(This post is a response to viewing the first 20 minutes of the iTunesU video MEC 01: Marco Torres - Donald Henderson presentations.)Torres and Henderson began their presentation by stating, rather blithely, that students know how to get all the information they need. Thus, my job, as a teacher, is to teach them what to do with the information they've gotten.
While I don't disagree with their second assertion, certainly can't agree with their first, at least not completely.
My sophomores have spent the last couple of weeks creating annotated bibliographies on their topic of choice; the only requirement was that it has to be related to technology in some way. My seniors have spent the last couple of weeks creating annotated bibliographies on a specific incident, person, or institution that illustrates one of the themes we're exploring in our study of Frankenstein.
I can't tell you how many of even my top students struggled to find four or five credible online sources. I was blown away by how little they know -- even as seniors -- about narrowing a search, selecting key words, using a search engine, etc. Some of them were honestly frustrated and asked for just enough help to get them moving in the right direction; others shut down completely, expecting me to come rescue them by finding all their sources and providing them with the links.
Obviously, I'm going to spend my upcoming summer developing a unit on research skills, most likely based on a cooperative learning model so that those "team" skills and experiences come into play. But for now, I'm very worried about these students getting jobs with companies that want thinkers; most of my students are happy to be "dabblers" and "tinkerers."
Doing the same thing, just differently vs. Doing different things
While the "historic" progression of "Read pgs. 1-10 and answer ?s 1-4" was funny, it didn't completely match my experience either as a student or a teacher. I remember my 7th grade math teacher, Mr. Petersen. He didn't just have transparency sheets -- he had ROLLS! And that man could crank out problem after problem after problem as we watched. If we didn't understand, he'd roll to a blank section and start over OR re-work the existing program after erasing the confusing portion.
I don't recall much about his teaching methods, but I DO recall 7th grade as the year I fell head-over-heals in love with math, especially percentages. While the overhead projector did allow Mr. Petersen to do "the same things" he had always done, he was also able to do different things, like rewind to show us prior problems.
The SMART Board would be a great example of a tool that allows the teacher to do different things. most traditional math instruction tools "cover the tracks" of the process. So if a student gets stuck at, say, step 5, by the time he raises his hand, step 5 has been buried by steps 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. The ability to work a step, duplicate the slide, work the next step, duplicate the slide, etc. so that every single step is PRESERVED and can be retraced has been a HUGE advantage. Yes, the teacher is still working math problems. But having 10 individual slides to show each of the 10 steps is, I think, an example of doing different things than were possible in the past.
Personally, I've set up a Ning for each of my classes: AP English Lit & Comp, English II, and English IV. I do the same things differently to some degree: I post assignments (like "Read pgs. 1-10 and answer ?s 1-4") and handouts and reminders.
But I also do different things. I might have the students "answer ?s 1-4" on our online discussion forum and then respond to several of their classmates with higher-level questions that lead into a face-to-face discussion later that week. I might have the students respond to what they considered the core issue of that discussion as a blog post. I might set up a poll where students evaluate the various behaviors displayed during the discussion and then report back, face-to-face, on the improvements they voted for their next discussion.
The two factors I use when deciding whether to use our Ning or a more "traditional" approach (a) the value of asynchronicity and (b) the perception of anonymity.
If I want to keep a discussion going over several days, giving my introverts time to ponder and respond, then I lean toward using the Ning. Many of my "mullers" are very expressive when given enough time and space.
Likewise, if I want to collect opinions but wish to avoid the peer pressure of "okay, raise your hand if . . . ", I find that students like the "cover" that our Ning provides. Yes, everyone ends up knowing what they thought or how they voted, but it's not as in-your-face as face-to-face.
"If we teach today the same way as yesterday, we rob our children of tomorrow."
Really?!? I mean, as an English teacher, I love the balance and irony of this statement. But is it true? After reading the "Natives and immigrants revisited" materials, I'm finding myself wary of absolute statements.
If I turn off my SMART Board and pick up an Expo marker, I suspect the sun will still rise tomomorrow!