This week I've been thinking a lot about property value.
If schools in the future don't need buildings and actual property will the internet property costs go up? Are there limitations to internet property? Are there servers in some building somewhere that will eventually overtake human space? What will happen to all that beautiful beachside property that was land granted by the State of California? Can I bid on some futures for both markets? I'm not sure I'd know what to do with some internet property, but i'm guessing it will be more populated than any actual property I ever own so it seems like a great bet.
My friend Tony, a talented advertising professional, recently turned me onto the upcoming world of 3D building projections. I was entertained, curious and "unlearning" for days after I was exposed. The symbol is so perfect for the present and future of schools. A classical building turned into an outdoor, nighttime, digital lazer show that draws crowds into the street to watch in awe. Please see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0XKmU5hF5s for a glimpse of this new art form. This highly developed imagery says so much about the expectations students have for school, projected onto the brick and mortar that exists.
Coordinated light that recreates buildings, and in a half-second destroys them, is closer to the norm of education for the graduates of 2040 than the antique buildings they project onto. Changing a projector bulb is more likely in their skill set than priming and painting. Typing the code for a mural on the side is more likely than a spray can. And yet without electricity the whole thing falls apart.
Last week Shalauna and I sent out a question about the 'future of schools' to our friends, family, and students. Even the youngest respondents struggled with the idea that "physical classrooms and buildings of 'school' would no longer exist". Their suggestions about the future of education were mostly about internships, outdoor, and service learning education. I have been struggling all week with ambivalence of how to understand this phenomenon...are they limited by what they know or are they excited that digital learning will emphasize going outdoors? As a public health and prevention specialist I worry about the increased sitting, typing, and isolation of working on a machine like I am now. But as an educational leader I worry about the loss of the residence hall experience, the organic nature of a classroom debate so dependent on body language and paralanguage to grow, and the plethora of activities defined as "co-curricular" engagement.
I've come to the conclusion that not knowing is exciting, and the thought that keeps me excited is how desks will turn in virtual reality suits. I can tell my kids about the old Oregon trail game as something I actually remember as motivating and useful...and they'll say: "Yeah that's nice dad, today I sat in a covered wagon and explored the landmarks first-hand in our simulation hollow deck. Then after a short hike in the Gobi Desert and some lunch I walked around on Mars collecting geology samples." To which I will reply; "I wanna go!"
I think virtual property value has more potential, but will require the real environment for endless inspiration.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
take the school out of education
school books
school busses
school buildings
school uniforms
school lunches
school schedule
school standards
school supplies
books are digital
busses are old
buildings are in disrepair
uniforms are degrading
lunches are unhealthy
schedules are demotivating
standards are low
supplies are bought by teachers
and somehow bad mortgages lead to decreased school funding.
take it away Jerry Brown...good luck buddy!
school busses
school buildings
school uniforms
school lunches
school schedule
school standards
school supplies
books are digital
busses are old
buildings are in disrepair
uniforms are degrading
lunches are unhealthy
schedules are demotivating
standards are low
supplies are bought by teachers
and somehow bad mortgages lead to decreased school funding.
take it away Jerry Brown...good luck buddy!
Monday, November 1, 2010
getting technical, ethical, and headachey
why doesnt anyone read my blog? (insert sarcastic frown here)
Technically speaking
Teaching and learning is going to the cloud. No doubt this has its pros and cons. As an educator I see it as a new challenge. Several of my colleagues teach online courses and i think they'd agree it is more work than it soumds like. For some reason the feeling associated with "online course" has a toned-down, less important, almost second-rate connotation. i chock this up to the lack of best practices in an emerging field because the preparation involved is intense and obvious. I think teachers feel like the 'organic' evolution of a class culture is so different online and has so many forms that are different from their rows and boxes and basically the same stiff i mean stuff they have been doing for years that the cop outs are winning out right now. fortunately the new generation is coming and the trends are a changing, see
1. curiosity: we must stimulate students current interests and push them to use them to explore the stuff they want to know more about. hell, just the idea of identifying things they want to know more about is a good start (and making a habit of doing so is a goal)
2. sense of control: force students to dictate their progress, write test questions and assignments, etc. see the greatest book of all time: FLOW for more info on this, a sense of control is vital for losing oneself in a psychologically optimal experience. which leads to the next:
3. moderate challenge: somewhere in between stuff thats too hard and stuff thats too easy is the right amount of challenge and skill use that leads human brains onto a different wavelength of enjoyment...referred to as flow...where "something unexpected occurs" and we are "stretched beyond ourselves". Just think about that thing you do for 2 hours that feels like 20 minutes and you'll know what im talking about. this chart is from the book;
4. fantasy: providing students opportunities to experience an increase in possibilities with a decrease in consequences and another part of the reward pathway will open up...and perhaps they will like us as much as they like video games (for a minute or so). try out a "if you were the president/chancellor/superhero/god/parent/teacher/etc. type assignment" with the conditions that "there are no wrong answers" and see what happens.
Ethically speaking
I was on a committee that produced the following document a few years back
http://www.policy.ucsb.edu/policies/advisory-docs/social-networking-guide.pdf
and its already almost obsolete. Makes me think that all of the use of social networking for business is really just an excuse for employees to be on facebook at work.
Headachey
Ive grown to be able to predict how long it takes for a headache to develop from working on a backlit screen. As it creeps up now, i look forward to my first-ever dictated blog next week with Dragon dictation technology. Every injury has its lessons, i look forward to the new challenge.
Political side note: tax subsidies for voting is long overdue, the fact that less than 1/3 of our citizenry will actually exercise their right to vote tomorrow (and that its predictable) is almost as sad as the 2/3 of americans with no right to complain about anything
Technically speaking
Teaching and learning is going to the cloud. No doubt this has its pros and cons. As an educator I see it as a new challenge. Several of my colleagues teach online courses and i think they'd agree it is more work than it soumds like. For some reason the feeling associated with "online course" has a toned-down, less important, almost second-rate connotation. i chock this up to the lack of best practices in an emerging field because the preparation involved is intense and obvious. I think teachers feel like the 'organic' evolution of a class culture is so different online and has so many forms that are different from their rows and boxes and basically the same stiff i mean stuff they have been doing for years that the cop outs are winning out right now. fortunately the new generation is coming and the trends are a changing, see
32 Trends Affecting Distance Education: An Informed Foundation for Strategic Planning
for a great overview that i think is already obsolete in many ways. but that is the nature of technology, growing and changing exponentially faster than anything else. Hopefully the desk manufacturers union lobbyists will at least adjust, because I think the future of classrooms is not only more digital, its going to require less sitting. I think the classrooms of the future will be more like video games and VR simulators, requiring people to acknowledge that our brains require more than the use of just our ears and eyes to learn. i think as schooling goes to the cloud all the buildings left behind will become playgrounds for technology like Wiis and Playstations...well probably more like their great great great grandchildren operating systems. I look at the air force and NASA and cant help but think we've known this for a long time and just ignored it. Perhaps we the "normal curve" dicated that teaching with the same methods for the "most technical" of professions wasn't economical. Hopefully with exponential growth in technology, education will follow suit with exponential growth in its use to relate learning to real life applications...and for motivation's sake, to fantasy applications as well. Jim Block is ringing in my ear now with the four basic principles for motivating students (i hope he will critique and correct this):1. curiosity: we must stimulate students current interests and push them to use them to explore the stuff they want to know more about. hell, just the idea of identifying things they want to know more about is a good start (and making a habit of doing so is a goal)
2. sense of control: force students to dictate their progress, write test questions and assignments, etc. see the greatest book of all time: FLOW for more info on this, a sense of control is vital for losing oneself in a psychologically optimal experience. which leads to the next:
3. moderate challenge: somewhere in between stuff thats too hard and stuff thats too easy is the right amount of challenge and skill use that leads human brains onto a different wavelength of enjoyment...referred to as flow...where "something unexpected occurs" and we are "stretched beyond ourselves". Just think about that thing you do for 2 hours that feels like 20 minutes and you'll know what im talking about. this chart is from the book;
4. fantasy: providing students opportunities to experience an increase in possibilities with a decrease in consequences and another part of the reward pathway will open up...and perhaps they will like us as much as they like video games (for a minute or so). try out a "if you were the president/chancellor/superhero/god/parent/teacher/etc. type assignment" with the conditions that "there are no wrong answers" and see what happens.
Ethically speaking
I was on a committee that produced the following document a few years back
http://www.policy.ucsb.edu/policies/advisory-docs/social-networking-guide.pdf
and its already almost obsolete. Makes me think that all of the use of social networking for business is really just an excuse for employees to be on facebook at work.
Headachey
Ive grown to be able to predict how long it takes for a headache to develop from working on a backlit screen. As it creeps up now, i look forward to my first-ever dictated blog next week with Dragon dictation technology. Every injury has its lessons, i look forward to the new challenge.
Political side note: tax subsidies for voting is long overdue, the fact that less than 1/3 of our citizenry will actually exercise their right to vote tomorrow (and that its predictable) is almost as sad as the 2/3 of americans with no right to complain about anything
Monday, October 18, 2010
10/18/10
Gonna be a short one this week cuz I have a dislocated finger, so im doing this one-handed.
This week I have Bloom's taxonomy on my mind. It all started with the review of How People Learn, a review by the National Research Council from 2000. Of course its not free so i had to use a review of the review by the National Academic Press talking about "bridging the research into practice". I was reviewing this review to update (yeah, i know, a point is coming) a lecture on becoming an effective peer educator. "How people learn" is one of several concepts along with "teaching behaviors", "professionalism", "starting discussion" etc. that we have the students teach each other. Apparently the classic teaching triangle/pyramid of retention we had been using for decades was found by a colleague to, in fact, not be research-based so i was given the task of replacing it (we have a high-standard of using best practices). I have pasted google images below of what im referring to:
This week I have Bloom's taxonomy on my mind. It all started with the review of How People Learn, a review by the National Research Council from 2000. Of course its not free so i had to use a review of the review by the National Academic Press talking about "bridging the research into practice". I was reviewing this review to update (yeah, i know, a point is coming) a lecture on becoming an effective peer educator. "How people learn" is one of several concepts along with "teaching behaviors", "professionalism", "starting discussion" etc. that we have the students teach each other. Apparently the classic teaching triangle/pyramid of retention we had been using for decades was found by a colleague to, in fact, not be research-based so i was given the task of replacing it (we have a high-standard of using best practices). I have pasted google images below of what im referring to:
Im sure every teacher has seen some form of this pyramid, and it always played a significant part of my educational philosophy so the idea of not using it was personally difficult. Even worse, the National Research Council findings were a fitting let down; lacking the visual. Their main findings were overlapping too, here's the summary i was providing for students:
There are 3 core learning principles all teachers should prepare:
- to draw on existing knowledge students bring with them (zone of proximal...)
- to use in-depth knowledge to create in-depth examples (student-friendly language..)
- to have students question where the information came from, why it’s important, and what mastery of the knowledge looks like (links to real life and their progress in it)
Classroom environments should:
- Incorporate students’ preconceptions (cultural, etc.)
- provide moderate challenges on an individual level (knowledge, skills, interests)
- help students see their progress and identify problems (where they are and roadblocks ahead)
- provide opportunities for camaraderie (building things together)
- encourage questioning rather than answering (process over product)
How fitting that none of these lead to the test scores we are currently using, i love the cognitive dissonance in our field!
Long story short, all of this led to a conversation with my mentor where i expressed my concern about losing the pyramid to the "original findings that can no longer be found" by the research lab in Maine, yet have been used for over 50 years and in over 1200 teaching and learning publications and schools. She responded that she fears using "antiquated" techniques like activities, discussions and small group projects she's been using for 30 years (that students love and constantly praise). Which leads me to Bloom, social constructivism, and the idea that lacking research and "new" is not always better. I came to the conclusion that the numbers on the pyramid may be arbitrary, but the concepts are right on. She came to the conclusion that she uses things that work and feedback to change all the time. Together we made the decision that students would get the most out of seeing the pyramid and hearing the three main ways people learn: cognitively, affectively, and psychor-motor. See this blog for a good explanation: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm
What she has been doing works so well, and yields so much praise because it touches on all three ways that people learn:
1. thinking
2. feeling and
3. doing
Classrooms should be about knowledge, getting emotional, and actually trying stuff out.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
10/10/10
This week I explored a new type of school assignment....one that I have assigned to many of my own students and even assigned myself but never actually had assigned by a teacher: the perusal of websites. It made me realize that when I assign websites I do so for specific readings and worksheets, but never just to explore it as a resource. It prompted me to start a running list of websites for professional use and referral. I'd like to walk away from this graduate program (that felt good to type in itself) with a strong start to a running list of online resources I can hand my Antioch (teacher candidate) students. So there you go Patrick Faverty, I've officially changed a cognition and behavior that will make me a better educator...well done buddy. Experiential activity (trying something new) is like the holy grail for a teacher so have a glass for this little sip of change on me :)
The websites themselves challenged me to think about how I motivate students to learn and how I don't. After watching some exciting videos (rollercoasters) and then some painfully boring videos (see the Joan Kuchner video on the Stony Brook website) I've come to a conclusion about education (for this week): if we don't at least try to engage more than one sense then we are wasting our students' time. Eyes and ears are only two pathways to the brain...the hands, tongue, and nose are highly underutilized when it comes to all forms of education. I realize that came out a bit weird, but it's true. Perhaps missing most is the pathway of the "heart" (realistically our reward pathways in the brain) otherwise known as the intrinsic/ big-picture/ why-this-matters type stuff that makes school tangible and important. In the current K-12 climate, consideration and planning to engage all of one's senses aren't even used for training students to the coveted (and ironically never used again) test scores. Over and over again I hear, "Well there has to be some standard, some way to measure what students are learning" as the reason to focus on test scores. To that I usually reply, "I agree, but sitting in a room with a pencil and filling in small bubbles about math and english I don't use anymore is a sad attempt to measure learning. Students don't use latin prefixes and gradutes use calculators. I think the test content is as sad as the methodology: humans are complex physical, mental and social animals that cannot be measured by one line of numbers. Our genetic code is long, the subjects we learn about are varied, and our influences screw us up in beautifully different ways. We've got to be able to at least get more experimental with the ways we prepare students for the test." Of course I'm oversimplifying and playing to extremes, but my point is that one test is a sad attempt at understanding a human student. Worse yet, training anyone to do anything with "high stakes" attached by sitting them down and engaging only their ears and eyes is like giving a car less than half the fuel it needs to run. I think there should be 100s of different types of tests with 100s of different practicums attached to them. Ask anyone who ever had the thought "I'm not good at math" or "i'm not athletic" if they felt the tests they took got them excited? Chances are they learned to be so anxious they convinced themselves to avoid the subject. ...And from there all my therapist friends get paid.
Rambles aside, I use the test example to highlight the difficulty of teaching and the variety of skills necessary to be a good teacher (as highlighted by the boring "teaching to the whole student" video on the Stony Brook website https://tlt.stonybrook.edu/facultyservices/IiE/Lists/Show%20List/DispForm.aspx?id=15). How fitting that this video could have been edited to 3-5mins.
It takes a special person to teach, with skills that are unmeasurable and measurable. Equally, it takes a variety of inputs to stimulate the human brain...pencils, chalk, and talking aren't enough. Come to think of it, this little body of text on a small illuminated screen isn't enough either.
Recipe for readers: spread out on a countertop near you:
The websites themselves challenged me to think about how I motivate students to learn and how I don't. After watching some exciting videos (rollercoasters) and then some painfully boring videos (see the Joan Kuchner video on the Stony Brook website) I've come to a conclusion about education (for this week): if we don't at least try to engage more than one sense then we are wasting our students' time. Eyes and ears are only two pathways to the brain...the hands, tongue, and nose are highly underutilized when it comes to all forms of education. I realize that came out a bit weird, but it's true. Perhaps missing most is the pathway of the "heart" (realistically our reward pathways in the brain) otherwise known as the intrinsic/ big-picture/ why-this-matters type stuff that makes school tangible and important. In the current K-12 climate, consideration and planning to engage all of one's senses aren't even used for training students to the coveted (and ironically never used again) test scores. Over and over again I hear, "Well there has to be some standard, some way to measure what students are learning" as the reason to focus on test scores. To that I usually reply, "I agree, but sitting in a room with a pencil and filling in small bubbles about math and english I don't use anymore is a sad attempt to measure learning. Students don't use latin prefixes and gradutes use calculators. I think the test content is as sad as the methodology: humans are complex physical, mental and social animals that cannot be measured by one line of numbers. Our genetic code is long, the subjects we learn about are varied, and our influences screw us up in beautifully different ways. We've got to be able to at least get more experimental with the ways we prepare students for the test." Of course I'm oversimplifying and playing to extremes, but my point is that one test is a sad attempt at understanding a human student. Worse yet, training anyone to do anything with "high stakes" attached by sitting them down and engaging only their ears and eyes is like giving a car less than half the fuel it needs to run. I think there should be 100s of different types of tests with 100s of different practicums attached to them. Ask anyone who ever had the thought "I'm not good at math" or "i'm not athletic" if they felt the tests they took got them excited? Chances are they learned to be so anxious they convinced themselves to avoid the subject. ...And from there all my therapist friends get paid.
Rambles aside, I use the test example to highlight the difficulty of teaching and the variety of skills necessary to be a good teacher (as highlighted by the boring "teaching to the whole student" video on the Stony Brook website https://tlt.stonybrook.edu/facultyservices/IiE/Lists/Show%20List/DispForm.aspx?id=15). How fitting that this video could have been edited to 3-5mins.
It takes a special person to teach, with skills that are unmeasurable and measurable. Equally, it takes a variety of inputs to stimulate the human brain...pencils, chalk, and talking aren't enough. Come to think of it, this little body of text on a small illuminated screen isn't enough either.
Recipe for readers: spread out on a countertop near you:
- a cut lime however you want
- 1 finger of some JW black label in a glass
- a shot glass filled with cheese-grated ginger root
- some rosemary clippings
- and some good california sage scrub from a local hillside
Sunday, October 3, 2010
10/4 Response
10//4 reading response/reflection:
I have several reactions to this weeks readings.
Constructive controversy emphasizes engaging in smaller conflicts with the goal of understanding the larger problem. While I love the intent, I thing the impact can be a slippery slope. On the one hand a teacher can provide an opportunity for students to explore the definitions and factors that make up the problem, but on the other hand they can lose the forest in the trees. While "speed dating" and other opportunities to connect can be facilitated, they can also be seen as barriers/distractions to understanding of their "tree". I think the problem is probably in the performance orientation of our society; whereby we look for what needs to be turned in (pressure to finish) rather than formative reflection of change as finished products.
I've always been interested in cognitive dissonance; both personally and as a pedagogical tool. I think the conflict holds energy that can be used for learning and memory that is very powerful. The Horizon reports have me feeling a bit of cognitive dissonance about this blog and how to best use it as a learning tool. While I get the traditional benefits of reflection, I want to ask more questions and engage more opinions from others. I'm feeling like the structure is conflicting a bit with personal goals in that this is a public space where reflective language is almost a waste. Perhaps I need to be more succinct? Which leads me to think I should be less reflective and expressive. Is this forum a place for everyone to share? A place for me to share and others respond? A place for me to respond to others? Does it lose power if it's all three? Maybe I should create several blogs, each with a more structured format that will serve a more structured purpose...and not waste the readers' time? Should I read this over, edit it, and condense so it's more entertaining? Maybe I should text all my students and see what they think? Should I make it an assignment to have them respond?
final thoughts: I met a nice stranger today at the coffee shop, sitting next to me right now. He works for a cool new technology company that creates wireless platforms for businesses, homes, etc. We laughed about old PA systems in schools for a bit and then about how our parents use the computer to waste time on useless shit like virtual crops for their virtual farms. Our parents go home and go to the computer for fun while we go home and do our best to avoid the computer/devices as much as we can. While the mobile devices and cloud computing increases access, it also increases the expectation to be "on" 24-7. In other words, accessibility is a valid intent, but expectation to answer my current 268 emails on my phone every chance I get is an exhausting impact. If I don't ignore my device I get way out of balance. I don't want to be an annoying force on my students' lives and I don't want to send them useless shit. I'd hate for them to lose the forest of knowledge in the trees of assignments with rewards/punishment.
Perhaps I'm just wondering how to make the technology fun again?
I have several reactions to this weeks readings.
Constructive controversy emphasizes engaging in smaller conflicts with the goal of understanding the larger problem. While I love the intent, I thing the impact can be a slippery slope. On the one hand a teacher can provide an opportunity for students to explore the definitions and factors that make up the problem, but on the other hand they can lose the forest in the trees. While "speed dating" and other opportunities to connect can be facilitated, they can also be seen as barriers/distractions to understanding of their "tree". I think the problem is probably in the performance orientation of our society; whereby we look for what needs to be turned in (pressure to finish) rather than formative reflection of change as finished products.
I've always been interested in cognitive dissonance; both personally and as a pedagogical tool. I think the conflict holds energy that can be used for learning and memory that is very powerful. The Horizon reports have me feeling a bit of cognitive dissonance about this blog and how to best use it as a learning tool. While I get the traditional benefits of reflection, I want to ask more questions and engage more opinions from others. I'm feeling like the structure is conflicting a bit with personal goals in that this is a public space where reflective language is almost a waste. Perhaps I need to be more succinct? Which leads me to think I should be less reflective and expressive. Is this forum a place for everyone to share? A place for me to share and others respond? A place for me to respond to others? Does it lose power if it's all three? Maybe I should create several blogs, each with a more structured format that will serve a more structured purpose...and not waste the readers' time? Should I read this over, edit it, and condense so it's more entertaining? Maybe I should text all my students and see what they think? Should I make it an assignment to have them respond?
final thoughts: I met a nice stranger today at the coffee shop, sitting next to me right now. He works for a cool new technology company that creates wireless platforms for businesses, homes, etc. We laughed about old PA systems in schools for a bit and then about how our parents use the computer to waste time on useless shit like virtual crops for their virtual farms. Our parents go home and go to the computer for fun while we go home and do our best to avoid the computer/devices as much as we can. While the mobile devices and cloud computing increases access, it also increases the expectation to be "on" 24-7. In other words, accessibility is a valid intent, but expectation to answer my current 268 emails on my phone every chance I get is an exhausting impact. If I don't ignore my device I get way out of balance. I don't want to be an annoying force on my students' lives and I don't want to send them useless shit. I'd hate for them to lose the forest of knowledge in the trees of assignments with rewards/punishment.
Perhaps I'm just wondering how to make the technology fun again?
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Let the sarcasm begin
If schools used sex appeal like pretty much every other industry in the world: our students would pay attention, content would relate to real life, and teachers would make more money. Imagine if the goal of school was to actually get students excited, moving around, and feel relieved after class. Now imagine if we actually talked about the things we're all thinking about and forced them to have fun. Maybe then our profession would be researched based.
On second thought, lets put them in a small room, tell them to sit down in rows, shut up, and only use two of their five senses. I'm sure there's plenty of science behind that.
My TA just found this great series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck-tQt0S0Os
On second thought, lets put them in a small room, tell them to sit down in rows, shut up, and only use two of their five senses. I'm sure there's plenty of science behind that.
My TA just found this great series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck-tQt0S0Os
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)