A Rant

There are times when I wonder if pursuing a doctoral degree is really for me. Reading the last few chapters of “How People Learn” once again flared up those feelings. I have mixed reactions to the tone of HPL. On one hand much of the information presented in the book is engaging and appropriate. On the other hand, I have always been bugged by the book’s seeming detachment from the practice of teaching. Much of the research seems to be about one step removed from the realities of teaching. The phrase, research for the sake of research, consistently rang in my head.

However, I mostly tamped down these impulses. After all, as stated in the book, and many other sources, the practice of teaching should become more “research based” then it is presently. I fully agree with that statement. Even if one sees teaching as an art, the teacher is an artist that should be fully versed in technique. Yet, this statement, “Research must be done on effective methods of communicating these ideas to teachers, administrators and policy makers” truly got my blood boiling.

Kids all across this country are in terrible schools, right now. I am not interested in the future directions of research; I am interested in the current state of practice. What amazes me is that we largely know how to help these kids. The reasons we don’t are largely political and cultural. The fact that we still have more to learn about how people learn, has very little to do with the quality of education that students are currently receiving. However, too many of the “experts” in education are busy researching “effective methods of communicating these ideas” in other words performing “research for the sake of research.” Believe me there are plenty of people who are quite effective communicating their ideas. Perhaps, the proceeds of the book should go toward hiring them and not on more research.

This focus on growing healthier trees while ignoring the health of the forest may be a reason changes are so slow to be enacted in schools. Reading HPL, it was difficult even in the scope of one owns mind, to draw a complete picture. Imagine trying to apply such wisdom across a school of 2,000 pupils while facing budgetary constraints. It is no wonder that these techniques tend to be tried piecemeal, since that is largely how they are presented (despite all best intentions). It is therefore, small wonder that these piecemeal implementations often fail causing teachers and administrators on the ground to be suspicious of “fads.”

This is not to say that the study of human learning is not important. It is critically important to know how humans learn when designing instructional systems, and curriculums. These are after all the building blocks of our educational system. However, effective instructional systems and curriculums cannot exist in a vacuum. We all answer to the system in which we function. Research itself is not an agent of change, only an ingredient. All students deserve a chance to learn now. We cannot hesitate.

Technology Literacy

As someone who taught technology education, I have a different perspective on the integration of technology in the classroom. To me technology is more of a process then an artifact. Technology is not only the use of tools, but also the creation of tools to solve problems. If this is the case, as I believe it is, what impact does this perspective have in how we utilize technology to support learning? I believe that there needs to be a fundamental shift in the way educators view technology. Too often technology is seen as a value added commodity in the classroom, we must instead being to look at technology as an intergraded, I would argue even interdisciplinary partner for our lessons (Grasha & Yangarber-Hicks, 2000).

When justifying to my fifth graders why we would be spending substantial time in my class away from the computer I would pose this question, “What is a more important piece of technology a hammer or a computer?” With a little coaxing I could usually spark a fairly robust conversation. In the same vane technology is supporting learning in ways we don’t ever think about. Before pencils and paper became inexpensive enough to use in the classroom, children would carry slate and chalk to complete their lessons. Take a moment to consider the “integration” of the pencil. New psycho-motor skills had to be mastered so students could grasp and manipulate the slender long pencil. Also, new classroom procedures had to be implemented to manage resources such as paper and sharpeners. However, also consider how the pencil must have changed the way learning took place. Exercises could be longer and summative assessment achieved more easily.

As the pencil became commonplace it almost certainly altered the way students and teachers thought and learned. Computers, and other forms of “high-technology” are already doing that in our society. However, these changes are reflected at a much slower pace in our classrooms. This has its advantages, for example it helps avoid fads, however educators need a way to deal with this rapid change. Google will soon be turning ten. What company is being started today that will have changed the world by the year 2018? How can educators ever keep up?

I propose that the study of technology be incorporated into every classroom. Not the rote acquisition of skills such as mastering the menus of MS Word, but exercises, which promote technology literacy. As proposed by the ITEA a technology literate person can “understand –with increasing sophistication – what technology is, how it is created, how it shapes society, and in turn is shaped by society. A technologically literate person is comfortable with and objective about the use of technology – neither scared of it nor infatuated with it. (2003) ” As technology literacy becomes more universal, in both teachers and students, the scaffolding will already exist for the judicial use of technology to promote learning. Only then will we be able to look upon technology as we do the pencil, a universally flexible tool for learning.

(Ed.). (2003). Advancing excellence in technological literacy : student assessment, professional development, and program standards. Reston, Va: International Technology Education Association.
Grasha, A. & Yangarber-Hicks, N. (2000). Intergrating Teaching Styles and Learning Styles with Instructional Technology. Colllege Teaching, 48(1), 2-10.

What is a Professional

I have a supervisor’s certificate from the state of New Jersey. To get it I needed to take my fair share of Ed Leadership classes. A surprising number of those classes focused around the question of just how do we get those darn teachers to learn. It’s a surprising question, teacher are some of the most well educated people you are likely to meet. Most hold masters degrees, and they by nature spend a whole lot of time thinking about how to make people learn. Common sense would tell you that they are probably pretty good learners themselves. Think of all the metacognative skills they must have acquired. Yet no amount of formal education can ensure that knowledge transfers to practice (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000). While formal education and training is an important piece of the puzzle, it is not an adequate replacement for a professional community of learning. Such communities encourage a culture exploration and self-reflection, and provide opportunities to share information and get support from the larger network of professionals (Darling-Hammond, 1997).
The culture of teaching has not changed much in the last one hundred or so years. Teachers still by and large work alone, and teaching is only marginally a profession (Darling-Hammond, 1997). Teachers rarely share strategies and lessons beyond their hallways. The other day I began ruminating how the field of teaching lacked leadership and community. Can you name the most influential math teacher in the country? Do you know the address of the most visited education Blog on the web? If you were a researcher in the field of Math education you may be able to name some of the big shots in your field. You probably could name a number of quality websites and publications, yet I would wager that your average math teacher could not. Think of how remarkably unique to teaching that is. If a doctor in West Virginia discovered a particularly effective dosing regimen for antidepressants, how long do you think it would be before the word spread? If an English teacher in Appalachia had a particularly effective method for teaching the cogitation of verbs, how long would it take before it was widely known? Would it even reach the other teachers in her district, her school?
This lack of community and leadership is stifling independent teacher learning. One part of this issue is cultural. As we already touched on teachers are expected to self-sufficient and already know what they need to successfully lead a classroom the moment they step to the front of one. The second is an issue of commonality. When a doctor diagnosis you with a strep throat the criteria she/he uses to make that diagnosis is standardized. A strep throat infection is the same in Mississippi as it is in California. In education third grade math is not the same in California as it is in Mississippi. There are no uniformly adopted national standards of education.
If teaching is to become a true profession, it will need the support of government and the community. However, most importantly it will need a leader to champion these changes, otherwise we will continue to get by on our islands.

Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn : brain, mind, experience, and school. (Expanded ed.). Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn : a blueprint for creating schools that work (1st ed ed. Vol. Jossey-Bass education series). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.