Posts Tagged ‘standards’

One-to-Anything: Being Technologically Faithful

August 29th, 2012 by Jim Yeager

The letters NEW on springsA friend of mine called this week to see what I thought about my new Nexus 7 tablet.  My quick answer? “I love it!”  When we started talking about the Nexus 7 in schools, I gave a little more thoughtful reply:  “Would I trade my 200 iPads for 500 Nexus 7s?  Yes, in a second.”

The problem with my enthusiasm is that I am always ready to trade my previous favorite for next year’s new and better idea. In fact, it may not even be a year before Apple makes their own 7-inch iPad.  (They won’t dare call it an Ipad will they?)   What if the next Kindle offers a student-friendly device at an even more attractive price?  School leaders who make hardware purchases based solely on the “coolness” of the hardware may experience a severe case of buyer’s remorse.

When our fickle nature concerning educational technology hardware shows itself, I call it being “technologically unfaithful.”  We have a relationship with an attractive device.  We swear loyalty to.  Yet our faithfulness lasts only until the next cool innovation turns our heads.

What does this mean for technology leaders—and those administrators who write the checks to buy the stuff those leaders recommend?  It means that we have to refocus on student skills rather than hardware.

The Common Core Standards will require students to do what they know.  The National Educational Technology Standards for Students place the emphasis squarely on skills.  The new assessments we are so concerned about will not be device specific, nor require students to utilize a collection of apps to prove competence.  The new core curriculum will ask students to collaborate, think critically, and be creative.  Such skills are well served by technology, but not dependent on specific tools.

My new suggestion for the schools I work with is to adopt a “one-to-anything” approach.  Utilizing Web 2.0 tools, cloud-based resources, and a varied selection of hardware solutions, we can help students learn and practice common technology skills on whatever hardware they encounter.  For example, at Two Rivers School District we have wired labs, laptop labs, mobile netbook labs, Chromebook labs, and iPad labs.  Next, we’ll add a Nexus 7 lab.

The point is to focus on student skills that will enable our students to create, evaluate, and collaborate, regardless of the hardware they encounter. Our goal is technology-skilled students who will be able to use technology tools to perform relevant tasks, not operate specific devices.  After all, the next greatest thing is right around the corner.

Keys to Implementing Common Core Standards

July 9th, 2012 by James Scoolis

The movement to Common Core Standards represents a change in how students are taught.  It promotes thinking and problem solving over memorization and item knowledge.  It provides students with skills and strategies that they can use throughout their lives.  It is good for kids.   As a school or district leader you have a lot of influence on how successful this implementation will be.  Here are five important things every administrator should know and do.

Establish a clear vision for instruction.

In Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform, Michael Fullan writes,

Working on vision means examining and reexamining, and making explicit to ourselves why we came into teaching. Asking, “What difference am I trying to make personally?” is a good place to start…I cannot stress enough that personal purpose and vision are the starting agenda. It comes from within. It gives meaning to work.

Communicate your vision consistently in writing and in person to anyone who will listen—teachers, parents and students.   Communicate to your school community that adopting Common Core Standards  is a change that will build on the school or district strengths.  Your commitment comes from a desire to capitalize on teacher strengths rather than repair teacher weaknesses.  Find and compliment teachers’ areas of expertise.  Implementing the Common Core will require long-term commitment.  Support teachers with professional development and collaboration time.  Make sure you actually do what you say you are going to do.

Do not get caught up in the details of each standard.

Keep your eye on the big picture.  I am reminded of a statement about standards that I heard when the term standards first became common place in education.

“We have upped our standards. Now up yours.”

Improving or even establishing standards by themselves will not improve instruction.  Improving instruction will improve instruction; use the Common Core Standards as guides and talking points, but focus on the process of teaching.

Focus instruction on process not content.

One of the keys to the common core standards is a recognition that we cannot teach all students everything they need to know.  We can teach them how to use problem solving tools to find out what they need to know.   Access to information—on the Internet for example—is a key component of this effort.  Technology is a tool, not an end in itself.  Students should also be encouraged  to solve real world problems and communicate their thinking in blogs and websites, collaborating with peers and colleagues.

Build capacity.

Leadership is strongest when it is given and shared.  The best organizations and schools grow leaders and, in doing so, develop people. One person cannot implement the new standards.  It will take the collective effort of everyone working together. Growing leaders is a conscious act. Developing and spreading leaders throughout the school is not an accident.

Leaders grow leaders by sharing decision-making, creating an environment in which trying new ideas is the norm, and by creating a culture of continuous improvement.  Rely on in-house expertise for professional development.  Support collaboration.  Start with the willing and support them with materials and professional development opportunities.  Set them up as mentors and observe how they do.  You will probably find that some teachers are natural at being teacher leaders and others are not.  Writer’s workshop guru Lucy Calkins writes,

In general, I tend to find that the people who push to the front of the line, saying, “Oh, I would definitely be wonderful in a leadership role. I know so much!” tend not to be well accepted by their peers, and those who instead say, “I don’t feel ready for such a role, I still have so much to learn,” will fare better.

 

Demonstrate your willingness to be a public learner.

Start a blog, be a collaborative partner, learn how to give a common assessment, learn through common reading of professional books.  Explain to parents in writing and in person what students are learning and how they are learning it.  When others see you taking risks and doing what they are being asked to do, they will be much more likely to do so as well.

What path innovation?”

October 12th, 2010 by Butch Owens

Are common standards and national tests the panacea for our nation’s woes?  Some seem to think so, but I’m not so sure.    Just last April I had the opportunity to hear Yong Zhao, author of Catching up or Leading the Way,  speak at our annual Leadership 3.0 Symposium.   He argues that while for years, politicians and the public have been looking for what is wrong with American education by constantly comparing the test scores of American students to those of students in such places as Russia, Japan, Singapore, and China, test scores don’t measure how well a country itself is doing. One striking example is how far America is ahead of all other countries in the number of patents issued; China, by contrast, is ahead in toy production.

The irony is that while we are busy trying to catch up with countries that have better test scores, those very countries are trying to emulate our educational system—or at least the one we used to have.  China, Korea, Japan and Singapore, for example, all have national initiatives to move their educational systems toward more local control, more autonomy, less emphasis on test scores determining a student’s or school’s future, and greater choices for the individual.  These are traditional characteristics of our system which have contributed to our success in turning out well rounded and innovative citizens.  And all of the latest literature argues that the ability to innovate is what we need in the future.

How would you judge an effective school?  Here are some top criteria on my list:

  • The number of  varied opportunities a student has beyond the core academics
  • The degree that students enjoy their school and feel they are important
  • Teacher behaviors that convey the expectation that all students can learn
  • Opportunities for students to progress at their own rate
  • Strong art and music programs and curricular activities that connect students to school

When you look back on your school days, is it the test scores that really motivated you to excel, or all of the opportunities you had to be an individual and find your own purpose and passion?

Take away those things that have enabled our system to produce the inventors and innovators of today and what will be left?  At best, a technically capable American engineer competing for the same job as an equally capable engineer from India who will do the job for $7500 a year.  A better alternative is an educational system that creates an American engineer with not only the technical skills but the imagination, innovation and creativity to design the new ideas that will need the $7500 a year engineer in India to help develop.

In an earlier post I wrote about what students really need to know and learn in school in this 21st century and ended with  the comment, “If it’s easy to test, it’s easy to digitize, and if it’s easy to digitize it can be done easily by a computer.”  What we really want are well rounded, innovative students prepared for a lifetime as productive, innovative citizens.  Will common standards and national tests ensure that outcome?

As you ponder that question, listen to Harry Chapin’s “Flowers Are Red“; how common do we want our standards to be?