Are we Telling Lies?

   

Tim is in the midst of an interesting series of posts about the lies that we tell our students.  The "we" refers primarily to secondary language arts teachers.  Here’s lie number four:

Five lies we tell our students – #4: "This book is VERY important to read!"

In the first series under Lies ELA Teachers Tell,
I will discuss the top five lies we tell our students.  As with
everything we do as teachers, we are well-meaning with these lies.
But, in the long-term, these lies hurt our students.  I will discuss
the lie, what we really mean when we tell the lie, and how we can
achieve the same objective.

Why do we tell this lie?  How did we become so arrogant as to think
we had the right to say which books were important to read and which
aren’t? 

I’m not sure how this became such a common lie, and no doubt there
will be some who disagree with me.  You can see the comments to the
post about why whole-class, teacher-selected books don’t work for
other’s thoughts as well as mine.  Let’s for a minute forget the
cultural capital argument of reading some books over others, however
valid of an argument it might be.

What disturbs me most is that when we say this, we take a little
power away from students AND hurt their critical thinking.  Shouldn’t
they decide what’s important and why?  That can be empowering, as well
as exercise the critical thinking muscle of evaluating.  They would
have to be able to justify their reasons for thinking a book is
important and we can share how other people define "important".
Students can further evaluate others’ criteria for "importance".  How
many perfectly good lessons surrounding this are thrown away when we
decide what’s important?

Too often, though, we take that power away.

Next time: Lie #3 We Tell Our Students … "A paragraph contains 3-5 sentences."

    For what it’s worth, I’ve never told any student that a paragraph contains three to five sentences.  Heck, frequent readers of this blog know that some of my paragraphs contain one sentence.  Some of those, one word. I deliberately play with the length of sentences and paragraphs for intentional effect.  I’ll even use a sentence fragment if it helps convey meaning.  Our students should, too.  (And the adults that teach them should understand that doing so isn’t automatically wrong.)
    I’m interested to see what Tim has to say about paragraphs.  He’s blogging some pretty interesting stuff right now — if you’re not paying attention, maybe he’s worth a look.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

Is it all just hype?

    This should be a very interesting conversation:


   Is our enthusiasm for web 2.0 technologies misplaced? I think that’s the essential question Wesley Fryer was talking about in his post Luddite criticisms of technology and modernism on January 4. Wes, Miguel Guhlin, Ewan McIntosh and I are getting together tonight to discuss these 5 questions:

 

  • 1. Is enthusiasm in the blogsphere for web 2.0 overblown,
    since the realities of the modern, accountability-driven classroom
    overpower individual drives for creative innovation?

     

  • 2. Is there hope for systemic school reform in the United States? Elsewhere in the world?

     

  • 3.
    Should schools repurpose their existing educational technology budgets,
    which largely serve now to support a traditional transmission-based
    model (pedagogy) of instruction? (And do something radical instead,
    like pay their teachers more?!)

     

  • 4. Will corporate
    interests (Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc) overpower the energy
    of web 2.0 technologies in their drive to monetize the Internet?
  •  

  • 5.
    How much should our enthusiasm for web 2.0, technology specifically and
    modernism in general be tempered by the “costs” we hear and know about
    regarding globalism?

I’ll be listening to this podcast as soon as I can get it.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

End of the Quarter

    It’s the end of our second quarter tomorrow, which means that I’m trying to catch up on all the work that both came in late and that I’m a little behind in grading.  I’m taking a break in large part because I need to flex my writerly muscles after so much reading.
    One of the most frustrating parts of teaching and assigning writing is that I can’t read, digest, and respond to everything that I ask my students to do in as timely a manner as I would like.  By the time I get to some papers, students have moved on to other thoughts, ideas, and assignments, and the opportunity that might have existed to push a particular student’s thinking in a new direction has moved on.
    I know I can’t grade or respond to everything.  I also know that sometimes, writing an assignment is in and of itself good practice, regardless of feedback.
    But still, a person’s writing is a fragile and precious thing, particularly if that person is a new writer.  If the student was kind enough to really engage an assignment, it’s hard to realize that I won’t always be able to honestly engage their contribution to our conversations.
    But I owe them that much. 
    One of the reasons I like the idea of learning networks so much is that a network distributes the load and the responsibility of giving feedback.  A student in such a network has the (potential) audience of the entire network from which to receive (potential) feedback. 
    Clarence has been writing about learning networks lately.  He writes:


One major lesson I have learned about blogging with kids is that
authentic purposes and spaces to write makes the difference between a
successful experience and not. Kids demand choices when working in
these ways, and given the opportunity to write for a global audience,
they will find spaces that match their interests and their style. I do
definitely appreciate the number of classes that are blogging, and the
teachers that have made contact with me, but we are still learning to
understand that when we work in ways like this, we are giving kids
opportunities for choice.

When we set up RSS feeds for our
kids, and give them choices about the networks they will form, the
information they are interested in, and the writers whose style they
appreciate, we need to learn that the information spheres they have
access to are as wide as our own. No one tells us who we must read
(outside of suggestion), and no one tells us where we must write.
Blogging gives kids choices, and we must support them in their choices
if this is the type of learning environment we hope to structure for
them.

The students in my class have formed networks on their
own. Their RSS feeds fill with the blogs of other students in our
class, the blogs of other student writers from across Western Canada,
the U.S., Europe, and parts of Asia; but we have much room for
improvement. We need to learn how these networks form and how to
capitalize on them for learning purposes. We must learn how to pull
kids together in learning networks for short periods of time and then
pull other groups of kids together in flexible groupings at other times
for other purposes. We need to form networks of classrooms who are
willing to come and go, who are willing to work together for short
periods of time and then drop off, when projects are completed, moving
on to other groups for other purposes.

If we want to work in
these ways, we must push ourselves further towards authenticity,
towards flexibility, towards understanding what learning means in this
new world.

  Of course, Clarence is talking about how tricky it can be to ask students to talk to one another without choosing favorites.  He makes the point very nicely that students who have real choice in their learning will not have to talk to everyone.  Nor should they.  I’ve got to believe, though, that, given enough students in enough classrooms, everyone can find someone to connect with via their words and ideas, at least for a short time.
    I like that teachers like Clarence continually push my thinking about how to teach, reach and publish writers and their writing.  His post on the blogging doldrums that hit his class over the holidays was full of good ideas.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

Better Late than Never

    I got a really interesting e-mail question from Tadge about three weeks ago.  Then the holidays hit and I got distracted.  (Sorry, Tadge.)  He asked a really good question, one that I’d like to think about some more, but I thought I’d share (with his permission, of course):

I am an Instructional Technology Specialist in Upstate NY and we are
going to be building a Wiki to help our teachers. With the recent
Wikipedia  incident relating to John Seigenthaler and the defaming that
occurred I am wondering about disclaimers and such that should be added
to our prospective wiki. I am curious if you have thought about this at
all. I know I heard a discussion that Bob Sprankle, you, and another
gentleman earlier this week. One comment was about students use of
blogs and conversation that is had within the classroom.

Unfortunately I work for a Board of Cooperative Educational Services,
and we serve over 50,000 students across 10 districts. I am not so
worried about students defacing the wiki, but rather preparing for
others prospective questions about the concern. I know one thing that I
am considering is making the wiki require a password (though I may am
some what against it). I noticed that you don’t have a disclaimer on
your wiki and was wondering if this was purposeful or just not thought
about?
 

I didn’t put one up because I didn’t think to do so.  He further elaborated:


My concern with a wiki, that is completely open like Wikipedia, would
be someone defacing it without my knowledge, or an anonymous IP doing
damage. I know that it comes down to respecting other peoples space and
citizenship, but the Internet has no governing body. Personally the
disclaimer issue has been bouncing around in my head recently. I am
thinking something simple if the wiki has some sort of security
attached to it. Such as requiring a password and login to be created.
The level of security though can inhibit the exchange of ideas, as well
as turn some people away. I am have just been doing some research about
it trying to put a process in place before making it public. I know
that there are skeptics and I want to be able to intrigue the early
adopters and make the fence sitters see the benefits.

At the same time I don’t know everything about technology and I want
others with more knowledge to be able to share it if they would like.
This is why I am thinking of taking some security measures, whether
that is requiring passwords or putting a watch on all pages I haven’t
really figured it out. I appreciate your thoughts and did get another
response about a college who is using wikis and they have actually
locked them down to prevent hacking and defacing. I will let you know
how things are going.

  So — what do y’all think?  I know that I’ve been fighting wiki spam lately — a related issue, but not specifically what Tadge is asking about.  What sorts of disclaimers would you write for a wiki?  Do we need to do so?  Here’s a sandbox — go to work if you’d like.  (Background — Bob Sprankle’s amazing students did a podcast on the John S. story.  It’s a great listen!

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

Hyperlocal — Sometimes, with Several Asides

    I’ve been really happy to see that my students are beginning to embrace the hyperlocal idea that I’ve been pushing for in regards to our school newspaper (this doesn’t seem like the right term anymore – -but what do you call it?  Newsblog?  Hyperlocal Journalism Site?  Doesn’t really roll off the tongue, does it?  Any suggestions?).  We’ve got a long way to go, and I think I’d like to write more about what the quarter’s been like (maybe a podcast on what we’ve been up to) as we’ve gotten used to the idea that we’re writing online.
    One good example of a hyperlocal story – one you won’t hear about anywhere else – is the recent theft of a camera from our computer lab.  The story’s good on the basics, and is a big step for the writer who wrote it.  You won’t see the story anywhere else, and it marks an important benchmark for the student who wrote it. 
    I’m very pleased that she would cover the issue in the first place, and I’ve enjoyed watching her writing improve as she starts relying more on her ideas and less on the words of her sources.  (I even think she’s going to sign on to take the class again next quarter, in spite of the fact that I’ve already told her that she’ll be podcasting her stories after she writes them.)
    Another story that I was especially pleased with this week is Rance’s editorial on Internet filtering.   Although I want to look at filtering as a possible thesis topic, Rance proposed the story quite some time ago, and I tried to stay out of his way.  (I wonder sometimes about how my enthusiasm for a particular topic or idea influences the way that a student proceeds.  It’s a tricky issue.)
     I’d like Rance to play more with some of the wording in the piece, but I thought it was ready to be published.  (John Temple recently pointed out one distinct advantage that online journalism has over print — the ability to change the story after it first runs.  I’m not one hundred percent comfortable with making changes to a "published" piece — but I think the web lends itself to such.  Is that a good thing or a bad thing?)
    One more note — I’ve turned off all the commenting screening that I was doing when the site first began.  Feel free to share your thoughts with our student writers, if you so desire.  It should be pretty easy, now that the bumbling teacher’s gotten out of the way.
    Yes — there’s lots more to say about how we’ve put OldeSchoolNews.com together — but that’s info for another day.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

Podcast: In a Hurry?

    In today’s podcast (actually, it was recorded yesterday), I’m thinking about several recent posts by some of the bigger guns of the educational blogosphere.  As Will Richardson and Steve Dembo and Stephen Downes  and John Pederson and others entered the new year, they were writing some stuff that seem pretty urgent/anxious/eager to me.  Amazing combinations of the personal and professional, actually.  I’m curious to know what you think. 
    Also, I’m talking about a recent Rocky Mountain News article that looks at money and performance in schools.  (Extra!  Spending more, by itself, doesn’t improve student performance.  If that’s s surprising headline for you, try this one: Extra!  Driving home during rush hour takes longer!)    All the links for the show are included in the previous paragraphs.       
    Enjoy.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare