I have decided that I need to change. This is rather interesting as my style of teaching is rather different anyway. I love to say that I don't teach my students, and I don't. I really try to lead them to learning, to involve them in attaching new knowledge to their old knowledge. Last week, when I attempted to have them teach themselves, successfully in the end, I rethought what I do again.
We are starting a new unit called From the Ground Up that involves area, perimeter and I'm including volume. So I started by having them search the internet to find out what these words mean and how they relate. It went very well even with my reluctant to lead themselves class. They are finally getting the hang of it and that's when it hit me that the biggest change that needs to occur in the curriculum is what is taught.
We need to teach our students to learn for themselves. We don't need to teach that area is length times height; we need them to know how to find what they don't know, and how to know what they need to know. Lots of knows here, but they don't need to know what year the War of 1812 was fought; they need to think about why it was fought. They already turn to the internet for information on what interests them; they need to learn to look there when they don't know answers as well. One game a substitute came up with one year was to challenge students to find the answers to Trivial Pursuit card the fastest on their laptops. What a great way to learn to search.
I really like the Trivial Pursuit game idea! Now I know why I've been saving old editions of the game...
ReplyDeleteAbility to search and determine whether a source is reliable is key. I'd like to see some information (continents, major countries, states, major cities, many math skills, ...) readily at hand for kids, but not through rote memorization. By deliberately designing things that are interesting to kids, but involve searching about the world, we can teach countries and continents without ever doing a map quiz. Imagine a unit on catapults - lots of history, lots of putting into context, map quizzes unneeded.
I watched the movie Social Network last night, which indicated Zuckerman used games to interview potential applicants for his jobs. Whoever was able to drink and win the game got the job. He was looking for skills not necessarily personalities and social skills. Is this the new paradigm? I think game playing has a major role in education, I am not sure what that looks like.
ReplyDeleteGreat insight Cathy - thought I'd play devil's advocate for a moment. What knowledge do kids need to know? If they don't need to know how to find the area of a square, do they need to know what the concept of area is? This may seem trite, but it's getting at the heart of a debate that is sure to erupt as more and more educators push for reform. In order to seek out knowledge, we have to know what we're looking for. Should a new set of common cores be drafted that really get at what it is we want our students to "know"...and at the same time should we revamp our definition of literacy to include the ability to navigate social media? Lots to think about.
ReplyDeletethanks!
Rhonda Tate
Rhonda, Good point. Some of the students just looked up the words but didn't understand the definitions, others found a cool site that let them find the area or perimeter. In the end, I don't think they "know" what they are going to need to know but we are closer, I hope, to understanding the difference between the terms.
ReplyDeleteCathy - I think your post ties nicely to Bloom's Taxonomy. We've been focused, as have our state assessments, on recall. Do they know the formula for volume? Can they plug in the numbers and get the correct answer? There is a sad lack of focus on the higher level thinking - analysis, interpretation, and so forth. I was interested in how the PISA tests from the articles a couple weeks ago really focused on these higher-order thinking skills, and it sounds like that is what you are trying to introduce more and more in your teaching. What I wonder is if individual teachers, classrooms, and schools move in that direction, how will that affect AYP? If we are teaching our students better, but the assessments still lack that focus, will their increased achievement even show up in the test scores? Hopefully, higher-order thinking will let them puzzle through the recall-driven assessment, but as one high school junior recently told me, the SAT is not a fair measure! (Yes, even students know this!) For example our school English focuses on artistic writing, description, and the ideas behind creative expression, but what does the writing part of the SAT test? Traditional grammar and conventions! No wonder we don't meet, our students haven't received grammar instruction since early middle school! I think the individual aim for deeper thinking and figuring out how to learn is excellent, and I hope it moves out of the pockets of classrooms here and there and into our state and federal mind-set.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post Cathy! Your comments go hand in hand with why I don't make my students memorize the Periodic Table. I don't believe memorizing the Periodic Table is a good use of time. What I want my students to know is how to use the information contained on the Periodic Table. There is a lot of information on this table that fits on one side of an 8.5x11 inch piece of paper; from names and symbols of elements to groups and periods to atomic numbers and atomic masses. To me, ensuring that my students know what to do with and how to use this information is much more important than being able to quickly spit out the names of the first 20 elements.
ReplyDeleteSo many thought-provoking comments here! As I read your post and then comments added by others, I began to think about how we hear alot about the importance of critical literacy...knowing how to judge the source and accuracy of a piece of writing, for example. Perhaps what we need to think about in schools is "critical thinking and learning".
ReplyDeleteI think you are right in asking what is it that our students really need to learn? I think that teaching them how to find answers for themselves is something that we don't always give students time to learn. You example of students don't need to necessarily know when a particular war was fought, but why, really struck a cord with me. Often times, we don't give our students time to develop a deeper understanding of issues and overlook what might be the important aspect of events that have happened in history. I have to say that I don't recall why the War in 1812 was fought, and I know I must've learned about it in school.
ReplyDeleteWe need to teach our students how to be independent thinkers and figure things out for themselves. I am interested in hearing about how things are going in your class using this type of teaching.
I am doing a bit of the regular as well right now as we had some totally new concepts but one of the offshoots of the exercise is that I don't have to help anywhere near as many students. They are very busily helping each other and the climate of the room has changed tremendously. They still don't take enough ownership of their learning but it is better and little steps are OK.
ReplyDelete