Archive for the ‘Philosophy’ Category

Changing Education Is Not for Everyone

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

I’ve had lots of conversations the last couple weeks with fellow educators who are frustrated by their colleague’s lack of enthusiasm and acceptance about their new and exciting ideas. I get it. It stinks. But I’ve kept saying over and over, “Change is not for everyone.”

There are three kinds of people:

1. People who look at the world and think, “If we did it this way, things would be better,”

2. People who just don’t look at the world that way and like things the way they are, and

3. People who aware that things could be better if x, y, and z were to occur, but don’t want to do it it themselves.

The #2 people don’t want change. They just don’t think that way.

The #3 people want change, but they don’t want to instigate it. Change requires energy. Change requires convincing. Change requires sticking out. Being different. Drawing a line in the sand between how things are and how things “could” be.  That requires gusto. That requires courage. That requires energy they’d rather use somewhere else.

The thing is this: The world is predominantly made-up of #3 people: People who want change but don’t want to expend the energy to make it happen, whether that be the time required or the social “shazam” of sticking their necks out to make it happen.

The #1 people – the change makers – look at things critically and have within them a burning desire to make things better. To improve. To progress. To correct what they don’t like about the present state of things compared to what they think would make things better. The #1 people don’t care about the flack or the criticism that their “different way of doing things” creates because they know that, in the long run, it will make a difference. A difference that will make things better.

So who do you want to be? Do you want to be a bastion of the status quo? Do you want to be one of the silent critics of the status quo … who never really does anything? Or do you want to be one of the people who sticks their neck out and make things happen.

Follow-Up to “Education Needs Better Tools”

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

My last post – “Education Needs Better Tools” – instigated several conversations this week, and each time I elaborated on what I meant, I just couldn’t quite nail it down.

And then I came across a picture that Christopher D. Sessums (a brilliant educational blogger) used in his most recent post … and it communicated in such a better and more simple way what I was trying to say.

tools make change

tools make change

Granted he refered to the toast and toaster differently …

  • Sessums: “Toaster = Teachers” and “Toast = Students”
  • Me: “Toast = Educational Learning Resources [or tools]” and “Toaster = State of Education” …

The picture and his opening McLuhan quote nonetheless helped me capture what I’m trying to communicate:

Change is more likely to occur when we invent new tools that make participating (in the change) fun and easy and worth it.

I’m not saying that theories and philosophies are useless. Far from it. Everything starts with an idea, and we have the great thinkers of the ages to thank for laying the groundwork for most of our advancements. But what I am saying is that, given how much tools accelerate and make change, I think Education would hugely benefit if more ephasis was placed building tools to make the change happen … instead of talking about the change that should be happening.

Some Final Thoughts:

  • It wasn’t the idea of looking for better land and game that spawned human expansion across the world as much as it was clothes and arrow-heads and fire-starting techniques.
  • It wasn’t Martin Luther that fueled the Reformation as much as it was the printing press and the use of a common linguistical tool … German.
  • It wasn’t the idea of settling the West that settled the West as much as it was the steam engine and the locomotive.
  • And it wasn’t the computer that got all of us using the internet in the 1990’s as much as it was the web browsers that made it so fun and easy.

If we want educational change, we need to think about changing our educational tools.

Slug Students and Positive Shock and Awe

Monday, April 6th, 2009

For some students, absolutely nothing their teachers teach them will ‘get through’ because their self-talk is resistant to learning. I am NOT talking about troubled, abused, incapable students; I’m talking about those ‘slug students’ who just sit there and resist learning because what they say to themselves on a minute-by-minute, second-by-second basis repels it. Their self-talk, for whatever reason, repels new information, new ideas, and new skills … like water off a ducks back. It’s stupid, lame, retarded, boring, who cares, this sucks, whatever, when does class end?

Example
I was in a classroom last week and overheard four female students converse during a work period. Here are some snippets:

“Mr. _____ is so lame. He thinks his subject is so important. It’s so stupid.”

“I have like no idea what they’re talking about in that class. Like I care … (friend says something) … Yeah, all I want is a pass.”

“______ (classmate) thinks he’s so smart. All he does is do homework. I think he’s the only one.”

“I can’t wait to watch ________ (reference to a reality TV show). All they do is fight with each other. It’s hilarious.”

“Are you working this weekend? Oh god, I hate my job. It’s like the lamest job ever … I don’t even do anything.” (friend replies with envious whine-like tone in her voice) “You’re sooo luckeeey you don’t have to do anything.”

How to Deal with Slug Students

How to Deal with Slug Students

When I walked over to this group of girls to see how their work was coming along, their bodies bristled, they stopped talking, and they waited for “teacher” to talk … in the same way we wait in fearful anticipation before a nurse gives us a needle. I spoke. They froze. They numbly nodded their heads when I asked if things were going well. They mumbled a couple of lame excuses as to why they couldn’t show me any of their finished work. They sat their like slugs, complaining about everything, liking nothing, and uninspired to do much of anything.

How do You Deal with Slug Students (or Workers)?
I’ve worked with many students like these ones over the years and, to be honest, they can be the most difficult (if you approach them the wrong way) because on a minute-by-minute basis they are telling themselves over-and-over that everything’s lame and everything sucks. Why would anyone work hard at something if they viewed the world that way? And if that’s the case, what could any teacher do to get them to do anything at all?

It’s easy to get frustrated with these students. It’s easy to write them off as lazy. As slugs. As wet noodles that aren’t worth pushing. Sadly, however, I’ve found that that’s how most people in their lives treat them and they’ve simply learned to respond in kind. But what I’ve found over the years is that what these slug students need – like what they’re really, really craving at a deep psychological level – is for someone to validate them. To put it another way, slug students are often hopeless students.

Positive Shock and Awe
What I’ve found works best is to give slug students a dose of positive shock and awe. They need someone to rattle their self-talk cages. They need someone to pull them aside and say how much potential they see in them. What outstanding qualities they possess. How frustrating it is to sit back and listen to them verbally beat themselves up – and the world – all class long. How their body language (have a look because I guarantee you that your slug students are really, really slouching) sends a message to everyone in their world that they don’t care about much of anything, especially themselves. They need to hear how happy you would be if you saw them taking pride in themselves. How happy you’d be if they found something they liked doing and poured their heart into it … regardless if it had anything to do with your course or not.

Basically, slug students need someone to come along and say, “I care about you, and I hate seeing you not care about you. In fact, in this class, I will not be able to stand by and watch you not care about you.” Slug students need their ongoing self-talk to be disrupted by something and someone totally unexpected.

Let me end with a story.
Seven years ago I was teaching a slug student who struggled with things, and her oral reading was awful. At the start of the course I let her pain through reading three sentences aloud to her classmates before respectfully moving on to the next student. After observing her repel everything we were learning in class and listening to her abuse herself over and over with her own self-talk, I finally pulled her aside and did the above (i.e. positive shock and awe), and encouraged her to read anything … just anything … for 30 minutes at night before going to bed. “Just read something! Steamy romance even,” I pleaded and then said quite seriously, “And I won’t tolerate you beating yourself up in my class any more. No more whatevers, yeah buts, or I’m stupids. Seriously.”

Three months passed and she would tell me from time to time she was finishing books. I continued to encourage her, but I remember being frustrated with her ongoing sluggish behavior in my class … but I didn’t want to be too hard on her either. With two weeks left in class we were reading a passage aloud and I asked her to read for the first time in 4 months. I was absolutely floored with how much she had improved. It was still tough to listen to, but it dawned on me that this slug student really had been reading. She really was trying. Her improvement was huge!

So I stopped her mid-sentence. She flinched. I said to her in front of all the students, “Get on up and stand on top of your desk chair.” I knew she was thinking the worst, but she obliged nonetheless. I explained to the class of students (hamming it up … in kind of an angry tone) that I had NEVER seen a student do what she did. And finally, I asked the class to give her a standing ovation for improving so much in her oral reading. They were a great group of students, we clapped and cheered for 3-5 seconds, and that was the end of it. When it was all said and done, I had maybe invested 20 minutes of time that semester working on that individual student.

Last year I met up with a few students from that class for dinner at the restaurant across the street from my house. She was there, and she was looking great. At a certain point during our two hours of reminiscing, she pulled me aside and said, “You were the only one Mr. Ross. You were the only one who believed in me. Everyone else thought I was stupid. My family, my friends, my boyfriends. You were it. The only one. It changed everything. I don’t know how I can thank you.”

20 minutes of positive shock and awe. Don’t write your slug students off. Validate them. Let them know you care.

Knowledge Work Learning vs. Industrial Work Learning

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

50 years ago, Peter Drucker, management visionary and guru, forecast a massive shift in the kind of work that would be done in our economy – a shift from industrial work to knowledge work.

Industrial work has boundaries. It has limits. It has superiors telling inferiors what to do, how, and by when. It has clear-cut rewards/punishments for meeting clear-cut goals and targets. Industrial work is quantity-based.

Knowledge work has no boundaries. The most critical task in knowledge work is deciding what needs to be done to reach the goal. And, in many cases, one needs to identify what goals need to be reached before he/she can decide what needs to be done. Knowledge work demands constant and ongoing learning. It’s self-paced, self-regulated, and quality-based … not quantity based.

This was described in 1959. It’s now 2009. And I have to ask myself, “Why aren’t schools waking up to this? Why are we still packaging learning for industrial work?”

Think about it. Most states/provinces require their schools/teachers to guide students through chunks of information packaged in what we call a course. The boundaries are clear (be able to do/recall this, this, and this by the end of this course) and we attempt to calculate results with equal clarity (especially with the standardized testing movement of the last 15 years). What needs to be learned and reached – and why – is predetermined for students, and teachers too. It has industrial work written all over it.

Sure, the state/provincial tests we use measure quality of mastery … but by and large they measure the quality of mastery based on the prescribed quantity … which, in essence, can be reduced to “quantity of mastery.” The ubiquitous Advanced Placement Program epitomizes what I’m describing here. I know. I taught an AP course. I had to ask my students to chug, chug, chug information and churn, churn, churn it out on test after test after test in preparation for the big test. Industrial, industrial, industrial.

What we should be doing.
If we want to prepare our students for knowledge work, our educational focus has to change. We need to teach our youth how to determine their own outcomes and how to identify what they can or should do with a chunk of information instead of memorizing it for the sake of recalling it. If we want to get serious about knowledge work education, standards should focus on presenting students with real-world scenarios and/or problems, asking them to identify their own outcomes, and challenging them to reach them.

Why it’s tough to change.
I’m going to offer some practical ideas and suggestions on how we can tilt the focus of our educational delivery towards knowledge work/learning in future posts (I can’t wait actually), but I end this post with some comments on why – I think – our system continues to package teaching/learning for industrial work when we all know it’s not what we should be doing, but I’m sharing these realities because I get frustrated with too many people’s 5-minute solutions to the education problem when they ignore just how steeped it really is:

1. Efficiency. Let’s face it, teaching and testing industrial work is efficient. And efficient is cost-effective. One test can be written for an entire nation of students to take. It should also be noted that when you offer something to the public for free (i.e. public education), it has to be cost effective.

2. Licensure. Although schools are, by their nature, factory-like, what’s more significant to their perpetuation of industrial work/learning is the fact that they’re part of a world-wide licensure system. My wife recently was cleaning out her university binders and asked, “Why did I have to do all this stuff? I’m never going to use any of it again.” Answer = licensure. She did it to get a teachers license, just as a doctor takes courses/tests to get a doctor’s license, or any of us take much shorter courses/tests to get a driver’s license. Licensure focuses on ‘quantity mastered,’ not on a learner’s ability to grow and progress continually.

3. Tradition. This is the big one. Most teachers received an education that focused on industrial work, and then find themselves teaching in the same system that’s oriented towards industrial work. It’s difficult enough trying to do something different that what the system expects you to do, but it’s even more difficult when that’s all you know. It takes a lot more work to unlearn than to learn, and given the over-burden most teachers face, it makes sense to do what takes less work. Thus, industrial work/learning perpetuates.

Just some thoughts. What do you think?

p.s. I’ll revisit this topic in the weeks to come, offering some constructive suggestions on what we can do to fix/change this.

Practicing Innovative Instruction

Tuesday, March 10th, 2009

I read another educator’s great blog post about failure and risk taking in the teaching and learning process. You should read it, it was great. But one sentence in the post really caught my attention, and that was this sentence:

I, for one, am tired of reading about innovative instruction and not practicing it. It seems that many of these philosophies of curriculum and instruction exist only on paper written by academics who publish in journals that often go unread by the classroom instructors.

The best use of learning – in my opinion – is putting what’s learned into constructive action. This makes it real. It makes it tangible. It makes it meaningful. And this includes the learning about teaching and learning.

If all of us educators did what the quote above suggests on a regular basis – if we tried out just half of the new teaching ideas and practices we stumbled upon because we looked forward to learning from what didn’t work as much as from what did work – not only would we be modeling the best kind of learning to our students, but I think we would become much better teachers … much more quickly.