’t it happen in more classrooms? How can we restructure our schools so that it can be pervasive and the norm rather than the outlier?

Yesterday, Milton Ramirez, (@tonnet) re-tweeted a comment about inconsistency that intrigued me (which he often does), so I began tracing the conversation back to see the context.  Through doing that, I found @monedays, @TalkDoc2 and @JohnDMcClung having a conversation that was right up my alley–but I came late to the party due to my wonky  nTelos air card, so wasn’t in time to join in. However, I filled a whole page marking many of their comments as favorites!

I think these folks MUST have read the book, Lift, and they live it. . . their tweets are inspiring and thought-provoking. I know these favorites will give me much food for thought.  Hope  they do for  you as well!

(I just copied them from my favorites, so read from the bottom up if you want to read them in order.)

Enjoy!

1. JohnDMcClung RT @MarkOOakes: Everyone 1 of us is called to LEADERSHIP, whether to lead ourselves, a great cause or lend a helping hand to just 1 person!9:44 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck
   RT

2. JohnDMcClung RT @TalkDoc2: @JohnDMcClung There actually would be more peace in the world w/o dichotic thinking. Good sometimes, but not usually.9:36 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck
   RT

3. monedays @JohnDMcClung @TalkDoc2 If there is truth, we cannot grasp it, only our perceptions of it. So comparing notes, gives us a broader pic!9:29 AM Oct 10th from Tweetie
   RT

4. JohnDMcClung @TalkDoc2 Too many times we work on the assumption that because “X” is true, “Y” cannot be. Both could co-exist as “truth.”9:28 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck
   RT

5. JohnDMcClung @TalkDoc2 Hypothesis testing in debate theory allows a “truth” to be examined on it’s own merits. It’s “truth” doesn’t discredit others9:26 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck
   RT

6. monedays RT @EdieGalley: Your past can be used as a great foundation of learning….just remember it is not a box to get trapped in.9:25 AM Oct 10th from Tweetie
   RT

7. JohnDMcClung RT @TalkDoc2: @JohnDMcClung There are many “truths” that evolve over time…thankfully. <Exactly! Why hypothesis testing is appropriate9:24 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck
   RT

8. TalkDoc2 RT @JohnDMcClung: @TalkDoc2 To get at truth, you need to look at an issue from all angles, not just fully support from one. – True9:20 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck
   RT

9. monedays RT @JohnDMcClung: @TalkDoc2 To get at truth, you need to look at an issue from all angles, not just fully support from one.9:15 AM Oct 10th from Tweetie
   RT

10. monedays RT @thehrgoddess: RT @wallybock “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.” ~ Daniel Patrick Moynihan9:13 AM Oct 10th from Tweetie
    RT

11. monedays RT @LeadToday: People in leadership positions that don’t care about their people forfeit the opportunity to truly lead. #BeOrginal9:13 AM Oct 10th from Tweetie
    RT

12. monedays So true! A challenge to attract them! RT @TalkDoc2: Deeper truths are discovered through open discussion with others who are not like you.9:09 AM Oct 10th from Tweetie
    RT

13. TalkDoc2 Deeper truths are discovered through open discussion with others who are not like you.9:07 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck

    RT

14. TalkDoc2 You cannot fully receive the gifts of love and laughter unless you give them away.9:04 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck

    RT

15. TalkDoc2 @LollyDaskal Good friends expect genuineness, not perfection. Good morning Lolly.9:02 AM Oct 10th from TweetDeck

    RT

16. monedays RT @MarkOOakes: Leadership Skills Inventory: Listening, Empathy, Attitude, Vision, Effectiveness, Resilience, Purpo (cont) http://tl.gd/kupo

LOTS to think about here! If you read one of these and a story comes to mind, would you share it with us, please?

Thanks again, Milton, for helping me find these folks to follow! When I tweeted Milton yesterday, I sent @tonnet Thanks for the new people to follow this morning. Will blog later about the conversation I followed thanks to your RTs! ,  he responded with these tweets:

tonnet @paulawhite@celfoster @ ritasimsan @Katjewave @Mrs_Fuller Read this piece and it will show u why I appreciate ur retweets

HOW TO: Develop into a Leader on Twitter « Bit Rebels

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about feeling disconnected as school began again, and that resonated with many people in my global PLN. And while I haven’t had as much time as I’d like to participate in Twitter or the other ways I connect with the folks I know all over the world, I’ve been watching and observing something else happen more locally.

A couple of our new instructional coaches began a private group for our school system on Yammer.com, a Twitter-like app that allows only a certain DOMAIN to participate–thus, the only people who CAN join are ones who have our school domain as part of their address. The other thing that is interesting is that you have to be invited to join by a current member, so the growth of it has been interesting to observe.

I joined August 16, a day or so after it had been created. People are joining daily, 1 or 2 or 3, still, a month later. We have principals, school nurses, secretaries, systems engineers, tech support folks, teaching assistants, and a various conglomeration of teachers at all levels and through most subjects who have joined. There are now at least 21 different group conversations begun and we have possibly a sixth of our teaching population present. Many of us who are familiar with or use Twitter are following everyone who joins, and attempting to engage people in conversations. It’s been an interesting ride.

I heard someone say Yammer had gone viral in our system. I don’t agree with that, and here’s why–the folks actually talking on Yammer are folks who use Twitter, mostly. The people who have the most messages (and Yammer counts them, just as Twitter does Tweets) are the Twitterers in our county, mostly. The posts that these folks make come straight from our Twitterverse, mostly. (@BeckyFisher73 figured out how to Tweet and send it to Yammer, so a couple of people do that regularly. I just copy and paste, attributing it to my Twitter buddy in hopes others here will start following that person on Twitter.)

Here’s the data to support my assertion that it has NOT “gone viral.” If you sort by messages sent, the top six senders are Twitterers, and I believe most of us (yep, I’m one of those six) are working to model professional networking through a social networking site and engage other people.  If you look at all of the people who have sent more than TEN messages (and that’s a small number for a whole month, I believe), we have 31 folks to of the 236 who have done so. If we look at those 31, at least 17 of those people Tweet, so are familiar with and know how to use social networking tools to develop a PLN. Looking at the groups people have created for specialized conversations, only 3 groups have more messages in a month than members–so most groups don’t even average getting a message a day. One group, the third grade group averages almost 2 messages a day, and the Ed Tech group is the largest, at 58 members (but only has 28 messages).

However, while the prolific talkers are mostly Twitterers, (obviously folks who seek out conversations), there ARE others who are conversing, sharing, asking, and participating. There’s no way to tell how many are lurking and reading, not actively engaging in the conversations right now. The conversation topics people are engaging in include specific grade level conversations, the Daily Five, Elementary Math, Responsive Classrooms, Being a Writer/Making Meaning, Art and Art-Infused Classrooms, Expeditionary Learning, Ed Tech and a visionary group called Envision ACPS. People are connecting across schools, conversations are happening about classrooms and instruction and homework policies, and teachers and principals are engaging(along with our Superintendent) in talk about our work.

We have 292 people who have joined a social networking site for professional networking, (albeit a closed one.) That’s more people than the 50 or so Twitterers in our division could have enticed to join one in a month, I think. That’s more than our Instructional coaches (the 10 or so we have for our 26 or so schools) by themselves could have gotten to join a social networking site, I think.

The conversations about teaching and learning aren’t just happening within a school anymore. They’re happening across schools and across our 750 square miles of rural county. We have people in all of our schools looking for conversations, starting them, asking questions and finding and making connections through an online networking site.

That’s pretty cool for a month of activity in a school system, don’t you think?

This morning  I read a tweet by @e_shep who quoted “Inventing Creativity” http://bit.ly/b2kYT The true pain of being passionate is encountering people who are not.

I think that’s a true statement because so many of us who are passionate are often perceived as dogmatic, or intense, or our passionate contribution to a conversation is misconstrued as “it has to be my way.” One reason I tweet is because I find like-minded individuals on twitter who are also passionate about teaching, learning, technology, students, quality interactions and real, honest, direct and sharing/caring relationships. So many times I have seen people who do not know each other face to face express incredibly kind sentiments to one another, and I have marveled at the ability of strangers to connect so deeply across this microblogging platform.

Today I tweeted out a question: “In thinking of passionate educators, are people on Twitter more passionate educators than you typically encounter day to day?”  I didn’t mean it as an either/or question, but as more of a continuum, or to help me think about the passion behind the educators on twitter.  In 140 characters, I certainly didn’t say all I was thinking, and the responses I got broadened my thinking even more.

Here’s a sampling:

• UltimateTeacher@paulawhite I love what I do, and I happen to work with some people who don’t feel the same…twittering allows me to help and be helped

• cwebbtech@paulawhite re: Passionate teachers – I think the teachers who are on Twitter tend to “share” their passion more frequently-globally. (And I’m appreciative of that sharing!)

• icklekid@paulawhite hard to say if educational twitters are more passionate but tweeting and sharing ideas makes me more passionate about education!

• chollingsworth@paulawhite I think teachers on twitter also have a passion for learning, collaborating, and improving education9 minutes ago from TweetDeck

• blenna@paulawhite i thnk tchers who tweet r life long learners &love learning from others passionate could b good descript. thax for though bomb25 minutes ago from TwitterGadget

• alexragoneRT @melhutch: @paulawhite passion can seem more evident when you are excited and learning so twitter people seem more passionate.28 minutes ago from TweetDeck

• tbrewster@paulawhite Educators that use Twitter are passionate about sharing ideas, and modeling 21st Century technology skills for their students.29 minutes ago from web

• rrmurry@paulawhite … I’m thought of as a “rebel” at school, because I support tech for learning instead of a mgmnt tool.30 minutes ago from TwitterFon

• rrmurry@paulawhite This statement is why I am on Twitter. The passion and a sense of being among peers. At school of 100+ tchrs, I’m alone…32 minutes ago from TwitterFon

• irasocol@paulawhite Not sure teachers on Twitter are more passionate, but they are more aggressive about learning and finding new ideas.33 minutes ago from twhirl

• melhutch@paulawhite passion can seem more evident when you are excited and learning so twitter people seem more passionate- others can be just as p.34 minutes ago from web

• jennyluca@paulawhite Maybe so, but I do work with passionate educators who don’t use social tools yet.38 minutes ago from twhirl

• kdumont@paulawhite – I think the main difference is where the area of passion lies. So I think not neccesarily.39 minutes ago from TwitterFon

• JoHart@paulawhite ….. maybe more aware of own needs to keep learning/changing to meet student needs???40 minutes ago from TweetDeck

• klandmiles@paulawhite re passionate educators, I think we are passionate learners, which makes us passionate educators.41 minutes ago from TweetDeck

• JoHart@paulawhite more passionate abt educating in different & e- ways to meet student needs – not necessarily more passionate as educators .. …41 minutes ago from TweetDeck

• suzcomptime@paulawhite My contact with educators tends to be more “surface”. Perhaps twitter opens a method of sharing and collaboration on a diff lev42 minutes ago from TwitterFox

• jackiegerstein@paulawhite Passion is a natural by-product for those who “get” & use emerging technologies for learning, teaching, expression, creativity43 minutes ago from web

• haretek@paulawhite I work with a school full of extremely passionate and dedicated educators, only one of which is using Twitter.43 minutes ago from TweetDeck

• history_geek@paulawhite I’d like to think so!43 minutes ago from web

So what I’m sharing is that it’s not that teachers on Twitter are MORE passionate than other educators.  Teachers who are passionate about teaching and learning are everywhere and show those passions in lots of ways.  Those of us who do it on Twitter may simply be more overt or public about it in this particular venue.

P.S. and being limited to 140 characters is probably a good thing for many of us!

You might want to read Tom Woodward’s Bionic Teaching and Michelle Bourgeois’ Milibo’s Musings response before reading my thoughts on both of those. Part of the background conversation also happened at Tom’s Bloom’s and Technology Pyramid, Mike Fisher’s Digigogy blog, and Visual Bloom’s and Bloom’s rubrics as well.

Tom and Michelle have been thinking about a teaching/learning challenge for a while. Initially Tom’s idea was “Pimp My Lesson Plan” and it turned into a challenge based on the “Iron Chef.” Having gotten a comment on the challenge on Tom’s blog, Michelle responded and tweaked the challenge potential a bit. Here’s my two cents to add to their challenge.

We all know it’s not necessarily  JUST about the lesson plan, or the hook, or the activity, but about a combination of all of those things that will allow people to put good ideas out for others to use, and that will engage students in important work. When thinking about engaging students in activities that support “higher level thinking” I think about at least the following 3 facts:

1. We can quantify rigor and relevance, but we experience issues when trying to quantify relationships. As we examine tasks and attempt to “judge” or “rate” them, we must keep in mind that relationships between student and teacher may make what might look like a less meaningful task important BECAUSE of the relationship.
2. Being mindful of Phil Schlechty’s Working on The Work is crucial to the development of tasks that are likely to lead to student engagement.
3. When an observer can see at least three of the 8 qualities of engaging work in a learning activity, then 80% of the time students self-report being engaged.

Thus, a learning activity not only has to be tied to good teaching, to the three R’s (rigor, relevance and relationships), and to worthwhile content, but also engage the students in quality ways.

Michelle described two scenarios where students were clearly engaged and the learning activities were built around the objectives for learning. Teachers were thoughtful about how to engage students so that interest was high, interactions between students were heightened and students received feedback throughout the activity. Teaching was centered around the task, which was clearly tied to the learning objectives. Teaching to the task is a GOOD thing!

Tying together the components of what John Antonetti calls “The Engagement Cube” is what I believe is critical to setting up learning opportunities that do what Tom and Michelle (and Mike Fisher and I and @beckyfisher73 and @mwacker and @barbaram and a bunch of other educators) are thinking about as we engage in these conversations around quality education.

Like the title of this blog, I say teachers must be MASTERS of task-making. I do not mean in the traditional sense of the word, as in making sure the work gets done, but as in MASTERFULLY crafting tasks. These tasks should be ones that engage, teach, allow for diversity of thought, stimulate creative juices flowing, and evoke a proud sense of accomplishment. They may even take on a life of their own, resulting in students taking the task to places the teacher may never have envisioned. Through rich tasks that demand rigor in thought and performance, that elicit cooperation and teamwork, students may also discover a passion for the subject or the discipline as well.

I hope my thoughts add TO the conversation and don’t detract from what Tom and Michelle are trying to encourage. These two educators have challenged other teachers to craft great lessons and share them.  Let’s support that challenge and collaborate to create some incredible tasks!

On Saturday, I got a wikimail from one of my students with his homework attached. (His was one of 4 students out of 5 assigned that I received over the weekend.) Here’s what he said about going to present (as a 9 year old) to our School Board.

“My experience at the school board meeting was phenomenal. We got to use technology that I have never even heard of, like Dell Minis. My presentation was cut short because of tech problems, but I still felt like it was the experience of a lifetime. Because of that meeting, my math class got five ipod touches to use! I would like to be able to go to the next school board meeting if I can. Thanks for letting me go and I hope that the third graders that came were able to show you that we use a lot of technology in school.”

Why does he want to go back?  Because he learned, because he was honored, and because he got to show some of his work to people who matter. He had an authentic audience and he also knew he had something to offer that audience–our elected School Board members.

On Thursday, March 26, 2009, as part of a technology innovator group, I took three third graders to our school board work session to share how they have been using wikis in our math class.(You can see specifically what my students shared here.) 

Several years ago, our board members realized that while they were making decisions that affected the future of education in our schools, they often did not feel they knew enough about those issues to make truly informed decisions. Thus, our School Board work sessions were created.

In these sessions, our School Board becomes a Learning Board. That means that for an hour, our leadership team sets up break out sessions that teach the board about a particular topic, in this case, technology. On Thursday, we had 3 break out sessions for 7 school board members, and they chose which session to attend. After the hour, the board typically comes back together and shares out from each session so that they learn from the group’s collective experiences.

The brilliance of our leadership team shone through that night, as they had arranged the 3 sessions to also highlight other important facets of learning as well-the “three R’s” of Rigor, Relevance and Relationships. My students and I were in the “Relationships” strand. 

Before that night, the people involved in my section of the session had pre-planned on this wiki:http://tech-relationships.wikispaces.com/ where you can see the kinds of things we were sharing. The idea was to begin with the youngest elementary sample (my 3rd grade wiki) and work up through the grades.  

Our session had 2 SB members in it–Mr. Ronnie Price, who currently has children in our schools, and Mr. Steve Kolezar, who does not. Both asked great questions, listened intently and made connections to their own experiences in the context of our sharing.  Mr. Price spoke to the fact that he has begun a wiki at his work at UVA and the adults there don’t participate on it as well as my students.  He also spoke to the fact that his own middle school student goes to school and unplugs from the technology he uses outside of school. Mr. Kolezar, later, in the sharing, spoke not only to the engagement of the students, their knowledge and their expertise but also the importance they felt in the connections with both other students and the teacher through the wiki work.

My co-presenting teachers are astounding educators and the collective sharing of our group was simply riveting.  As teachers listening to our colleagues, we all learned much as well! The passion for learning, using technology as a tool and especially for helping our students succeed showed openly in each person who spoke.  We clearly develop those relationships through our teaching (both with and without technology), and that was noticeably recognized.

Social networking was one of our topics, as we talked not only about wikis, but also Twitter, texting, nings, blogs, social bookmarking and Google Docs. That led Mr. Price to ask questions about students bringing personal devices into our system, and gave us an opportunity to speak to both the potential advantages and disadvantages of that practice. He then later brought that up to the entire board as something to consider, so the groundwork was laid for future discussions and possibilities.

The sharing out from the board members was absolutely amazing to hear. Mr. Price spoke eloquently about the fact that we can provide all the rigor and relevance we want, but if the students do not feel involved in worthwhile relationships, the rigor and relevance probably won’t engage them. The social networking piece was basically addressed in each break out group, so while each member heard about it from a slightly different perspective, the socialness of learning was clearly a theme underlying all the presentations, and the board recognized that.

The members took turns sharing what they had learned, fielding questions from one another and clarifying their understandings with one another. They actually complained a bit because, in listening to one another, they wished they could attend EACH session for themselves! (We should think about recording each session in the future, I know!)

About 2/3rds of the way into the sharing, my Superintendent, who I follow and who follows me on Twitter, said to the board that the meeting was being Twittered as they spoke, and she turned to me. (I had been tweeting the comments from the board and my astonishment and pride at the whole experience.)  Dr. Moran, our Sup’t, asked the board if they’d like to see the tweets, and they said yes, so I literally got up from the audience, hooked a computer back up to the LCD projector and shared some of my tweets as well as responses from all over the world live to the board. Talk about demonstrating the power of Twitter! (Feel free to follow me. I’m @paulawhite.) 

The words of another student, in his homework, (also turned in over the weekend) says what I feel in the last sentence! 

“My experience at the School Board meeting was fun. I loved seeing all kinds of cool technology (iPod touchs, Dell minis and Dell laditudes.) I It was fun skyping with Dr. Brown. It was cool knowing that you are talking to the people who decide what the schools do.” 

It IS cool knowing you are talking to a LEARNING BOARD, and that they use that learning to help make decisions!

Before you read this, perhaps you’d like to explore the Visual Blooms wiki, the Blooms Rubrics wiki (looking at Rubric # 6 which is the only one we’ve worked on so far), and the Professional Practice wiki (which describes teacher levels of technology use and levels of expertise.)

It would help as well as be familiar with the edorigami wiki and Andrew Churches’ paper on the Digital Taxonomy.

This is addressed to a group of folks who have been thinking with me on these issues, some of whom are meeting tonight in Texas to discuss it face to face. 

Paul, Michael, Scott, Mike G., Mike F, Cris, Eduguy101, Becky, Glen, Barbara, et.al.,

(@paulrwood, @mwacker, @woscholar, @MikeGras, @fisher1000, @cristama, @eduguy101, @BeckyFisher73, @gardenglen, @porchdragon, @barbaram)
I like the Church article, because it attempts to tie digital tools to each Bloom’s level, which is what Mike Fisher’s Visual Bloom’s wiki does as well (the triangle at the visual blooms wiki.)  However, Michael W. is right. . . we need to go beyond that paper.  Scott asked me what a rubric for “Create” would look like—he didn’t ask for a rubric for a tool, which is what Andrew Church did in his paper and on the edorigami wiki.

I don’t want to judge my kids on how they use an IWB—whether they can control it or not,  and how they interact with it (which are the areas of the IWB rubric.)  I want to know how their understanding of the world changes because of the content with which they have engaged ON that tool.

If you look, though, at the fourth navigation section on the wiki , edorigami at the link called “Pedagogic Skills, IWB’s and Technology “ that addresses more what I’m thinking, in some ways.  The researchers were looking at what kids and teachers did with the tools and seeing the impact on education.
As Michael suggested, though, they didn’t go far enough, in my opinion.

Their stages:
1.  Supported Didactic
Essentially normal teaching practice using the IWB – I would liken it to “learning about the technology”. Little student interaction but some use of commercial products like presentation tools, spreadsheets.

1. Interactive
Lessons start to include different stimuli or learning styles – visual, auditory etc. IWB is a part of the classroom rather than a novelty, Teacher is confident in basic usage. The teacher is developing advancing technical skills – “Learning with Technology”

1. Enhanced interactive
The technology is an integral part of the lesson. Teachers vary use and approaches to using technology. The IWB provides opportunities to challenge students and “enhance active learning” “Learning through technology”. By this stage, students are familiar with almost all the functions of a interactive whiteboard and can take appropriate care of it without any guidance. They are allowed to use the IWB for writing, drawing, illustration, problem solving etc. At this stage a teacher uses all possible whiteboard applications from floating toolbars, infinite cloner to smart recorder. He also becomes proficient with whiteboard accessories like visualizers, interactive panels, student response systems etc.

ARE VERY AKIN to the ACOT stages of technology use I describe at the Professional Practice wiki.  It is all about the teacher’s technology USE and how that affects learning, very similar to David Berliner’s Teacher Expertise descriptions, also described on that wiki.  It is NOT about the learner and what they are learning, or what they are doing differently to IMPROVE or change learning. Those stages and the accompanying suggestions for support came right out of Teaching With Technology: Creating Student-Centered Classrooms by Judith Haymore Sandholtz, Cathy Ringstaff, and David C. Dwyer.

The create rubric on the other hand attempts to describe a creator, a person who is operating at various competency levels of creating. The tools are superfluous, as tools can be used in different ways and at different levels, depending on HOW one is using them.  The examples shown center on what the students are doing in the process of creation, not what they are using to create. It’s about how they are applying Blooms’ levels, and how they are remixing and changing the information they are using to create something new and unique (or not so new and unique.)

Does that make sense?

So, for me, it’s not about which tools as much as it is about how the learner uses the tools and the outcome in the areas of learning, understanding, and assimilation of that knowledge into their repertoire, so that they can use it to go deeper in the next conversation/activity/experience.

I ask Paul and the dinner friends to toss this into your Texas conversation, and those of you who aren’t in Texas tonight, join our wikis to talk with us!

Visual Blooms

Blooms Rubrics

Professional Practice

Until next time,

Paula

Note: I began this post literally over month ago on November 1, but wasn’t quite sure where I wanted to go with it after I told the story here. After receiving a comment asking me to write more on my blog, I decided I should at least finish this one. I did, and now hope it feels connected, as the experience with injenuity’s plea for help really did resonate deeply with me, and I’m not sure I did my thinking justice with my ending here. Oh, well, here goes:

Twitter has reduced the isolation of the classroom for me and allowed me to connect, meet and affirm and be affirmed by educators all over the world. I have discovered intellectual opportunities and online conferences I had no idea existed, and been involved in conversations that have stretched me, made me laugh, made me sad and increased both my empathy towards and concern about world issues. I have met people in this online adventure that I know I will see in RL–and I am looking forward to that opportunity. LOTS of folks have written about Twitter, and I know I am simply one more. However, my take on Twitter is slightly different because I want to talk about the metacognitive aspects of this amazing microblogging service.

On Twitter last night a Twitterbuddy, @injenuity, asked for help with understanding her child’s “critical thinking” homework. Being a Gifted Resource Teacher, I thought, “Ooh, I bet I can help here” and clicked on her link to the flickr picture of the child’s homework. It was sad. Labeled “Critical Thinking” by the publisher, it was a simple worksheet where the students were to simply x out the math fact that did not belong in the “fact family.” They then were to match the rectangle that held three related facts to the correct picture. While that may sound simple to the elementary educator familiar with the lingo, the layout of the worksheet was extremely poor, directions were minimal, and it was hard to figure out exactly what to do. Maybe THAT’S the critical thinking part of this worksheet.

While several of us on Twitter were helping Jen understand how to help her daughter, I noticed there were multiple conversations going on with the conversants. @tomwhyte1, her initial responder, was also conversing with @cbell about the fact we were tutoring a parent about a child’s homework on Twitter and making up names for this new service–however, twutor.com was already taken. I explained fact families and gave an example, and Jen responded to me while @monarchlibrary was sending a web site that showed and explained it as well. Jen’s daughter was worrying that her Mother was “cheating” by asking her friends for help and we were all responding to that concern. @courosa began a new conversation talking about how many homework assignments he had seen were meant for entrapment. @tomwhyte1 and Jen were exchanging their usual level of repartee–initially starting out as picking on or teasing one another and moving to genuine help as Tom realized Jen was sincere in asking for help. Jen spoke as a Mom about going to her child’s school and nodding without understanding when the teacher referred to “fact families” in the recent parent night for her child, and I began wondering how many times our “educationalese” astounds/confuses really intelligent people. Jen and her daughter were also trying to figure out the pictures, when @KevinByers joined in to help her with that. Tom continued his conversation with both Jen and @cbell, Jen continued with me, @courosa AND @KevinByers, and I began two other conversations about two other topics with @nnorris and @dmcordell (who was also conversing with @courosa).

Both Jen and I were very aware of all the things happening here at the same time (as were several of the others, I am sure) as she commented on this experience being a blog for her later, and she was keeping up with at least four conversations at once, all working on different aspects of her issue. The fact that she commented on it, (and later wrote about it on her blog) and that I was thinking about it is what got me thinking about metacognition and Twitter.

Some people like Plurk better for microblogging, saying they get lost in the randomness of Twitter. I do NOT like Plurk better, because it seems to be linear, and that makes it NOT as interesting to me. I LOVE seeing a comment on Twitter, not understanding it, and backtracking through the person who posted it (or the person they are talking with) to figure out the context. I often ask a question that gets me IN that conversation and I make new Twitterbuddies that way. I also find new folks to follow that way as well.

Twitter, for me, is WAY beyond a microblogging service. It is a way to connect and to find new thinkers to add to my world. It is also a puzzle, a way to entertain my overactive brain, and an avenue for fun as I explore new opportunities I learn from my Twitterverse. I laugh out loud at least once a day as I read, and I love that I have funny people in my online world. (I ESPECIALLY appreciate @injenuity for her stories as a stay-at-home-mom (SAHM) and her quirky sense of humor.) I so appreciate all of you whom I follow for allowing me to observe your thinking and sharing. Thanks, too, to the folks who follow me. I hope I give you as much to think about as I get from your sharing and thinking in public.