Innovation in Public Schools

[socialist]

You're right that educators need to facilitate learning rather than being just the bearer of knowledge. However, devices are tools...not solutions. In my experience, too many teachers use tablets to generate busy work rather than as a tool to complement great inquiry based lessons. It is important to engage students, but we must be mindful of what we are engaging them in. Far too many of the apps used are simply electronic version of that olde tymey rote learning that you rightly criticize.

My second point is that tablets are not a great fit for every class. At the young primary level they are generally the best option, but get less useful as the kids age. Tablets are poor document or content generation devices, so in my opinion, something like Chromebooks or traditional laptops are a better tool for middle school kids and older. Kids that age tend to be already armed with phones and iPods so adding tabs doesn't really add value.

Finally, of the available tabs Ipads are, IMO, the worst option. Schools do not getting big discounts on Apple devices so good quality Android tabs are generally 25-40% less expensive. Plus, there are far more free Android apps and the paid apps are generally cheaper. It's always better to get more for taxpayer money, but when considering that education funding almost never provides a maintenance or replacement budget for tech, having some (25 to 40%) more devices in storage is a necessity.

Now you are starting to understand 21st century learning. I facilitate my class. For example, I am not great at division with fractions, but I have to facilitate it. So I allow learners to take the bull by the horns and learn their own strategies for learning how to divide fractions. I'm not the one in front of the classroom dictating to learners how to divide fractions 1950s style. When learners discover their own strategies, they are much further ahead than any kid from the 50s to 80s who had some teacher dictate how to do things. This is new style education that many of you don't understand.

[socialist]

Here is a great blog about people with nothing better to do than slag teachers. I love this quote:

You may have read or heard John Green's position on taxes and education. Here is a popular quote by the author of The Fault in Our Stars: "Let me explain something. Public education does not exist for the benefit of students or for the benefit of their parents.

"It exists for the benefit of the social order. We have discovered as a species that it is useful to have an educated population. You do not need to be a student or have a child who is a student to benefit from public education. Every second of every day of your life, you benefit from public education.

"So let me explain why I like to pay taxes for schools, even though I don't personally have a kid in school: It's because I don't like living in a country with a bunch of stupid people."

That is going on the wall in m y classroom tomorrow.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/ugh-why-do-i-read-the-comments-blog-of-the-week-things-that-need-to-be-said-223798901.html

Once again:

Public education does not exist for the benefit of students or for the benefit of their parents.

Edited September 16, 2013 by socialist

[The_Squid]

Shouldn't you be in school...? If you are in fact an actual teacher? lol

[socialist]

Shouldn't you be in school...? If you are in fact an actual teacher?

LOL.....Ummm...it's after school hours where I am. I see you have nothing of merit to add to the discussion.

[Michael Hardner]

Here is a great blog about people with nothing better to do than slag teachers.

What's the answer to this ? I would suggest one answer might be dialogue. In dialogue, one needs to start with a basic respect of the positions of your partner. Dismissing parents' and taxpayers' points of view isn't part of it.

[GostHacked]

What's the answer to this ? I would suggest one answer might be dialogue. In dialogue, one needs to start with a basic respect of the positions of your partner. Dismissing parents' and taxpayers' points of view isn't part of it.

No one is slagging teachers. The thing being slagged is this approach to teaching. You'd figure socialist would figure that out. Unless reading and writing comprehension are part of this 'find your own way' method, then I am not sure socialist is fit to be a teacher.

[Argus]

Shouldn't you be in school...? If you are in fact an actual teacher? lol

He's not.

[Argus]

Here is a great blog about people with nothing better to do than slag teachers. I love this quote:

Public education does not exist for the benefit of students or for the benefit of their parents.

Quite right. But utterly irrelevent to the conversation, which is in regard to the failure of modern teaching methods to properly educate.

[Argus]

For example, I am not great at division with fractions, but I have to facilitate it. So I allow learners to take the bull by the horns and learn their own strategies for learning how to divide fractions. I'm not the one in front of the classroom dictating to learners how to divide fractions 1950s style. When learners discover their own strategies, they are much further ahead than any kid from the 50s to 80s who had some teacher dictate how to do things. This is new style education that many of you don't understand.

A new style of edcuation which results in a failure to understand how to do basic arithmetic. Yes, you're right. Nobody understands it.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/whos-failing-math-the-system/article14112165/

[AngusThermopyle]

So I allow learners to take the bull by the horns and learn their own strategies for learning how to divide fractions.

Obviously you are not that great with language skills either. Will you allow leaners to take the bull by the horns and learn their own strategies for learning language skills as well?

[Wilber]

Quite right. But utterly irrelevent to the conversation, which is in regard to the failure of modern teaching methods to properly educate.

I think encouraging creative thinking is great but there are some necessary skills that are required to function properly in society. Skills that actually do require a systematic process and some rote learning. The ability to memorize is a skill in itself that takes practice. The average literate Japanese can recognize about 3500 Kanji characters of which over 1900 are considered everyday. This is what is required to read a Japanese newspaper, This is also why cultures like this kick our asses when it comes to anything that requires memory and we seem intent on making it worse.

[Mighty AC]

Nobody is against practicing systematic processes. However, in the past too much emphasis was placed on simple memorization and regurgitation. Now a little more time is spent teaching students to understand processes rather than just memorizing outcomes.

Using a simplistic math example, students that memorize multiplication tables to 10 can struggle when they encounter a figure like 12 x 13. Students who understand the process can more easily work the problem out in their head, by doing something like 10 x 13 + 26.

It's important to teach the how and why along with the what.

Edited September 17, 2013 by Mighty AC

[cybercoma]

A new style of edcuation which results in a failure to understand how to do basic arithmetic. Yes, you're right. Nobody understands it.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/whos-failing-math-the-system/article14112165/

Wente is being a bit dishonest here. Not all teachers are using the new approach. Moreover, she's being obtuse when she generalizes saying, "teachers are clueless." She also offers absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the teaching methods are to blame for the slip in scores. I've provided research in this thread to the contrary. That the new methods of teaching are on par with the old and that only students who struggle to begin with are having problems with these new methods. To say her opinion is baseless is putting it mild.

Edited September 17, 2013 by cybercoma

[jacee]

... the conversation, which is in regard to the failure of modern teaching methods to properly educate.

I've heard this complaint every decade since the 60's.

If you read link carefully, you will see that the current deficits are NOT in basic competencies, but in innovative, creative problem-solving. Current students at the top end are being stunted by the test-test-test methods of the 1990's+.

[Wilber]

Nobody is against practicing systematic processes. However, in the past too much emphasis was placed on simple memorization and regurgitation. Now a little more time is spent teaching students to understand processes rather than just memorizing outcomes.

Using a simplistic math example, students that memorize multiplication tables to 10 can struggle when they encounter a figure like 12 x 13. Students who understand the process can more easily work the problem out in their head, by doing something like 10 x 13 + 26.

It's important to teach the how and why along with the what.

I don't know why people think kids weren't taught the how and why in the past. I know I was. Just because you can't memorize everything doesn't mean there is no need to memorize anything.

[Mighty AC]

New assessment methods aren't a complete replacement of the old; just a shift towards higher order thinking skills. Students are now spending more time practicing skills at the top of the pyramid and less just memorizing and regurgitating facts. Teaching methods haven't completely changed either, but rather shifted to foster greater choice, creativity, collaboration and critical thinking. Activities are differentiated to better suit the individual needs of each student rather than the class as a whole and learning is more inquiry based. Lecture and rote memorization aren't gone they just play a supporting role to higher order tasks.

The world has changed and continues to do so. The teaching methods of the past had created a creativity, problem identification and imagination drought. The shift will address that. Unfortunately, implementation of better practices is painfully slow.

I once took an online class taught by a Sweedish man. The requirements for our first assignment seemed more vague than I was used to and was thankful, at first, when a woman had a dozen questions about what was required of her and the precise break down of marks. The professor just laughed and said you must be Canadian. It turned out that he was right. He said Canadian students always want the requirements completely laid out for them in a list, they will then diligently follow the instructions given. This is a problem we are in the slow process of fixing.

[Argus]

Wente is being a bit dishonest here. Not all teachers are using the new approach. Moreover, she's being obtuse when she generalizes saying, "teachers are clueless." She also offers absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the teaching methods are to blame for the slip in scores. I've provided research in this thread to the contrary. That the new methods of teaching are on par with the old and that only students who struggle to begin with are having problems with these new methods. To say her opinion is baseless is putting it mild.

I've been hearing differently from parents and been reading differently as well. Is the opinion of math professors baseless as well?

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/09/13/frustrated-professors-convince-schools-to-step-back-from-new-math-and-go-back-to-basics/

Edited September 18, 2013 by Argus

[Argus]

I once took an online class taught by a Sweedish man. The requirements for our first assignment seemed more vague than I was used to and was thankful, at first, when a woman had a dozen questions about what was required of her and the precise break down of marks. The professor just laughed and said you must be Canadian. It turned out that he was right. He said Canadian students always want the requirements completely laid out for them in a list, they will then diligently follow the instructions given. This is a problem we are in the slow process of fixing.

I can think of any number of occasions where if you got the requirements off by one centimeter you were failed, and not just back in school. Current testing by the federal government is like that, too. It's also the standard in any process which involves any kind of legal mandate, which is most hiring processes in large organizations, btw. It's also the requirement if you're applying for some sort of grant or loan, from the government or not, or in taxes or in an awful lot of other things. You don't get to just do things the way you figure sounds right. You do them the way the organization wants or you get a big REJECTED stamp on your paperwork. And often enough no second chance.

[GostHacked]

I cannot imagine how large construction projects will pan out if people are left to discover some things on their own.

I'd be concerned about bridges, hi-rises, stadiums, ect ect. Anything requiring proper math and known formulas and calculations demands some kind of consistency in how people understand it and work with it. If math is going to get creative, that means structures will not be built properly and will pose serious safety concerns. Lives depend on you getting it right the first time.

Group A builds a home with traditional math.

Group B builds a home with discovery methods in math.

Which home do you want to live in?

[Mighty AC]

It is easy to follow instructions, but a different skill set is required to identify a the problem, solve it and then write the instructions. We've been missing all those great C words, Creativity, Collaboration, Critical Thinking, for quite some time now. Industry leaders have complained that applicants have been lacking in this area. Today people are required to change jobs frequently. Even within an existing position people are required to pick up new skills and technologies way more frequently than ever before. Our old education model built for a now non-existent industrial economy does not deliver the goods. A shift from memorization and regurgitation to understanding, evaluating and creating does.

[Wilber]

I can think of any number of occasions where if you got the requirements off by one centimeter you were failed, and not just back in school. Current testing by the federal government is like that, too. It's also the standard in any process which involves any kind of legal mandate, which is most hiring processes in large organizations, btw. It's also the requirement if you're applying for some sort of grant or loan, from the government or not, or in taxes or in an awful lot of other things. You don't get to just do things the way you figure sounds right. You do them the way the organization wants or you get a big REJECTED stamp on your paperwork. And often enough no second chance.

True of most employers I think. Creativity is a limited blessing if you can't come up with the right answer. Mistakes may not be that important in a classroom but can be very expensive and potentially lethal in the real world.

Five year olds can be very creative but they will need tools to put that creativity to use. Those tools include language skills and the ability to do basic arithmetic accurately and reasonably quickly without a calculator. If not, they should come with a label. Batteries Not Included.

[jacee]

I don't know why people think kids weren't taught the how and why in the past. I know I was. Just because you can't memorize everything doesn't mean there is no need to memorize anything.

Exactly.

Fercripes sakes we don't choose one OR the other.

We have to do it all.

And right now both skill assessment

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-004-x/2007006/article/10528-eng.htm

and international business ratings

http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/default.aspx

show a need for improvement in innovative thought and technology in Canada.

Edited September 19, 2013 by jacee

[jacee]

Five year olds can be very creative but they will need tools to put that creativity to use. Those tools include language skills and the ability to do basic arithmetic accurately and reasonably quickly without a calculator. If not, they should come with a label. Batteries Not Included.

They just need cell/wireless.

[Michael Hardner]

I cannot imagine how large construction projects will pan out if people are left to discover some things on their own.

I'd be concerned about bridges, hi-rises, stadiums, ect ect. Anything requiring proper math and known formulas and calculations demands some kind of consistency in how people understand it and work with it. If math is going to get creative, that means structures will not be built properly and will pose serious safety concerns. Lives depend on you getting it right the first time.

Group A builds a home with traditional math.

Group B builds a home with discovery methods in math.

Which home do you want to live in?

That's not a concern at all. The methods that are generally used only help teach math to a wide base, right ? Specialist math, engineering and calculus is taught at a higher level and its methods persist.

[Mighty AC]

Five year olds can be very creative but they will need tools to put that creativity to use. Those tools include language skills and the ability to do basic arithmetic accurately and reasonably quickly without a calculator. If not, they should come with a label. Batteries Not Included.

When tested North American 5 and 6 year olds are very creative problem solvers, but 10 years later their scores are incredibly low. It seems that we are training them to simply follow instructions and think inside the box. Students are already being taught more advanced math and science skills much earlier than they were 20 years ago. That's not being reversed, we're now just educating our kids in a manner that gives them more individual attention and will no longer beat the innovation out of them.