Several highlights from a recent board visit to Houserville Elementary School.
First, an example of the impact that technology is having on education:
Because the 5th grade class was reading “No Talking” by Andrew Clements, the school’s librarian thought it would be worthwhile to arrange for a visit by the author. Although that proved impractical due to weather and distance, Mardi persevered, and eventually arranged for a “Skype call” between the students and the author in the school library, with Mr. Clements projected onto the overhead screen. (Only a few years ago, this kind of video-conferencing was very expensive.) The students were thrilled, and the entire event took only an hour of everyone’s time (except, of course, Mardi’s).
A good example of student engagement/citizenship/leadership from a trio of 5th-grade students, who saw a big need for improvement in one of the community’s track facilities. They documented the problems with the track, complete with visuals, and presented their findings to the school’s PTO. Money was raised, the township was approached, and within a few months, repairs were completed.
And then there was the Math class...
Subscribe To SchoolBoardBlogger
Posts
All Comments
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
... Learning
And then there was the Math class...
…which began with the teacher saying to the students assembled on the carpet:
the number of sides in a pentagon, times
the number of sides in a square, plus
the number of days in a week
rounded to the nearest ten
What 2 numbers, when multiplied together, give you this result?
The hands in the room went up, and then in rapid succession: "2x15!" "3x10!" "5x6!"
A couple of things worth noting, for context:
These were 3rd graders
We saw neither paper nor pencils; all these calculations were done mentally, and quickly.
This was the warm up; the following exercises were harder and faster.
I certainly understand the frustration of parents, who having been taught Math the old, “algorithmic” way, struggle to help their children with their homework. I also think that more could be done to bridge the “old” and “new” approaches. (I believe the latest edition of “Investigations Math” addresses this issue.)
However, I have to say, as someone whose best subject in school was Math, this conceptual approach to Math instruction that began in State College a couple of years ago is the best thing since sliced bread.
Although I was taught the old, algorithmic way, the reason I was good at Math – and perhaps, just as importantly, the reason I enjoyed it – was that I understood it conceptually. The only time I struggled (briefly) was with multiplication, until someone explained why you “carried the one”.
(I also had good teachers. My high school Calculus teacher spent the first day of class demonstrating how the theory of calculus was developed. Very cool. Woe to the student whose first exposure to calculus is the mechanics of derivatives.)
It is a crime against all that is good that generations of Americans have been trained to believe that “they’re not good at Math” or that “Math is boring”.
An idea to consider: a Continuing Education course in “Investigations for Adults”.
You do the Math.
…which began with the teacher saying to the students assembled on the carpet:
the number of sides in a pentagon, times
the number of sides in a square, plus
the number of days in a week
rounded to the nearest ten
What 2 numbers, when multiplied together, give you this result?
The hands in the room went up, and then in rapid succession: "2x15!" "3x10!" "5x6!"
A couple of things worth noting, for context:
These were 3rd graders
We saw neither paper nor pencils; all these calculations were done mentally, and quickly.
This was the warm up; the following exercises were harder and faster.
I certainly understand the frustration of parents, who having been taught Math the old, “algorithmic” way, struggle to help their children with their homework. I also think that more could be done to bridge the “old” and “new” approaches. (I believe the latest edition of “Investigations Math” addresses this issue.)
However, I have to say, as someone whose best subject in school was Math, this conceptual approach to Math instruction that began in State College a couple of years ago is the best thing since sliced bread.
Although I was taught the old, algorithmic way, the reason I was good at Math – and perhaps, just as importantly, the reason I enjoyed it – was that I understood it conceptually. The only time I struggled (briefly) was with multiplication, until someone explained why you “carried the one”.
(I also had good teachers. My high school Calculus teacher spent the first day of class demonstrating how the theory of calculus was developed. Very cool. Woe to the student whose first exposure to calculus is the mechanics of derivatives.)
It is a crime against all that is good that generations of Americans have been trained to believe that “they’re not good at Math” or that “Math is boring”.
An idea to consider: a Continuing Education course in “Investigations for Adults”.
You do the Math.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Wikis and K12-university partnerships
In spite of the weather, I was glad I attended Saturday's "Symposium for Teaching and Learning with Technology" at the Penn Stater.
A highlight was a presentation by Dr. Kira Baker-Doyle of Penn State-Berks on the "Wiki Collaboration Project", in which she provided oversight for a partnership between ten elementary education interns from the University and ten classroom teachers in Cornwell Terrace Elementary School.
Kira saw this as a way to demonstrate the concept of the University as "an incubator of civic participation and democracy". For her students, this was an opportunity for service-learning: a way for them to apply their theoretical knowledge with active community involvement.
Hopefully, this project would help these pre-service teachers to develop a network of professional support before they entered the workforce; this would become a resource for their future professional development. (There's a growing recognition that an effective way for teachers to receive meaningful, ongoing professional development is for them to be connected to a diverse body of peers.)
For the university, this was a chance to see "education theory put into practice" and to address the disconnect between emerging research and the practical aspects of what's "on the ground."
It's an opportunity for K-12 schools to "get outside" of their school community and connect to information about emerging trends in the field; to experiment with different ways of delivering curriculum; and for teachers to generate ideas on how technology might be used in their classroom. (Teachers appreciated having a chance to partner with students who were clearly more digitally literate than they were.) For some teachers, it was an opportunity to become familiar with new theories of "21st century literacy".
The students began by observing the classroom, looking for practices that supported literacy. They posted their observations in a "wiki" that was edited by their fellow students, with comments added by the classroom teachers. The importance of "reflection" - the chance to compare notes with others on "what we have learned" - was a common theme throughout the conference.
For many of her students, collaborative writing was a new concept; they struggled with trying to merge different styles, with writing in the third person, and with wanting to maintain authorship/ownership of what they had written.
A highlight was a presentation by Dr. Kira Baker-Doyle of Penn State-Berks on the "Wiki Collaboration Project", in which she provided oversight for a partnership between ten elementary education interns from the University and ten classroom teachers in Cornwell Terrace Elementary School.
Kira saw this as a way to demonstrate the concept of the University as "an incubator of civic participation and democracy". For her students, this was an opportunity for service-learning: a way for them to apply their theoretical knowledge with active community involvement.
Hopefully, this project would help these pre-service teachers to develop a network of professional support before they entered the workforce; this would become a resource for their future professional development. (There's a growing recognition that an effective way for teachers to receive meaningful, ongoing professional development is for them to be connected to a diverse body of peers.)
For the university, this was a chance to see "education theory put into practice" and to address the disconnect between emerging research and the practical aspects of what's "on the ground."
It's an opportunity for K-12 schools to "get outside" of their school community and connect to information about emerging trends in the field; to experiment with different ways of delivering curriculum; and for teachers to generate ideas on how technology might be used in their classroom. (Teachers appreciated having a chance to partner with students who were clearly more digitally literate than they were.) For some teachers, it was an opportunity to become familiar with new theories of "21st century literacy".
The students began by observing the classroom, looking for practices that supported literacy. They posted their observations in a "wiki" that was edited by their fellow students, with comments added by the classroom teachers. The importance of "reflection" - the chance to compare notes with others on "what we have learned" - was a common theme throughout the conference.
For many of her students, collaborative writing was a new concept; they struggled with trying to merge different styles, with writing in the third person, and with wanting to maintain authorship/ownership of what they had written.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Go Green
Friday’s symposium opened with a presentation from Rachel Gutter of the U.S. Green Building Council on the Go Green Initiative. She began by defining a “green school” as one that “creates a healthy environment, conducive to learning, while saving energy, resources and money”. This will sound familiar to anyone who heard last August’s presentation by John Boecker of the 7group.
Among her other points:
By the way: afterwards, I shared with her the link to the State College “Board Resolution on Sustainability”. She later told me, “this is the best district green schools resolution I have ever seen, hands down.”
Among the recent developments on LEED certification, the twenty categories by which projects are measured are now weighted according to their relative impact on the environment, with regional climate variations taken into consideration. There are also new standards for renovations to existing buildings that recognize the tradeoff between the environmental options that are available with new construction versus the impact on the environment that comes from the manufacture of all new materials and the disposal of demolition waste.
The symposium concluded with several presentations that addressed opportunities of integrating the physical facility with academic curriculum.
As a salesman for Lucent (a lighting controls company), several years ago Steve Beede attended a school demonstration expecting to see how the newly installed system was saving the school energy and money. Instead, he saw a demonstration of innovative teaching: a science teacher with a hand-held device who could show her class, in real-time, the impact of opening and closing the blinds on energy consumption. (Adjusting the blinds automatically adjusted the lights.) He immediately redirected his career to the development of school energy curriculum. The video is worth watching.
Trung Le expounded on this idea of school buildings becoming the Third Teacher. Entire curriculum based on this premise now exist, some of which can be found at Greenovations.
Among her other points:
- Schools should be statements of the community's commitment to the environment.
- Building design should make it easy for the occupants to “act green."
- Just as today’s students are thought to be “digital natives” they are also “sustainability natives”; our children are growing up with a commitment to the environment that didn’t exist a generation ago.
- An important aspect of sustainability is durability. We should be asking "how many generations should a school last?" instead of "how many years?"
By the way: afterwards, I shared with her the link to the State College “Board Resolution on Sustainability”. She later told me, “this is the best district green schools resolution I have ever seen, hands down.”
Among the recent developments on LEED certification, the twenty categories by which projects are measured are now weighted according to their relative impact on the environment, with regional climate variations taken into consideration. There are also new standards for renovations to existing buildings that recognize the tradeoff between the environmental options that are available with new construction versus the impact on the environment that comes from the manufacture of all new materials and the disposal of demolition waste.
The symposium concluded with several presentations that addressed opportunities of integrating the physical facility with academic curriculum.
As a salesman for Lucent (a lighting controls company), several years ago Steve Beede attended a school demonstration expecting to see how the newly installed system was saving the school energy and money. Instead, he saw a demonstration of innovative teaching: a science teacher with a hand-held device who could show her class, in real-time, the impact of opening and closing the blinds on energy consumption. (Adjusting the blinds automatically adjusted the lights.) He immediately redirected his career to the development of school energy curriculum. The video is worth watching.
Trung Le expounded on this idea of school buildings becoming the Third Teacher. Entire curriculum based on this premise now exist, some of which can be found at Greenovations.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Building (design) basics
Several speakers at the school symposium addressed school design from the perspective of the individual classroom.
Any conversation about the impact of school climate on learning needs to consider the physical aspect. As important as good soil is to a farmer, a good learning environment requires:
Except in auditoriums, or when the teacher is especially soft-spoken, sound amplification systems are not the answer. If room acoustics are poor to begin with – a lot of hard surfaces that cause sound to reverberate - an amplification system only serves to amplify the problem.
One strategy is carpeting. The acoustical advantages of carpeting are obvious; a major concern has been the affect on air quality.
Granted, one has consider the source, but a spokesman for the carpet industry argued that much of the evidence against carpeting is the result of poor cleaning products (many of which act as a glue for dust, etc.) and inadequate or poorly maintained equipment. It would not surprise me if his claim turned out to be true: that many vacuum cleaners suck dirt out of the carpet only to release it right back into the air. A properly maintained carpet should act as an air filter. Something to think about..
Any conversation about the impact of school climate on learning needs to consider the physical aspect. As important as good soil is to a farmer, a good learning environment requires:
- comfort (furniture that encourages good posture and in which it is possible to sit for extended periods of time. It should be noted that some of the best classroom furniture I’ve experienced has been made primarily of plastic);
- natural, evenly diffused lighting that eliminates glare;
- temperature controls;
- good room acoustics.
Except in auditoriums, or when the teacher is especially soft-spoken, sound amplification systems are not the answer. If room acoustics are poor to begin with – a lot of hard surfaces that cause sound to reverberate - an amplification system only serves to amplify the problem.
One strategy is carpeting. The acoustical advantages of carpeting are obvious; a major concern has been the affect on air quality.
Granted, one has consider the source, but a spokesman for the carpet industry argued that much of the evidence against carpeting is the result of poor cleaning products (many of which act as a glue for dust, etc.) and inadequate or poorly maintained equipment. It would not surprise me if his claim turned out to be true: that many vacuum cleaners suck dirt out of the carpet only to release it right back into the air. A properly maintained carpet should act as an air filter. Something to think about..
Monday, April 13, 2009
Notes from NSBA: Professional Learning Communities
I was glad that my schedule allowed me to attend the pre-conference “schools symposium”, sponsored by McGraw-Hill. A mix of architects and educators heard a series of presentations on the impact that new educational and environmental initiatives are having on school building design.
Small (or Professional) Learning Communities was a relatively new concept when I first heard it about seven years ago. The idea is now well enough established that we have many good examples of new and renovated schools in which the building design supports the SLC concept. (Our facilities planner, Bill DeJong, is an advocate – he refers to them as “pods”.) Several board members visited Mason, Ohio last year to see one example for themselves.
The central idea is to make a school feel smaller to its students - and faculty - through organizational and building design, without sacrificing all the advantages of a comprehensive school. The intent is to create educational environments in which “the students all know one another” (they are missed when they are absent) and "all the faculty are able to sit around one table." This concept has been particularly helpful in large urban school districts that struggle with discipline, high dropout rates, and a lack of family support.
In response to these issues, research by the Gates Foundation concluded that the components of a successful high school experience are: rigor, relevance, and especially, relationships - the development of personal connections between and among students and faculty.
What resulted was the “small schools” concept: breaking large schools into pieces of 400-600 students each, in order to create more personalized environments. But as the Gates Foundation now acknowledges, reducing the overall size of a school is a strategy, not the final goal. We now see a spectrum of solutions tailored to individual communities, particularly at some traditionally successful suburban schools.
At one end of the spectrum are autonomous career academies housed in separate buildings, with student course selection limited to the offerings within their school. At the other end, students choose to identify with faculty and students of similar interest, but they are free to take classes from any of the “schools”. Under this design, it is emphasized to parents that their children are not choosing a career; rather, the choice of an “interest area” is intended to increase the student’s engagement to his/her education.
Beyond that, there is a great deal of variation. In many schools, the science labs are scattered throughout the "schools" so that science teachers have the opportunity to work with faculty from different subject areas. (One way to provide for collaboration within the science department is to locate labs near the "core".) Typically, but not always, there remains one football team and one drama club.
The architects were clear that there is no one "best" solution; each community must decide for itself. Also: flexibility is essential, so that the organization can continue to evolve as the school community learns what does, or doesn’t, work. (As part of their design plans, one school identified "one-year", "five-year" and "twenty-year” walls.)
The speakers noted that there is almost always some resistance to organizational change, driven by both personal and professional experience (especially when “the way we've always done it" has been mostly successful). The best way to create faculty enthusiasm for a different approach is to have them visit schools where these changes have been effectively implemented.
Small (or Professional) Learning Communities was a relatively new concept when I first heard it about seven years ago. The idea is now well enough established that we have many good examples of new and renovated schools in which the building design supports the SLC concept. (Our facilities planner, Bill DeJong, is an advocate – he refers to them as “pods”.) Several board members visited Mason, Ohio last year to see one example for themselves.
The central idea is to make a school feel smaller to its students - and faculty - through organizational and building design, without sacrificing all the advantages of a comprehensive school. The intent is to create educational environments in which “the students all know one another” (they are missed when they are absent) and "all the faculty are able to sit around one table." This concept has been particularly helpful in large urban school districts that struggle with discipline, high dropout rates, and a lack of family support.
In response to these issues, research by the Gates Foundation concluded that the components of a successful high school experience are: rigor, relevance, and especially, relationships - the development of personal connections between and among students and faculty.
What resulted was the “small schools” concept: breaking large schools into pieces of 400-600 students each, in order to create more personalized environments. But as the Gates Foundation now acknowledges, reducing the overall size of a school is a strategy, not the final goal. We now see a spectrum of solutions tailored to individual communities, particularly at some traditionally successful suburban schools.
At one end of the spectrum are autonomous career academies housed in separate buildings, with student course selection limited to the offerings within their school. At the other end, students choose to identify with faculty and students of similar interest, but they are free to take classes from any of the “schools”. Under this design, it is emphasized to parents that their children are not choosing a career; rather, the choice of an “interest area” is intended to increase the student’s engagement to his/her education.
Beyond that, there is a great deal of variation. In many schools, the science labs are scattered throughout the "schools" so that science teachers have the opportunity to work with faculty from different subject areas. (One way to provide for collaboration within the science department is to locate labs near the "core".) Typically, but not always, there remains one football team and one drama club.
The architects were clear that there is no one "best" solution; each community must decide for itself. Also: flexibility is essential, so that the organization can continue to evolve as the school community learns what does, or doesn’t, work. (As part of their design plans, one school identified "one-year", "five-year" and "twenty-year” walls.)
The speakers noted that there is almost always some resistance to organizational change, driven by both personal and professional experience (especially when “the way we've always done it" has been mostly successful). The best way to create faculty enthusiasm for a different approach is to have them visit schools where these changes have been effectively implemented.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)