Great class research

It isn't exactly a research article but it was about a classroom survey about what makes a classroom great. So I thought it sort of counted. It was from Remote access and the link is http://remoteaccess.typepad.com/remote_access/2008/11/great-classroom.html

The article started out by asking the students "What things would make a classroom a great place to be and learn?" What would the teacher be like? What kinds of things would the students be doing and be involved in? How would the day be spent?

The results of the research/survey found several trends from students. They thought that a great class is fun, but their explanation shows they meant that the learning was engaging. They also wanted more time outside of the school. Not to avoid work or learning, but to see what jobs are like and to take field trips. Finally they expressed that classrooms should bring more reality in instead of just always preparing for real life.

I think kids are right. They need to be engaged. They need more exposure to the real world. But we are constantly worried about portfolios, tests, IEPs, and following laws about what good education is we miss it. We find ourselves bogged down in lesson plans, paperwork, teacher meetings, parent conferences, required content, and anything that keeps us from really teaching the kids anything.

There may be a few unstated assumptions. First, it is that kids would actually have any idea what a good classroom is. Second is that they would tell you what a good classroom is without being selfish and just thinking of what would make it better for them as opposed to what is best for them. Another major assumption would be that this is a representative sample set of students. Perhaps they represent the world or USA as a whole or perhaps they are an outlier in the land of representation and don't even adequately represent their county as a whole. It would be better if the survey was across classes and schools. Perhaps it could cover a district. The bigger the sample size the better. I realize that if you are focusing on your school you may be tempted to only go as far as your school, but is it possible that anyone outside your school would have a good idea? Maybe.

Possible research topic

In Distance Education the topic I would like to research would be 'How much a students past experience with computers limit/enhance their ability to perform in Distance Ed courses'. Several steps would be needed to study it, but it would definitely involve a survey. That would be the best way to know their exposure to computers.

Questions would include things like: is there a computer in your home? How often do you use a computer at school/work? How often do you use email? chat rooms? Instant messaging?

Beyond this the survey would have to include demographic information about socio-economic level, urban/rural lifestyle and the like. Another useful set of questions might include how much they use a cell phone, text message, play video games, are involved in sports/groups, and how well they do in classes now. Success may be linked also to the use of technology in general.

After the survey, which would be of students preparing for an online class, the students would actually go through a Distance Ed course. At the end the teacher and student would both fill out an exit survey and the grade would also be used in the study.

The question is a simple one, but there are many possible things that could drive high performance in distance ed classes. That is why the post and exit surveys are important. Also this would have to be a sample set across demographics and geographic area. In the end the correlations of different answers and performance would be calculated. Hopefully some trends would emerge.

Chatroom value

Well, since we are not having a chat this week we need to post about the value of the chat. I think chat rooms as a tool for the class can be invaluable in distance learning. Yes email and instant messaging can accomplish most of the same thing, but not all. Chat rooms give that feel that we are actually in a classroom. There are awkward pauses/silences of contemplation. There are also times when everyone is talking at once. I really enjoy those moments. Chat allows for everyone to accomplish in a few minutes what might take a day of emailing and instant messaging. It becomes so more efficient for some interactions. I personally never use chat rooms outside of my classes. But that is only because my family needs me and I don't have time. I can see great value in going to chat rooms focused on certain issues in politics, recreation, relationships, education, and so on.

Lack of Posting

I suppose the only thing causing issues for me in the class right now is the lack of posting lately. Posting is supposed to be done at noon on Sunday, but I find many haven't posted until after noon on Sunday and then I get confused between new and old postings. I find many post nothing until Saturday or Sunday. I don't have time to read and respond or comment on my own blogs about what they are saying. I think it hurts the class as a whole if people don't blog some by at least Thursday. If we don't blog then we can't respond to one another or make reply posts. Also, I hope everything is OK with the Doc, but it has been days since and email or post from him. He is probably sick, most people are having issues with that. I just hope the week finishes strong. Not just for me, but for the whole class.

Thoughts to Ponder

Does the global nature of the web have an effect on evaluation?

Obviously there has to be a language difference in evaluation. An evaluation created in Russian would do kids in eastern Tennessee no good at all and wouldn't be fair. I guess the question for me is that if the communication/language barrier can be resolved, then does the global web effect evaluation? I think it can. I don't think that is must always, but it certainly can. We have to remember that cultures are different and experiences can be different. Yes, kids in east Tennessee have many similar experiences and a similar culture. But compare that to East Kenya and suddenly kids aren't thinking the same. I think for evaluations to work globally within the web, they have to be very broad and as culturally neutral as possible. Now culturally neutral may not be totally obtainable but if done right it can almost be accomplished.

Are the goals and objectives changed when you take a course online compared to classroom based instruction?

No way. If a class if offered online and in the classroom, then the major goals and objectives should be the same. It only makes sense. What students should be learning should be the same online or in classrooms. The methods, techniques, and tools used to learn may be different, but the final goals should be the same. If they are not, then I'm not sure if it would even be the same course. This seemed like a no brainer to me, but I'm interested to see what others have to say.

Fear/Humiliation

What an interesting article about World of Warcraft and how someone can actually learn something from playing the game. I found myself agreeing with the writer because I too can understand that there is a time for orders and to follow them completely. There is a time when there will be no one there to catch you and you must do what needs to be done. I found a few phrases in the article interesting.

"A 25-person raid is the same size as a class, and like a class its leader can only take it to places places that it is willing to go." Well, I think that sums up real world leadership and management. You can't take people places they aren't willing to go. When I first read this I thought about motivation. I thought maybe this means we can't really motivate anyone. Then I realized that is not what it means to me. It means fear can stop you. Motivation can be given to you by others, but fear is a "mind killer" so to speak. If someone is afraid to go through a door, then just going through in front of them may not be enough. At some level they have to want it.

Also, "Teaching is about empowering students, and Warcraft has taught me that there is a difference between being powerful and feeling powerful." Students want to feel powerful and educated and important. Many times they don't care if they really are powerful, educated or important. How do I know this? Cheating. Not just classroom cheating, but at anything including video games. Many people want to "feel" successful and powerful. They don't care if they actually are. The illusion is good enough for most people. My students would rather be dumb with straight A's then smart with all D's.

iBrain research

Paper thin. That is how I would describe this article and it's reasoning. As I read it I was offended by the logic and suggestions made.

"We're seeing an evolutionary change. The people in the next generation who are really going to have the edge are the ones who master the technological skills and also face-to-face skills," Small told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Well, so he is saying that those who master both technology and social skills will do well. That seems to be a obvious statement. I don't need any research to make me agree with that. It is like saying bigger, faster, smarter guys will do better at football. That is just obvious.

He said a study of 24 adults as they used the Web found that experienced Internet users showed double the activity in areas of the brain that control decision-making and complex reasoning as Internet beginners.

OK, so 24 people. Not really a legitimate sample size but we will go with it. He says experienced Internet users have more activity when browsing then beginners. OK, again that just seems obvious. The more I use the Internet, then the more my brain will adapt to better use the Internet. Just like in multiplication tables. The more I use them, then the faster I get at using them. Duh.

"We are changing the environment. The average young person now spends nine hours a day exposing their brain to technology. Evolution is an advancement from moment to moment and what we are seeing is technology affecting our evolution."

I have issues with the word evolution being used. Not for religious reasons, but evolution is "gradual development". He seems to use it as though evolution is constantly happening, but I'm not sure that it is. I don't think we are constantly evolving, unless you simply want to use the word a little loosely. You could just as easily used the word learning in it's place for this article.

Overall I thought the article was a plug for the book. I don't think technology will have brains evolved in one generation. At least not in the biological sense of evolution.

Clarence Fisher

Well, I actually found a Cool Cat Teacher blog that referenced and quoted Fisher. The link is http://coolcatteacher.blogspot.com/2006/05/excellent-classroom-practices-from-mr.html

The quote from Mr. Fisher was about blogging and in particular how he advocates for his students to blog. He wants them to both blog and reply to blogs of people all around the world. Mr. Fisher appears to think that it is a good thing to communicate with different people. Different meaning different country, socio-economical background, and just about anything. He thinks it is a good educational experience to communicate with others and learn about them and let them learn about you.

I would have to agree with what he wants done. I would say that knowing and understanding others that are different creates a compassion and respect for others. I can look back at my own life and see that the more I learned about those different then me, then the more I could understand them and feel connected to them. It is a good thing. Is blogging the answer? Maybe not, but it isn't a bad place to start. Chat rooms and social networking sites can also easily accomplish the goal, but are in a sense more dangerous for children.

The neat thing about this is that you can learn about others. Build a feeling of understanding for them. Then still be able to disagree. At least I hope. That is the problem I see in today's society (at least in America). We tend to hate those we disagree with. We should be able to disagree and still be civil with one another and maybe even friends.

Cheating???

Cheating is all about the assignment and the expectations of the assignment. For instance. The ACT and SAT are about what a person can do without the assistance of others or tools such as the Internet. So cheating is well defined.

Now what about writing a paper on Microsoft office. Would it be cheating if Bill Gates was your cousin and you talked to him about the paper and had him proofread it? I don't think letting someone proof read your paper is cheating. You would want someone with knowledge of the topic to proofread your paper. Should we be punished or called a cheater because we know people or are good at finding information on the Internet? Of course not. But again the idea of cheating is based on the assignment expectations. If a teacher says "write a paper about gravity on mars, but don't interview anyone, just use scientific research", then you have an idea about what cheating is.

On to the point of the blog which is the topic of online cheating. I suppose as an online instructor you should assume students will have access to other people, the Internet, books, interviews, videos, and chats. Those could all be ways to cheat obviously. But wait. Those things all exist for people in a regular classroom based class also. So any assignment that is to be completed outside of a regular classroom setting would be subject to the same possibility of cheating as online courses. So papers and projects that require work to be done outside of the direct supervision of the teacher are no different with traditional classrooms or online delivery courses. But what about exams or performance in class.

This I think is where the cheating online can occur. A traditional classroom may have a quiz, test, or quick write that students have no time to consult other people or sources. I think most online courses lack this. For instance, every time I log on to blog, chat, or do any assignments I could have my brother sit next to me. Or my wife. Or my son. Whatever. There is no way for a teacher to know that what I am doing is just me. Technically with great effort someone could replicate the same sort of cheating. An earpiece, tiny camera, and microphone could possibly allow you to "bring someone" with you to class. Online delivery courses just seem to make it much easier and almost impossible to stop. Perhaps with microphones and web cams it could be limited somewhat.

In the end, if a teacher understands what they want and gives assignments with clear goals in mind then cheating isn't a problem. But I also admit that my cousin Ted could have taken all of my online classes for me without me every doing anything and no one would know. I would get the degree I want without doing anything.

Portfolio? What?

I suppose here in Kentucky when we hear portfolio most of us cringe. Either we have done one in school(me) or at least taught where the students had to do one(also me). I remember it starting when I was in middle school I think. Suddenly we were to keep track of writings and write more often. At the time it seemed simple enough for me. But looking back, I wonder about the benefits of the portfolio. I mean is turning in a portfolio of writings really a good measure of performance. Some of my final writings were 4 years old, revised a dozen times by multiple students and teachers, and had very little of me in them. It was like a 60 year old lady that had plastic surgery monthly since she was 25. She is still her technically, but really she is nothing like what she should have been. I think if they want a portfolio, then they first need to decide why. Why are we making them do this and what do we hope to get from it. Then we need to look at the entire process and have cut off points. Maybe portfolios start over every 2 years or something. It just always bugged me that someone would use a 9th grade writing for a 12th grade portfolio.

Biggest drawback of the portfolio: Time. We spend weeks on this thing. Not just in English class, but in most classes. All classes were required to submit 2 portfolio pieces each. This was ridiculous and terribly time consuming. But what about the benefits of the portfolio? Well, until someone gives me a good reason to have them at all, then I cant think of a benefit. Students don't take them with them to use after high school(not that I know of). So they just go away like any number of things we do in school. If the idea is for the students to learn, then all they learn is that you have to revise papers 20 times to get them to be good.

Honestly I can't say how much doing portfolios helped me. I was just an average writer(still am) and never enjoyed the process that much. Perhaps in all that editing and revising I did learn how to write better. On a side note, I don't remember every writing anything longer than 3 pages in high school. But once in college 3 pages seemed like addressing an envelope it was so short. High school certainly never prepared me for 15-20 page writing assignments.

How do you know if a student is learning?

I suppose this question seemed simple to me at first. I know if a student is learning if they can apply the knowledge to solve a problem. For instance they have learned how to add if they can tell me what 4+6 equals. Or they can do 8 digit addition after only being shown how to do addition up to 4 digits. It is about applying the knowledge that lets you know if you have truly learned something.

But then I started thinking about on the fly. How do you know if the student is learning right now? How do you know if they are learning this class period? Or this day? That can be more difficult because our means of instant assessment can only determine if they have in the short term held onto the information. It doesn't let you know if they have truly learned and stored the knowledge. I suppose there is no way to truly assess if a student has learned something right then and there. The true test of if something is learned has to come after the short term to see what is now a part of the student.

8th grade testing.

Sometimes I wonder if we give too many tests. Sometimes maybe we don't give enough. Is it the calling it a test or is it the consequences of the test that make them seem like a bad thing. For instance I could take a test tomorrow on world history and think nothing of it. I might think it is fun to see how well I could do. But if that test would decide my salary for the next 10 years I would be too nervous to breathe.

I don't think a test for 8th graders would be a bad thing as long as there is no unnecessary pressure put on them to do well. If it were say a test to find what they might like to do when they get out of high school, then that is fine. Also a test to see where their strengths are in certain areas would be good. But it has to be explained to them so they know it is all about helping them and can't hurt them in any way. Will some blow it off? Yes. But that is why you have to sell it to the students. Get them to realize it is all about helping them.

I am not against testing students. I am not overly for it either. I think we should reexamine the tests we give and make sure we are accomplishing what we want with these tests with minimal negative effects.

Toaster

The toaster post got me thinking about individualized education and differentiation in education. a quote from the post was:

"All the noise about individualized education is just adding some kind of sensors to the toaster to tell what kind of bread we’re dealing with and how the heat transfer works in the structure of the bread. It’s all a way of taking variable inputs and yielding uniform outputs."

Where I work we talk about differentiating education. We talk about meeting the individual needs of students. We talk about teaching to their level and bringing them to where they need to be. Ah ha. That is the point. We always have a place we want them to be. We always have what outcome we want in education. Funny thing is it is always the same. We want everyone to know 2+2=4 and the 9-11 attack was in 2001 not 2000. We expect everyone to learn the same thing so that their "outputs" are the same. We talk about them as individuals and how they are different, but we don't want different. We want them to conform to our view of what they should know. We rarely give students the chance to excel in an area. Sure some kids take Art 2 or Physics in high school, but that isn't what I mean. Kids are different and it should be okay for them to learn different things, in different ways, at different speeds, in different settings. Math class should be outside sometimes.

I challenge any teacher that has never taken their class outside to do it this year. I've done it (in public school not the prison). It works. I challenge art teachers to talk about ascetics and how some the same picture may look better to a person depending on the degrees used in the angles and how that relates to math. I challenge all teachers to collaborate together and stop working against one another. Math teachers use data analysis to let students analyze their own ratio of letter usage in their writing. It is interesting for students to see that they never hardly use the letters X, Q, and Z. Do students that use them more tend to do better in English class? Maybe it could be a collaborative project.

I'm sorry for ranting, but education is such a rigid process in America and teachers need to teach. We need to be outside the box sometimes and not just think out side of it.

Education as Science

Well, I agree with most of what the Doc says about education as science and the pitfalls it has. But if it can't always be a science, then is it an art. I don't think so and I don't think the Doc would either. It made me think of my college degree and degrees in general. Typically we get BA's or BS's. Education degrees are typically BA's, but mine is a BS. Why? Because I took so many math classes that I also qualified for a mathematics degree. Therefore my degree is in secondary math education, but is a Science degree and not an Art degree. What does all this mean. I think it means that education is both a science and an art. Obviously poetry in education is an art and gravity is a science. Perhaps it is all about the content. Maybe education of certain topics make education a science and other topics make it an art. If so, then teachers (at least effective ones) are part scientist and part artist. Regardless of subject, I think it involves some amount of art and science in education. Even in Math, some topics tend to be leaning toward education as an art instead of as a science. These are very abstract ideas but they still exist. I only say this so that I can say that I think education is both an art and a science for all teachers. We shouldn't fall into the trap of thinking the square peg of education fits into the triangular holes of art or science. Only when the triangular holes are lined up to form a square can it truly fit in.

What do we Know?

What do we KNOW about teaching and learning theories? How do we know?

Well, similar to another post in the class on this issue I feel we don't Know very much at all about anything. We knew the earth was flat once. We knew earth was the center of the universe once. So to talk about what we know is difficult. Perhaps we can discuss was appears to be consistently true right now for us. Even if we loosen up the definition of "know" we don't get anywhere. There are so many theories about learning and teaching we cant really discuss what we know. Heck, we have a hard enough time just defining what teaching and learning are. And what we would know about them would alter depending upon just how we define them.

But enough of that. That is my real response, but here it is for the average Joe. We know we can teach. We know we can learn. We know these things involve tools and communication. We know Learning always involves a teacher, even if the teacher is a book, computer, or the learner themselves. That is about it. Everything else seems up in the air for me.

Connectivism

Well, I added the Connectivism blog a few days ago and have finally had a chance to read up on some of the posts and ideas behind the concept. I admit I don't think I have a full grasp of the concept except to say it uses the idea of networks to describe knowledge. It seemed to basically suggest that learning isn't always individual centered. Learning doesn't always occur inside a person, but can happen outside of a person such as in an organization or in technology such as a database.

I don't buy it. I am not convinced that learning occurs outside of people. If a computer assimilates some "knowledge" and now can use the information then I think it A) didn't learn anything it was just programmed OR B) it as an individual learned the information and then is still individual centered. Second, I'm not sure that organizations can "learn" anything. I suppose the people within can learn, but if none of them know something then how can the organization know it. I would enjoy some comments or responses. I am open to hear more about the idea, but so far none of what I've read makes any sense to me. And to suggest a new learning theory simply because technology has advanced seems ridiculous. Should learning theories go beyond the level of technology we have?

Learning Styles

When people would ask me questions about my learning style I would give many vague answers.

"I like to take notes, but I don't study them."
"I pay attention in class to what the teacher says, but more so to what they do and write."
"I don't like to just listen without seeing something."
"I enjoy hands-on practice because it sharpens my understanding and skills."

So I guess I am a visual learner. But does that really sum up all that I can learn? No. The audio helps me learn also. So do hands on activities. I learn well reading, but also watching. I need the audio to explain the details of demonstrations and the reading supplements that with even more detail. I don't buy into the fact that people have only one learning style and can't learn with other styles. Sure, people can learn "better" with some delivery methods then others, but I can't believe it is all or nothing. I think I could learn from an audio tape, but I would learn even more if I had a book to accompany it and a class or group to discuss it with.

It isn't about what learning style a student has. It should be about using multiple delivery styles and techniques to enhance and support the different ways in which we can learn. It is like driving a car. I can read about it. I can hear about it. I can watch it. I can get in and try. But to be the best driver I can be I need to do all of those things.

Constructivism.

Is constructivism a theory or a religion? Why?

Well, I looked at several definitions of religion from multiple online and paperback sources and none seemed to allow constructivism to be labeled as a religion. All definitions of religion referred to some "god" or to spirituality. So that doesn't seem right. Constructivism could easily be considered a theory. It is a theory about learning and has been studied and written about for years. Piaget is attributed much of the credit of this theory. Since a theory is something we can study and then use to predict outcomes, then constructivism is definitely a theory. It says that we learn from our experiences and that learning is a social activity. Whether or not I totally agree that all learning is social, it is easily seen that some learning appears to be social.

THeory? Yes, No.

An article from OLDaily about Sims and letting people limp along really caught my eye tonight. The link to the article is http://clarkaldrich.blogspot.com/2008/10/in-sim-do-you-let-players-limp-along.html. I had been looking for 3 days now to find an article on theory on OLDaily. When I found this article it really got me thinking about our approach to education. The article may not be directly related to educational theory, but it was provocative to my idea of education.

It mentioned how in sims, that early choices can greatly affect the entire game and how well you will do. Now this is realistic, but the point in education is for learning to occur, not just let them know what is realistic. The proposed alternative was to have "gates" that needed to be reached and then players got a sort of start over where the past didn't have that great of an affect on them. This idea is similar to the idea of playing games with levels. You can start over each level and the only effects from the last level is that you get to go to the next level.

What does all of this have to do with learning theories and educational theories? Well, I'm not sure exactly but it had me thinking about how much we will let students "limp through" sections of a class or entire classes. Sometimes we feel that it is necessary to let them struggle for a while in order to strengthen them. In contrast, some teachers feel that supports should be in place to assist students not long after problems begin to arise. Ideally teachers should find some balance between helping students too fast and letting them just suffer through the work. I find myself sometimes wanting to help as soon as I see a problem, but I am doing much better at just letting the students try and work things out themselves. If we don't let them try and work through their issues then they will become dependent, but if we wait too long they may become discouraged and quit. Again, this isn't a theory, but what popped into my mind.

Know it all and the Teacher's Pet

What's the function of a "know-it-all" in the class? Does that person have a purpose in the over all scheme of things?

What I found odd when reading a few other posts about the "know-it-all" is that it wasn't necessarily a bad thing. Yes in general the label is negative, but there were good things that can come from it. They tend to answer questions and try to trump the teachers knowledge. These are great chances for the teacher to explain things to the class. Even just the discussion between the KIA and the teacher can be very informative. I think the teachers needs to be careful about proving the KIA wrong. This could discourage the other students from trying at all. But you can't let them dominate the entire discussion. It is possible to make them a peer tutor or give them some other duties that keep them from annoying everyone. But even though the KIA may answer all the questions, at least the questions are being answered. This gives the teacher an opportunity to draw other students in on the discussion.

Where does the "teacher's pet" come into play?

Again, this term more then the first had both negative and positive connotations. Yes, they are helpful, endearing, interested, and everything we want in our students. BUT they are also annoying sometimes, needy, and gain a sense of being owed something. So I think pets can be good as long as there remains defined boundaries and they aren't given too much power. Also it is necessary to always be fair. If the pet breaks a rule you have to treat them like any other student. I think this is where teachers have issues. First, they don't create boundaries which creates ownership by the student. Then teachers react differently to issues with the student. So pets end up being useful in the classroom as long as a teacher keeps in mind what they must do to maintain fairness.

Multiple student roles in the classroom dynamic.

Of course students have multiple roles in the classroom. Obviously they are learners, but that is a generalization. They explore and apply knowledge. But they also have other roles like motivator and tutor. Peer tutoring is very important where I work. Students can also be cleaners, secretaries, teachers, and many other things. We rarely find ourselves in any situation where we are only functioning in one role. So it doesn't make sense to try and fit students into just one role. These multiple roles allow for students to feel successful everyday even if the topic of the lesson is something they don't do well with.

Front Row/ Back Row

Interesting Topic and after reading several other blogs on the topic I chose to mostly just respond to Davids comments.

I agree that typically in the regular class back row students want to be less involved and unnoticed, while front row students want involvement and interactive learning. I am not sure that this has anything to do with motivation or success, but perhaps more about how they like to learn and how shy they are. For instance a very intelligent person may sit in the back because the subject is easy for him and he just wants to skate on by. While a lower functioning student may sit in the front just to talk with the teacher in hopes they will give them a better grade. I know it happens like that sometimes it is just hard to know how often.

Are all online seats front row? Good question. I suppose in the since that you have and open view and communication pathway to the teacher, then yes. But in the since of being unnoticed if you want to be then you are also a back row student.

I think students get the advantages of both a front and back row student if they want them. The problem is that some people view front row/ back row as simply how much a student wants to interact. If so, then online education has this dynamic. Because online you can be as interactive as you want to be with the teacher and class, only you don't have to pick a seat.

All seats online are equal so there are not "better seats" as David said. Do teachers teach to the front row? Of course. If some students are engaged and interacting with you then you will tend to run with it. Although David said online courses can overcome this with tools, it is still about student motivation and even those tools can't overcome that. Teachers online don't necessarily speak to only the first row, but in blogging, chatting, IMing only some students may interact which gives the same effect as Front row/back row.

I think David had and excellent point about getting students involved. Asking them questions can just be setting them up for failure. But "asking open-ended questions that have many possible answers" can be very effective to get the confidence of the student up and get them interacting more.

Overall I think front row/back row doesn't exist online, but the things you can from them can still be gained by how you interact with online courses.

Student Role in the Classroom

I found this article about student roles in the classroom. http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/engaged.htm

The direct quote about the student role from the article was: "One important student role is that of explorer. Interaction with the physical world and with other people allows students to discover concepts and apply skills. Students are then encouraged to reflect upon their discoveries, which is essential for the student as a cognitive apprentice. Apprenticeship takes place when students observe and apply the thinking processes used by practitioners. Students also become teachers themselves by integrating what they've learned. Hence, they become producers of knowledge, capable of making significant contributions to the world's knowledge."

Some words that really jumped out at me while reading about student roles were "explorer, reflect, observe, apply, and integrating." This was a very short section from the article, but a very important one.

I think we as teachers overlook exploration/discovery. We think that it is done more at only certain grade levels, but that isn't true. I learned how to swim by getting in some water and going at a young age. Then while a teenager I learned how to both build and disassemble computers. Exploration is a great educational tool. Just try it. Set a bunch of books or magazines down on a table and let some students come in and sit down by them to wait for something. If they are even close to age appropriate they will most likely begin looking through them. They may see a picture that catches their eye and begin reading. The funny thing is that this doesn't just happen at age 9, but at 17, or 70. We want to learn and explore.

Reflection is something my students struggle with in my classroom. Most of my students are between 3-9 grade levels behind in reading/writing. This really hinders their ability to communicate what they have done or why they have done it. They can do some math problems, but can't explain why in writing or sometimes even orally. I push this all the time. I don't care about the answer, I just want to know how you get there. If I know how you got there, I can adjust the thought process to get the right answers. I have to do mostly oral reflections because many of my students can't spell or punctuate at the 4th grade level even though they are 17 or 18.

Back to the general role of the student. I think the article assumes a certain level of responsibility and motivation on the part of the student. Many of the things it mentions as being a part of the role of the student includes things we as teachers can't control, but rather they themselves bring. We can only assist them in developing those skills.

Disappointing

Well, I was reading OLDaily the other day and came across and article that disappointed me. It has disappointed me so much that now a few days later I am blogging about it. The blog was "Diagramming Sarah" and was referenced from an article from Slate.com. What bothers me is that it is political. Sure, you might say that they are just reporting on the general topic of how we view politicians, but I bet that could be done using dems, republicans, and any other party. I just felt after reading it that this blog was slanted. Slate.com is definitely a liberal political site. This blog referenced this site, so now I have to assume they are liberal or perhaps just anti-Conservative. What bothers me is that every article I read from that blog now I will have to look at through a political eye. I have to wonder if their political views are driving the thoughts and outcomes of the discussion. I just hate for something like education to be political. I don't look at it that way. I think both parties have failed American children time and time again. I don't think making fun of a VP candidate helps anyone or opens our eyes to where politics are. The point should have been made using references from both political parties. Instead it was just a liberal talking point mixed in with valuable educational information.

Yes, in case you are wondering I am socially/morally Conservative and economically indifferent.

Teachers and Students meet in the Middle

The article "teachers and students meet in the middle" left me with two very different thoughts. One about roles in education and the other about technology in education.

At first I thought the article was about simply how teachers and students and swap roles temporarily. I think this is true and effective in the classroom. I think when students see teachers engaged in learning it validates that learning and being a learner is not just what you do as a student K-12. Students should know that teachers read for fun, take classes, and learn skills. Students should know I can lay carpet, read sci-fi and religious texts, and have taken adoption classes. It lets them know that we don't stop being learners at graduation or even at college graduation. In general students will be more open to discuss things with the teacher if the teacher is open to learning and listening to them. Some teachers (and other professionals) tend to take the stance that they are the expert. And in some circles they may be the expert, but the feeling of being an expert in psychology trickles down to all aspects of their social life such as politics or cooking. They come off as obnoxious and annoying. This doesn't work well for student learning. I was the kind of student that could overcome those teachers and still succeed but I always felt bad for the other students that were crushed by those teachers.

On to point number two about technology. The article sneaks in the idea of laptop schools. Schools where every student has a laptop. I think it will be a long time,very long, before all schools are like this. But the truth is that slowly schools will shift toward this. Those that can afford it and think it will work. As always it isn't about if the technology will work, but if it is used in the right way.

changes

I am not a perfect teacher. Most of the time I feel I am a very poor teacher. I try. I'll try new things. I'll tweak old things. I'll watch others. I've tried to soak up all the teaching knowledge I can get my hands on. Well, I've had a 3 week break recently. We do schooling all year with 4 breaks each 3 weeks long. It is nice but this time I think I've failed. I planned to do some things differently, but after just a few days I see myself already slipping back into a few old habits I didn't want to continue. I'm taking the easy path but I know it will only make things worse. The problem is how hard it can be to change things after you've begun. Teachers should be consistent. Especially in a setting where kids don't have consistency in their personal home lives. I'm afraid to try and implement the changes now because I know some will backlash against me and their behavior/motivation will go down the drain. But I think it is one of those things that has to be done. If I don't do it then everyone will suffer. If I do it, then the suffering will be bad for a while.

That is the thing about teaching in prison. I've known teachers to give out candy as a reward. Not necessarily a bad idea, but here is the problem. In prison they don't think like we do. They don't think like even the normal bad kids in school think. Once you give someone a candy bar, they all want it. They don't want to earn it, they just want it. Then you have problems. So teachers stop giving out candy and things only worsen. We struggle constantly with wanting to reward kids but trying not to make it a problem while doing it.

I love my job and feel I can make a great impact on those kids, but nothing in my life has every assured me more of one basic fact: You can't save them all. You can not. If you think you can, then you haven't seen them all because some are destined to fail. I'm amazed at how much support someone can get only to throw it back in your faces. I know some of you will have stories about reaching those hard to read kids. I know. It happens. Just not always. It is sad. No, it is sad to see an 18 year old that can't read at all. But to see that 18 year old not care and not take help is........I don't think I have the words. Goodnight. It is too much to talk about and I'm tired.

Facilitator?

I have found it really interesting to read other responses to what the role of a teacher is. Many of us are teachers and yet we view what we do in some really different was. I commented on a couple of posts, but decided to make this one little post before I go work around the house.

The word I found as kind of a hot button word was "facilitator". It seems to either be a word we want to label ourselves as a teacher or that we feel is far to inadequate to sum up all we do as teachers. This was really interesting to me. I thought facilitator was a good label to try and say what officially do as a teacher. It seems to me to include motivator, encourager, helper, guide, mentor, and many other words I could have used to label myself as a teacher. I think in the end it isn't that some people think the word is great or poor as a label for teachers. It seems to be that peoples idea of what all the work means to them is very different. For instance I think facilitator includes the idea of encouraging and motivating, but others may not. This is more of a semantic difference perhaps then actually a philosophical difference. I just thought it was interesting and wanted to see if anyone else got that or not while reading.

Online teacher vs classroom teacher reply

This is my reply to anther student in the class that posted their thoughts on the online vs classroom teacher. Here is what they said:

"My answer is YES! The role of a teacher differs from being in a classroom to being online. I think that online learners are self motivated and realize that the requirements are more demanding. The classroom allows a teacher more of a sense of connection with the students. In an online classroom there is not connecting but there is a lot of communicating. Teachers in a regular classroom can interact with students while providing immediate attention to the their needs. There will be no waiting for a response to a discussion question or email."

I posted a response to the blog but felt I needed to go ahead and repost it here with minor changes.

I suppose as a very broad generalization I could agree with the response, but I can’t totally agree with a few statements.

“I think that online learners are self motivated and realize that the requirements are more demanding”
No, I don’t think this is true. I don’t think online learners are necessarily more self motivated or expect it to be more demanding. I might go so far as to say the exact opposite. A highly motivated person would find time to take a classroom course or an online course. A truly highly motivated person might be taking online and classroom courses to optimize their time. From my personal experience I just can't say that online students are more motivated then classroom students. Also, I think people in general think of online courses as easier than a classroom course. Again, from my experience and talking with others in my classes, most online courses are really easy compared to classroom courses. Of course this really has nothing to do with online or classroom as it is dictated by the teachers style and delivery along with how they grade. I suppose either of us could be wrong since we are just speculating on what other people think about online and classroom courses.

“The classroom allows a teacher more of a sense of connection with the students. ”
Again, I think is is mostly true, but I have communicated back and forth much more with my online teachers then I ever did with my classroom teachers. In the classroom setting more often then not I would simply listen to what they said and soak it up. There has been much more interaction with the teacher as a online student for me. I agree that the ability to connect with students is much greater in the classroom setting, I just don't think that it actually happens any more then it does with online classes.

I don’t want you to think I am criticizing you, I mostly agree with what you are saying, but it might be too broad a generalization.

Community and Miracles?

So I read the blog "On Community" and it got me thinking. First as a math teacher I was glad to see so many Venn diagrams and them being explained correctly. But mostly I was really thinking about community and what it means. I used to think that community in courses would really have to have some face to face time. But I realize that isn't what community is about at all. So I looked up the definition of community and found some interesting things.

Community has many definitions. Typically the first definition defines it as people in the same locality. But as I read the different definitions i found community to be just a group of people. Maybe sharing beliefs or working together. So I suppose community can truly be created even if the people never see one another. One example given was the "gay community". I could easily classify them as a community with similar beliefs or agenda, but they definitely haven't all met. Teachers likewise could be a community. I had to give up the notion that online courses isolate people and keep community from forming.

On to miracles. Yes, miracles. Well, I was trying to compare online communities to something and ended up thinking about God. I thought about miracles. Yes, I believe in miracles including several in my own life. But anyway, I thought about miracles and communities. You can hear about a miracle, read about a miracle, see it's evidence, watch a TV report on it, and even talk to those that experienced them. BUT, that is very different then experiencing a miracle personally. I think the online educational community is like that. You can learn and absorb just as much as a community that is classroom based. Still, something is different for those that get to be in the class. There IS a difference in how you can relate to the teacher and students. I still don't think I will ever be convinced that an online relationship is the same as a relationship that is face to face.

Role of teachers

Well, I've not had a chance to post much this week but I was looking for articles about teacher roles and found this one on the OLDAILY blog. http://drapestakes.blogspot.com/2008/10/hacking-curriculum.html

It seems to reference much of the same ideas as the Hacking Diploma blog posted by the Doc. I know the blog link is about how curriculum might change due to online delivery. Yes, there is a good possibility that a standardized curriculum for courses could be created to use for states, countries, or even the world. What is interesting is how Steven on the OLDaily blog comments about this link. He says about teachers that no longer create the class curriculum :"So what would they do? Coach students. Conduct assessments. Create community." Imagine what would teachers do. No more lesson plans or thinking what will work best now. It is all done for you. You just follow the plan and make it happen. I thought it sounded terrifying at first. Why even have teachers? Just create an online delivery system that has a FAQ and maybe an online Q&A session once a week. No need to do much teaching!

Then I backed off and thought about it. Well, what does a teacher that has taught algebra for 8 years do? They do what they did the year before. Same worksheets, same lessons, same tests, same projects. This doesn't seem that different. It is just about do you make your own lesson and reuse it, or does someone else make one that you reuse? I realize not all teacher just keep rehashing their old lessons, but most teachers only change small pieces of the lessons. perhaps they add a new tool or adjust some minor part of the lesson. This began to worry me. I hope others can give me some hope on the topic.

BREATHE

I'm really worn down right now. Things have just been real busy in my life and I feel like I am neglecting my classwork. I do still post and read but not as much as I think I can. I'm going to try and do a few posts and catch up on all my reading tonight. I hate feeling like I am getting behind so I'm going to make a real effort. I guess I'm not hyperventilating over the work so much as just can't find the time to do it. I have to get more disciplined about it. I'm not the kind of person who checks their email 6 times a day. I check it like every other day. I have too much of a one on one personal life with my family and friends that email and computers can hardly fit in. I use my computer for information, communication, and business, but only about an hour a day total. Beyond that I am out there with people. I just feel like I need to be more "connected" sometimes.

Week 7 Questions

What do you think the role of teacher is? Does it differ if you're in a classroom or online?
One basic idea of a teacher is to facilitate the learning process for the student. Basically the teacher is there to help the student. The teacher can be a master at the subject that is being learnt or can simply have enough knowledge to guide the student in the right direction. Does this change whether it is done in a classroom or online? No. It simply changes how the teacher does some of his/her communication with the student. They still function in the same way, only adjust the tools they use.

What is the relationship between teacher and learner?
First, they both assume some responsibility in the process. It isn't just the teacher or learners responsibility. Now the responsibility may shift over time as students get older, but there is always some responsibility on the student. Teachers are there to assist and guide the learner. They have specialized knowledge, but also a willingness to guide and direct the learner into helping themselves. Learners need to just be open to direction and motivated. Sometimes a teacher can motivate or even help the student self motivate.

Is the role of the teacher imposed upon you? Or does it arise from within?
Both. What I mean is occasionally we are simply put in the situation to be teachers. We may not exactly choose it or at least we don't know we are choosing it. We simply find ourselves in a teachable situation with someone and do it. But "teachers" in general should be people that have the desire to teach within. It should be as though you are born to do it. Not everyone has the temperament, knowledge, or passion to teach. Good luck to all of those who choose to teach!

STOP INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGY?

I must say that by the title of this I was somewhat worried and confused. I actually thought someone wanted us to stop using technology in the classroom. Then I realized I was playing into the hand of the author. He wasn't talking about a physical change but rather a mindset change. We don't need to stop using technology, but stop thinking we have to integrate and understand it. This happens all the time. We don't need to know how things work to start using them. When I got my first computer no one taught me anything. I knew where the power button was and off I went. Of course this was before the time of the Mouse and fancy interactive help menus. Still, I made it. I could use software and play games. People find ways to use things. Just like the blog earlier in the semester with the video about putting a computer where kids had never had one. They just jumped in and learned how to use web surf and everything, even when it wasn't in their language.

This reminds me of something that aggravates me. I will go to the message board of a new video game to see if people like it or it has major flaws. But inevitably people are always asking for help with some part of the game. "How to I get past......." or " Where can I find....." I think it is crazy when it is day one or two of having a video game and you are already searching the web for help. Sometimes the questions could be answered by simply skimming through the manual. My point is that we can learn how to play the game without much help. And if we need help, then we know where to go to get it. The same works with technology. Students will get by using whatever you throw at them.

Bridging the Gap

Lesson Plans and Standards have a gap between them. Sometimes the gap is much larger then we would like. I have been to schools where the idea was simply to take the standards and create the lesson plans around them. All you needed to do was select the standard, then make the lesson build up around it. But I think we could do better. I teach in a setting that is not traditional. The time frame we teach in is different. We teach in Quarters and students can enter and exit the class at basically any time. So I can experiment and test different approaches. What I usually do is create lesson plans that I feel will help the students be successful. Then I go back and see how many standards I cover. I then try to see if any other standards would fit into those lesson plans. I don't force a standard in, but sometimes another standard will just naturally fit into what lessons I am teaching. This may sound odd and maybe I am not communicating it well, but it is working for me. I used to do the exact opposite. I listed all my standards, then started filling them into possible lessons. This did accomplish the basic goal of covering standards, but never felt right. It seemed to constraining and I needed a little more freedom in my teaching.

Importance of Course Objectives

How important are course objectives? Are they a necessary fact of life in education or just something we hopefully wish for? We all need a plan. When I go out to build something I have a plan. When I want to teach my son something I have an idea of how I am going to do it. This is good for intentional learning and may not apply to possible incidental learning. Objectives are good because they keep teachers focused and give students some idea of what they are doing and why. I write daily objectives on the board. It keeps me on track and lets them know that I cared enough to plan what we are going to do. Does this mean they are unalterable? No, they should be fluid.

For instance I might be going over a lesson and we are constructing circle and arcs. Suddenly the conversation turns to a pie chart a student saw on television. They ask questions about what the chart was representing. We could get into a discussion about politics or food distribution or whatever the chart was dealing with. There is nothing wrong with that and I feel at least where I work it is good to relate with children and converse about topics beyond the classroom. I often find myself adding, removing, or modifying one or multiple objectives in my lesson. That is a good thing. To set back and say “I've got it all planned to perfection” would just be arrogant and stupid. We have to meet the students where they are and sometimes that means going off the beaten path. I know some teachers hate it, but I enjoy the moments of just talking to the students about football, cars, politics, and other topics. Sometimes I relate them to math and sometimes that is just where we end up. Some educators might say this is wasted time and just the students getting a teacher off topic. I suppose that may be true sometimes. I want them to see me as a caring person that has their best interest in mind, not just an authority figure. But I work with trouble adolescent boys. They need role models as much as they need Linear Equations. So I walk down a slightly different path then many teachers because of my setting(prison). Although, even in public schools many students need role models and caring adults to help them as much as they need some book knowledge. Some of us teachers that don’t come from the underprivileged side of life can easily forget that we have a greater value then just as a teacher to many children.

Number of tools in design.

How many tools should we use when designing a course? Well, one answer would be that the more tools the better. It keeps things feeling fresh and new while offering different was to learn. It gives more flexibility to the teacher in how things can be presented. But, just a few tools can be better. It creates a feeling of consistency and allows for the mastery of the tool to really shine. Instead of showing the flexibility of using multiple tools, the teacher can show the flexibility of the tool itself. It keeps students from constantly seeing new things that can be unstable to their learning experience.

So, which is better? It isn’t about how many tools you should use; it is about using them effectively and to accomplish the learning goals. If you want the students to learn about ABC, then you need to use tools to do that. How many tools? One. Twenty. It is all about personal teaching style. Some teachers will become good at using some tools. Those tools would be more effective for them. Can you learn new tools and use them? Yes, but that isn’t the point. The point is that it isn’t about how many tools you use. I personally don’t ever think: Hmmm how many tools am I using? I just create lessons and design what I need accomplished with whatever tools I feel would work the best. Some weeks I may use two dozen tools and other weeks maybe only five. We need to make sure we don’t put some arbitrary number on how many tools we need to use.

Now, if we are designing an entire course and not just a lesson, then most likely many tools will be used. But some tools should be used repeatedly to create stability while others used sparingly so as not to overwhelm the students. This may be different depending up the grade level it is being designed for. Again, I think moderation is always the best way. The problem is some peoples viewpoint is so skewed, they think they are moderate, when they are leaning to an extreme.

Tools Influence Design

How does your knowledge/skill with the tools from the two toolboxes influence your choice of design?

Well, any tool I don't have in my toolbox will not be used in the design. Seems obvious, but is actually very important. You can't use what you don't have. So when designing lessons, you won't incorporate tools you don't know of or don't yet have. For instance, I have very limited knowledge and experience with SecondLife and Myspace. I don't use them and don't have a drive to use them. So, when designing a lesson I would not use those things.

Tools we don't like. We all have these. For me it is the old projectors and transparencies. Yes i suppose they have a purpose and some good uses, but I hate them. I used transparencies on those projectors for a few reasons. I've used calculators that can be put on the projector to show what you are doing on the board. Also I've used transparencies to project the examples I am doing onto the wall. This allows for me to do them once step by step on trancparencies and then reuse them slide by slide without constantly erasing and rewriting on the board. But I still hate them. I don't even have a good reason. I suppose a smartboard and projector can take their place. I don't care, I hate them. We all have those tools and skills we don't like to use but have there for a rainy day.

Teachers Role

Well, I was reading a Phaedrus article today and at the very end it said the following: "But that does not necessarily mean we have to make them so comfortable that they have no incentive to get beyond the grade."

So? What about it? Well, it got my mind going for a minute about how comfortable we can sometimes try to make students. School districts, governments, and teachers can all fell as if they walk on glass with students and parents. Society seems to be so "selfish", "lawsuit happy", and "its all about me". Well, when parents think like that, which is very juvenile, it causes major problems. Parents don't want their kids disciplined, corrected or told they are wrong. It doesn't matter what you document or show as proof you are doing it right. Some parents will fight to the bitter end just to say "ha, I got you". It is insane. The idea we can't fail kids is ridiculous. The idea we can't correct kids is crazy. Maybe it is just a product of where I work now.

For instance, if a student has something they are not allowed to have, then I ask for it. If they don't give it up, then it is taken from them. This is done by force if necessary and everything goes along. Picture a 15 year old in high school with a cell phone. Assume that cell phones are forbidden to be used except for some special pre-approved instances. The students makes a call in the middle of class. He refuses to stop or to hand over the phone. No one can do anything. No one can take it short of risking losing their job. If a teacher or principal grabbed the students wrist and took the phone they would have a lawsuit on their hands.

My point is this: we can comfort kids too much. I think most of us in this class know what I mean. We were drug from our comfort zone with no mommy and daddy. Sure, I guess we could complain to the teacher's supervisor, but that wouldn't help us. It would only be the easy way out. On a rerun of lost John said "the Struggle is natures way of making us stronger" or something very similar to that. That is the point of this class and should be a major idea behind education at least in secondary school. Kids need to struggle and be uncomfortable with their education. Now, I don't mean that the teacher should teach naked just to make people uncomfortable. But dealing with education we should struggle at times.

STYLE

Well, I was reading the docs post on Second Life and it reminded me of something I dealt with this week on vacation. My 4 year old can be too rough with my 8 month old. I stopped midweek and thought about what I was doing wrong. Should I model the appropriate behavior? Should I have them brought together and ask him to do certain appropriate things? Should I be a hard disciplinarian and just smack him anytime he did something rough to her? I realized it is similar to teaching style, or better yet selecting the most appropriate "tool" to get him to learn. Maybe it is a combination of the above, maybe not. I think being a parent can be good practice for being a teacher, but I digress from where my thoughts were going.

Then I thought of the adoption training me and my wife are going through to adopt three girls. They mentioned Discipline vs Punishment. They said Punishment was meant to stop a behavior and Discipline was meant to meet the need of the child while stopping the behavior. I thought they were real close, but had to add something. I think Punishment is more about satisfying the Punisher. They are angry/embarrassed and want something done. Where Discipline is all about what is best for the kid. You want them to learn and grow into a good person.

I feel education is sometimes like that. We have tests and standards we need to meet. So we "punish" the kids and force them to learn the test. Instead we should "discipline" them and do what is best for them. We want them to learn and they want to learn. We should quit being scared of tests and standards. We need to stand up for the youth and do what is best for them.

Back from vacation

Well, I've been gone since last Saturday, so when I booted up and looked at my Gator, my jaw dropped. I think It was almost 200 new posts. Well, I'm trying not to let that intimidate me. I did post of few of this weeks topics last week as week 5 posts, but I need to respond to a few things. First, POWERPOINT. Well, well. I already new Doc didn't like it, but it was refreshing to here why and when it could be useful. I do agree with him that PowerPoint is basically outdone by web applications. Even a basic web page creator can make better presentation material then PowerPoint. But one line about eye candy did make me think.

How much are we into "eye candy" in the classroom. We have old traditional teachers that still just use chalk and board. Then we have "eye candy" teachers throwing every tech and visually stimulating thing they can find at the students. I don't think either are very good. Like Doc said, it isn't about what we are doing, but rather is it doing what we want it to do. If we want students to remember the noble gases, it doesn't matter if we use a jeopardy game, lecture, slide show, movie, or class project. What matters is in the end did the students learn what you wanted them to learn. Sometimes I feel we need to reflect on what we are doing. Don't do it just to be "creative" or untraditional. Do it to be effective.

Week 5 material Part 2

MUD MUSH MOO: How can they be used for teaching and learning? Well, I like that it is text based and allows for the use of imagination while playing around. Now they don't have to be games necessarily although that may be the most notable use of these. Still, they allow a text based system to interact with one another and can be set up as games, with puzzles, and even problems to solve together as a group. I think as far as online deliver is concerned, this is an excellent way to get people to learn together and help one another. One of the best ways to master a skill is to teach it to someone else.

Audio/Visual: IM w/video and voice could be very useful in education. It allows for people to "feel" more connected to one another. I would suggest that for those resistant to online delivery, that this kind of technology allows for a smoother transition. Again, I think online lecturing is awful, but it is a step. Not a big one, but for some even those little steps matter. We have to be patient, because not everyone will respond to online delivery the same way. For some teachers, just using email is a big step and I try not to get on them about being resistant to technology. It would be more helpful to be encouraging for what they are doing and share some other easy things you do with technology with them.

WEEK 5 Posting ahead of time.

Because I will leave for vacation during the night tonight, I've got to post some week 5 stuff now. If I get back late Saturday next week I'll try to post some responses then also.

Wikispaces: How are they different from blogs? Well, I found one note on a website that said blogs were personal and wikis were collaborative. I thought this was a really good explination. Although blogs can have comments, they are very personal spaces where people express their ides and allow others to respond. Wikispaces on the other hand is collaborative in the way a chat room or IMs can be, but are more long lasting. Chatrooms are nice, but rather temporary to those there in the chat. Wikispaces last over time but provide the more collabotive feel of a chat.

LECUTUREWARE: What? why in the world would I want to just sit at my computer watching a standart lecture. How horrible that would be. If I wanted that I would just go to a normal classroom setting. But I get ahead of myself. This has many good things going on. First It allows for those they may have issues getting back and forth to the classroom a way to similate the classroom experience. Perhaps those with a broken pelvis or a very contagious ailment. Still, if you are going to use the Web and computers for online delivery, you really should be doing more than just broadcasting the lecture to the students.

Well, I'll take a break and try to respond to more of the week 5 stuff later.

Hyperventilation

What is causing the hyperventilation? Well, I'm going on vacation this week and will be gone for the entire week 5 of the class. I had this planned 7 months ago so I can't wait to go, but I do feel a little anxious about not being able to post or reply during this period. I'm not really worried about my grade, although I can't say it hasn't crossed my mind. Rather, my biggest concern is coming back home on Sunday and having all the blogs from week 5 and the new week 6 starting up. I'm going to try and just let it go and have fun, but somewhere inside my traditional head it just bothers me to miss a week of class. Oh well, I'm going to try and post one or two times today for the next week in order to get some of my thoughts about the week out there.

Chat

First, Sorry to everyone for missing the Chat on Monday. Now, I did read the chat log posted on blackboard. It seems there was quite a discussion about education being a stable system and how to change it. Of course money and parents were listed as places to start the change. I agree that in an ideal world parents would always be the place to go to for change in education. They have a large voice and all the power as far as I'm concerned. But, sadly many parents don't take that much interest in there children. I know people who were sexually and emotionally harassed at school but their parents did nothing. I'm not sure the parents even knew about most of it because the child felt the parents didn't care. So, in some areas the parents may be able to be of some use, but that simply depends on the parent involvement in their children's education.

MONEY [that's what I want, that's what I want :) ]. The true force in education. This gets people involved. Start talking about spending and saving money and people start to listen to see how it will effect them. I think if you can convince people that it will save money then it can be done. I know where I work it is all about money. Not that the government spends money well, but everything is money motivated.

Tool: Portable Computer

Well, I found a really good article abou the future of computing and a tool that will be used more readily for distance education. The link is http://www.downloadsquad.com/2008/09/02/24-killer-portable-apps-for-your-usb-flash-drive and it is about a flash drive. Flash drives are nothing new and are basically just a storage device like a floppy disk or CD. The cool thing about them is that they get larger in capacity yet smaller and cooler looking. So what about it as a tool in distance education. Well, like the article on OLDaily said before linking over "we're getting closer and closer to simply carrying around our computer, operating system and all, on our keychains". These devices are making this closer to reality. The good thing about this tool in distance ed, is that it could allow you to take your distance ed everywhere you go. Not just doing distance ed classes at home, but at work, at a buddies, at the library, on vacation at an Internet Cafe. Everywhere and anywhere. It is amazing how you could not just have your files on there, but also your Web browser, Burner Application, IM's to use, and just about anything. The same goes for classroom based courses. You could use it to transfer documents from school to home to library to uncle's house. But it isnt just about files. Those could be emailed to yourself, but it is about your entire computing experience. Your media software, OS, all your apps.

It really made me think about the future of computing and how this seems rather obvious a step in the technolgy age. I really can't wait for this. I go from my work computer to someone elses and I will still have virtually everything I have at my computer. Sure somethings will differ depending on hardware, but most software issues could be resolved to allow you to have "your" computer anywhere you go in your pocket.

Basic Toolbox for Distance Ed

What all tools do we have at our disposal for distance education? Well, as usual it depends a little on what you define as "distance education". I'll be using the typical, although incorrect, definition that implies distance education happens when teacher and class aren't geographically together.

Tools
1. Telephone (good for immediate oral communication) (calling someone to walk you through a complicated process that may require adjusting the directions on the fly)
2. Cameras/Video (good to see others from a distance, or to see things they want you to see)(having students take photographs of a project to send in and share with everyone)
3. Web quests (good for exploration and allowing students to work at their own pace)(create a web quest so that students search for information about a person in history, along the way they may find out about many other things as they read and look for info about the person)
4. Email/Blogs (good for communication without regard to time, allows for permanent record of text to review at any time)(sending directions as the teacher to all students at once, just like handing them a printout.)
5. Blackboard (good for managing files for a class and allowing for chatting and messaging)(can easily upload assignment to teacher)
6. Chat rooms/IM's (good for instant communication with many people)(5 students from different states can discuss the presidential election all at once and have an easy record of all the comments made)
7. Online readings/articles (good for research and finding out information)(Have students select and review an article about a particular topic)

Those are just a few I thought of, but it is late. I'm sure others will have many more cool tools to share.

Working with people.

I think people are different. Scratch that, I know they are different. The sexes are different, cultures are different, even siblings are different. Why would I bother to make such an obvious statement? Well, some people may say they enjoy working with people. I realize working with people can be done many ways and in some instances at a geographical distance. But I don't think that is exactly what they are talking about.

What I think they mean, is that they enjoy working with people and actually being with them. Not just emailing, not just video conferencing, not even just working with a glass wall between them. I think the glass wall is the most telling. Some people just desire that human closeness. I think elementary teachers probably have this desire much of the time. Counselors don't just want to call someone that just had a miscarriage. They want to be there, they want to hold them if necessary. They want to look in their eyes and show how much they really care. They want to hand them a tissue. It isn't about just being able to communicate. I genuinely think some people just desire to be with others.

In some ways I think we all desire this. Most of us want to be near other people sometimes. I think this is a legitimate claim for a teacher. Why can't they desire to be with their students at least some of the time. It has NOTHING to do with distance education, online delivery, or anything else. It is just about how they are as human beings. Personally I am not that way. I get my personal contact with people between my family and friends. I don't need that from my work, but I at least have the wisdom to recognize that others may want that from there job and it isn't about Online courses.

Reply to 16 Qs and a Final Paper

I understand totally about what Tim was saying. I think it would be a lot easier for a teacher to post what we have to do and when it is due and be done with it. Easier for everyone. BUT.... is easy what we need. Is easy how we learn. Lets face it, we learn the most when we fail. When I get a D on a paper, I learn a lot about what is expected and what I should have done. Getting As just for showing up doesn't help me much. I'm earning a Masters degree here and there should be difficult times. This isn't something we just do in that extra time we have. I do most of my work when the kids are sleeping. Typically it is late at night and I miss out on sleep just so I can do this work. That means something to me. If I just had 2 hours a day with no responsibilities and was acing a class, that wouldn't mean anything to me. At the end of this course I will get a grade and I will know that whatever it is, I earned it and I worked for it. That is really satisfying. I've had tons of courses where I breezed through learning nothing new and just spilling back at them what they give me. This is different. This class reminds me more of my Philosophy classes (my other major). I get to think and discuss how I feel about things. I see how others feel about things. And it isn't just about right and wrong. I can disagree with the teacher all day and I don't think that will cause me to fail. Try that in some regular courses. I enjoy the class. Yes, I feel like I read and type a lot. Yes, I feel tied to the computer at times. But that is a sacrifice. Nothing worth doing is easy. Or is it Nothing easy is worth doing. Either way I can appreciate how this class is actually worth doing.

Sunday afternoon thought

Well, I've been home from church a little while now and a few things began to cross my mind. I teach Sunday School to young adults (20-45) and I realized how poorly we do at teaching Sunday School. I mean we do almost nothing that a teacher should do. We have almost no tools or technologies. It is just the people in a room with our Bibles. No flip chart, no audio recordings, no anything. Then I began to think. How would it work if it were more like a classroom. What if I had handouts, video clips, oral quizzes, group work. I don't know. I might run everyone out of my class. I realized that as bad as education is about tradition, churches can be even worse. I don't know what would happen if I had contemporary christian music playing when they entered, a video to watch, and a handout that they answer questions to and turn in. There are three public school teachers in the class other than myself, but no one seems to mind the daily grind. This class made me think I should shake things up. I've found some good websites, books, youtube videos and such they the class may enjoy. I should try to incorporate that into the lessons or at least let them be aware that it is out there. Just an afternoon rant.

Short Critique on the Class

Well, It is near the weeks end and I thought I better post this before I forget to do it, since I will be at the UK game most of the day tomorrow. Three weeks almost finished and I think I am just getting a handle on what to do. I admit this is my 5th online course and it is by far totally different then the other 4.

I have to admit the one thing I've really enjoyed is the blogging. Sometimes I catch myself basically typing them to myself. I don't feel like I have an audience, but rather it is just me trying to figure out how I feel about topics. It is a place to vent, a place to think, a place to learn. It is almost like a journal for those that kept them. I never did obviously or this wouldn't all be new to me. I find it really amazing that I never give my audience much thought when blogging. Audience is important when writing, but with these class blogs I just don't feel the pressure. I think the Doc is good about encouraging us to just participate and that helps me to not care about what others think. Don't get me wrong I appreciate comments, IM's, and other posts on the same topic. I've always thought discussion is a wonderful tool in the classroom. Kids teach each other and learn together during discussion. Online has the advantage of reading at your own pace and being more deliberate about what you say. I've just enjoyed the forum to let my thoughts and and peek into the thoughts of others.

But I guess I should be critical of the class and not just praise it. Well, I guess my only issue with the class is the amount of work. I don't think I really use more time in this class, but rather more thought provoking time. Some classes have you do mindless things like play games or simple stuff like answer multiple choice questions. We have none of that here. It is like everything we do is intense. I have to think all the time. I read and type, then read and type. It can be straining on the brain. I personally don't mind the pressure, but I could definitely see how others may struggle with it. My wife would hate this class. She loves to talk and chat, but the topics are complex and deep. Not typical chat stuff. No, I'm not dogging my wife. She is smart and wonderful, but just probably wouldn't like this class.

In the end I have to admit I like the idea of people failing and not everyone getting an A. That isn't how it should be. Everyone won't be excellent in there work. We should get what we earn and I've met teachers that don't really believe that. Shocking for some I know. Even where I work, I'm told to never give a Quarter grade below a 50. They say it becomes to hard to make up. Even when the kid earns a 15 I'm supposed to mark 50. Sometimes I go against the grain, but usually it isn't worth it. If they got a 15 this time what makes me think they will bring a 50 up next time. Just a vent, goodnight all.

Just some thoughts and replies.

Well, I'm busy like most of you so by the time I get to the computer at night I am worn down, but with a lot to think about. I just want to reply and comment on a few things that I have read.

First, the Doc replied to one of my blog posts with this comment "As for face to face ... nobody would begin to suggest that there's something wrong with it. Just -- how much you willing to pay to have face time with me? You'd have to fly to Colorado, rent a car, probably wanna stay over at least one night... frankly, I doubt that I'm worth it."

So, what does that mean to me. Well I began thinking about that. Of course we can't all fly to Colorado and visit with a professor to take a class on a daily or weekly basis. That is why we have "online" courses. They bridge the gap that we otherwise would just be staring at wishing we could cross. I went to a college about an hour and a half from where I grew up. Now, many reasons existed, but one of them was that I wanted to be close to home and save money. Many people are in a similar situation.

But what about online delivery? Wouldn't that have also met my needs? I think so, but I think about what I would have missed. I never would have met my wife. My friends I hung out with would only consist of the high school buddies that didn't go away to college. I wouldn't have joined a fraternity and went on spring break. I'm not saying all the experiences of college are great, but they made me who I am and I regret almost none of them. I certainly wouldn't want to go back and do it all over again online. I just think online delivery, video tape course, and other distance ed has a bright future but isn't the final word in education. We need that face to face time more than anything for socialization especially at the younger years. I realized some may argue that it could be done similar to home schooling. I have nothing against homeschooling and have considered it for my own children. But again I think it isn't about the technology, but how it is used and how the parents raise the child. It would be easy to let little johnny take classes online, chat online, watch TV online, and spend his days online. I personally don't like that and think it is a bigger possibility than some think.

That brings me back to other comments the Doc made in his stereotypes post. I totally agree with him that it isn't about how the tech is bad or the Internet is bad, but rather how it is used. Guns aren't bad and cars aren't bad. But either in the hand of someone abusing substances is real bad. We can't just say things like "technology is bad", "the Internet is bad", "online classes are bad." What we can say is that these things have issues when misused or abused. I think in another post of mine I even began to argue against the method of my current masters degree. All the classes are online. I will never see a teacher in the physical world. I will never go to campus because I even order my books online. For my sake I don't want it changed, but It wouldn't hurt to require one or two courses to be taken face to face. Even if it only met once a week and did online work the rest of the time. Again comments are welcome and I'm never sure if I have communicated what I mean to communicate. That can be an issue with typing messages online because the lack of face to face and SMELL. :)

Same Old thing

Yes, we like to do the same old thing. Many just want to improve upon what we are already doing. We want it easier, cheaper, faster, greener, smaller, and the like. We don't really want innovation, because innovation would mean real change. Not just changing things for the better, but changing how WE have to do things. People are very resistant to change at times. Now tradition can be good especially for stability. Stability is a good thing, because it builds security and trust. If someone doesn't feel secure then they don't care about some new innovation that may do this or that. Innovation is scary because it involves the unknown. Many people don't like that. They want consistency.

An intersting comment in an email from the Doc about this article said the following: Education is what we do to students, learning is what students to to themselves. I reread this statement several times. The thing I found odd about this (perhaps it comes from my philosophy degree) is that it appears that teachers would carry the responsibility for education but students would be responsible for learning. I'm not really sure what I think about that, but I would love some responses to that line of thinking, agree or disagree.

If we didn’t have schools, what would education look like? The final question from today's post. I think to answer this we would first have to decide if schools had ever existed or if they suddenly shut down today. I will go with they have never existed at least in current form and maybe someone else will post on if they vanished or shut down today. So what if schools as we know them had never been formed. I would assume even in General education schools hadn't come about, then at least small schools (maybe as few as 5 students) would have formed for specific job training. This would be more like apprenticing. So where does that leave us today. I think with the downfall of the traditional family, increased substance abuse, and a selfish attitude, we would be lost without schools. Where would the 8 year old kids be. Not at home studying. Sure maybe 25% would be. But what about the masses that can't stay at home with the kids. They need school as a place to go and learn. I am not saying schools do everything right, but they are needed. Without them we would have a lot of kids sitting at home without direction or in daycare all day long doing nothing.

Why NOT Distance Education?

Interesting article about the potential benefits of Distance Ed. The comment about getting a GED online was a good one. But I think it brings up an excellent point. And before I state it I would like to say that I am coming from someone who works with prisoners every day. So I have some of the "criminal thinking" bouncing around all the time in my head. Anyway to the point.

Cheating. I know many will argue that cheating isnt an issue with online courses. And perhaps depending upon how it is ran, then cheating would be more work then actually doing the work. But lets go back to the GED. Let's suppose you want your GED and you are 23 year old man that hasn't been in school since 5th grade. Well you go and take it and fail. Then you hear about the online test for the GED. Your girlfriend is 19 and graduated high in her class last year. You sit down with her and take the test together. BLAM! You have a GED.

This argument could be extended to any online class, certification, license, or anything were proving who you is about typing in info to a faceless computer. Again, I don't think cheating is a large factor, but imagine an all online degree(such as the one I am currently in). From the day I signed up for this class, this could have always been my cousin Ted. Now, not only this class, but all my classes. Honestly I can't think of any reason my cousin Ted, if I had one, couldnt get the entire degree for me. Maybe pay him some money or whatever. For all anyone knows, this is Ted right now.

Again, I just think it has the potential to be a problem. I would really enjoy comments or responses that show me cheating isnt the issue I think it could be.

To use DE or not to use DE? That is the question.

From what we have read and talked about so far, I think Distance Education has huge advantages over traditional education. (On a side note, for the purpose of this article Distance Education will include anything that is education outside the traditional classroom that involves geographical distance between teacher and learner.) Distance Ed allows for a great deal of time and space flexibility in the classroom. Instead of class being 3pm-4pm Mon and Wed, it is anytime anywhere. Or perhaps better it is all the time everywhere. Class in some ways can seem to never end as opposed to being strictly limited.

But I suppose this depends on how a class is managed by the teacher. For instance, some teachers just lecture, while others are interactive to the point that lecturing is eliminated. Some classes I've had could be done by watching a video tape of the teacher and mailing in your answers to questions. That would be Distance Ed, and the Internet just allows the video to be online along with the questions. Both are poor uses of Distance Ed and should be avoided.

Almost anything you can do in a classroom you can do with Distance Education. And sometimes many more things can be accomplished with a Distance Education class. DE often has advantages such as having digital copies of lectures, work, discussions, and the like to refer back to if needed.

The major downfall of Distance Education is the lack of personal face to face time. I don't care what anyone says, but you need the time together in order to properly build a relationship. For instance you shouldn't raise your teenager via text messages. You need face to face time with them. If nothing else, it shows that you care enough to show up and be with them. Humans were never meant to be isolated and alone in our lives and this includes education I think. Sure, at some point in learning DE becomes much more viable as an option. Someone pursuing a PHD could easily take courses online and get what they need from it. But to consider using DE for 2nd graders without any human contact is crazy. I think the biggest disadvantage of DE is truly that people make think it is the end all be all answer to education.

I would love to use some DE in my class. Being that I am in a prison, I don't really have that option. But one day I hope to be teaching in a regular school. I think as technology becomes cheaper and more available to everyone, then DE should be used more and more. I would love to have webquests, online chats, discussions, and the like with my classes. I can only dream for that day when I am allowed to actually teach someone.

A Remote Access Gator Review

Since we were to select and tell about another blog from our "gator" I selected "Classroom Setup" from the remote access feed. The link to the article is http://remoteaccess.typepad.com/remote_access/2008/08/classroom-set-up.html and includes many pictures. Honestly the pictures are what caught my attention when I was skimming through different blogs. Apparently this blog is mostly pictures and discussion about setting up the classroom at the beginning of the year. I noticed several interesting things both in the reading and in the pictures.

First, the teacher has no "desk" as most teachers do. The teacher has a small corner with a chair, laptop, and small cabinet to store some basic supplies. My first reaction because I teach in a prison was "no waaaaaaaay." But then I tried to think about teaching in non prison settings. It actually seemed to make sense. Why have a big bulky desk with tons of unnecessary stuff in it. A laptop can replace a bulky desktop and a small file cabinet should work for supplies like this teacher did. Some other issues arose in my mind. For instance, what about a classroom printer. Well, either it could be located somewhere else in the room or usually you can just link your computer to an office printer on the network. Next, I wondered about separation. I think for instance that many teachers use the desk as a dividing line to separate teacher from student. Perhaps in some settings they feel this is necessary because of safety or the behavior of the students. I think separation could just as easily be created by how the room is set up as a whole and not just about having a desk to act as a wall. By the way you arrange tables, desks, and other objects in the room you could create a more open feel but maintain separation.

Another topic that jumped out at me in the blog was how much "POP" you want your classroom to have. This class had lime green on the walls, colorful chairs, plants, posters on the walls, and a couch. I would say this classroom had quite a bit of "POP" in the room. I've always wondered at what point colors and interesting stuff in the room is just distracting or a temporary attraction that fades quickly to students. Then again I suppose things like colors are only meant as a "hook" to get kids interested. Having lime green on the walls won't have kids coming back in January saying "wow I love the green on the walls, this room is so fun". At least most kids wont react that way. For sustained "POP" that would have to mean change in general. In some ways kids hate change. They like security. They think "I know Mr. Bennett will be there and so will my desk and the poster about triangles." So as interesting as change can be for some, it is unstable to others. Especially the at risk kids in unstable families. So, I would warn teachers to use change with caution. Yes repainting your room and rearranging the layout during spring break can rejuvenate the class, but some kids will be uncomfortable and feel they've lost a stable part of their unstable lives.