I believe that we have a unique opportunity at this moment when districts all over the country are looking at new curriculum and assessments.
We can either see this as an opportunity to innovate and improve learning…or we can just go on with business as usual.
I recently gave a short talk about this at SXSWedu. Here it is. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts.
Today I had the opportunity to talk about differentiating instruction with a group of educators using mobile technology as a part of ISTE’s Verizon Innovative Learning Schools virtual conference.
At the end of the end of this session (with no time left to respond), this great question came up:
“How do you all suggest differentiating when it comes to kids who don’t work well with technology in a technology based class?”
[wait time...in case you want to think or write about this yourself before I start thinking aloud ;]
Credit: rosipaw
Differentiation is all about accommodating different learning styles and empowering learners to guide their own learning. If some learners don’t work well with technology, don’t force it. Instead, help them find strategies that work for them.
(Side note: I think it’s probably worth some time to look with these learners at why they “don’t work well with technology.” Is it certain kinds of technology? Is it certain kinds of content or activities? Are there other factors in play? Do they use Facebook or play WOW? Saying that someone “doesn’t work well with technology” seems a little like saying someone doesn’t work well with paper. I’m not discounting the possibility, but just saying that it merits some exploration. It’s a big world, technology is.)
Depending on the age of the student, I would put equal onus on him/her to puzzle through this. Some exploration about how we learn and taking responsibility for our learning is a good thing for all of us.
Then, if you end up at the same place, accommodate! There are a million ways to learn that aren’t technology-based. When I taught, we had very little access to technology, and so I differentiated in many other ways that you’ve probably all used. I made up independent learning project folders that students could choose from and work on at their own pace. I encouraged individual reading and writing on topics of choice. I tried to avoid a lot of whole class work and to give students flexibility in pacing and had them track and monitor their own progress.
What would I do differently now (but with no technology)? More language support. More use of multiple resources. Less use of textbooks. (There are many non-technology options: magazines, trade books, video, mentors, hands on experiences, etc.) And always more acknowledgement of where students are starting from and working from there, rather than trying to fit a learner into a hole he/she just doesn’t fit in.
And of course, I’d probably try to find some alluring, atypical technology treats to dangle in front of these learners as well. 
How about you? What ideas do you have?
This weekend I was a part of a panel presentation at NSBA called “New Opportunities Presented by the Common Core: Deeper Learning, Open Educational Resources, and Increases in Long-Term Student Success.”
Among the main points of this presentation were:
This doesn't tell you much about what students really know.
Are we preparing students for this type of assessment?
I feel a certain amount of sadness that most educators seem to view Common Core as yet another worthless series of hoops they are being asked to jump through, rather than as an opportunity to do the kind of deeper learning that many of us feel is missing from classrooms.
One of my concerns about Common Core is that many districts seem to be implementing the new standards very quickly, possibly without considering all the opportunities and ramifications. New instructional materials are being purchased hastily. Professional development and planning is inadequate.
In the audience of school board members I spoke with, approximately two-thirds said that they have already implemented or are well into implementing these new standards. Many are doing this without being aware of the forthcoming new assessments and without thorough thought about related curriculum and instructional materials issues.
For example, at a time in which many districts are making large curriculum purchases, might it be a good time to think about digital content? New ways to involve teachers? Etc.
As we discussed these issues, there was a fair amount of discontent in the audience about the current state of assessment. Teachers are not afforded the professionalism to do what they know is best for students. Charter schools are often lauded without being held to the same standards. Deeper learning is not happening in many classrooms. Many new mandates are unfunded. There was plenty of unhappiness and blame to go around.
But perhaps it is time to put aside the blame and start doing some things that we all believe are best for our students.
This point in time might be the best opportunity in decades to look deeply at standards, curriculum, assessment, and the professional role of our teachers — it is simply too important to rush through or not do to the best of our abilities.
I have been excited about the potential of the Common Core standards. Fewer standards, deeper coverage, more higher order thinking skills and process orientation, better assessment — it all sounds like an improvement.
Yet, as I’ve seen the beginning of Common Core implementations, they don’t seem to be living up to that potential. And the outcry from teachers about the problems with Common Core have surprised me. They largely seem to view it as the millionth change imposed on them by the powers that be. “This too shall pass” is what I’m hearing. This passive resistance has surprised me because I saw Common Core as a part of the solution to the curriculum and assessment problems that everyone sees.
I talked to someone from an organization involved in Common Core who said “If a school is implementing Common Core, and it doesn’t look radically different from how it looked before, they aren’t really implementing the Common Core.” Again, what I see so far isn’t radically different curriculum or classroom practice.
So why the disconnect?
I think the answer lies in part in how schools are implementing the standards, which looks something like this:
I think that process misses the spirit of the Common Core.
In business, we do something called zero-based budgeting. The idea is that instead taking last year’s plan and adding a bunch of incremental stuff to it, you start from zero. This forces a hard look at every decision and its relation to the overall mission.
What if a curriculum were designed from scratch using Common Core? I venture to say it would look quite a bit different than one taken from previous years with cross-walk items added. Probably a lot more like what those of us who were hopeful about Common Core were thinking. And what a wonderful opportunity for some collaborative professional exploration around standards unpacking and curriculum mapping.
Anyone doing this?
FreeReading is a great site for all kinds of early literacy resources. One of my favorite parts is the decodable reading passages.
Unfortunately, to date, these have only been available as pdf files. Pdfs are good for printing, but not much good for other uses, like putting on mobile devices, interacting with, making movies, etc.
The great thing about open-licensed content, though, is that you can remix it.
So this summer and fall, I’ve been working on taking these pdf files and remixing them into PowerPoint presentations, separate jpg art files, and interactive VoiceThreads (with audio and the ability for students to record their own audio).
original pdf:
ppt:
voicethread:
All of these resources for almost 80 stories are available on Curriki, along with ideas for using them.
Thanks to FreeReading, the Hewlett Foundation, and Bon Education for inspiring the idea to do this and to Steve O. and David Wiley and his Educational Productivity Pledge (see P.S.) for the impetus to move ahead with it.
There is a lot of discussion about the new Common Core standards right now.
States are cross-walking their current standards to the Common Core and adding their 15%. Districts are frantically trying to figure out how they’ll implement the new standards. Pundits are either hailing the new standards or criticizing them.
I’m not entirely convinced that these new standards are better than many states’ standards, but I think there potentially are benefits to be gained from having a more nationally consistent approach to standards and assessment. More importantly, I think the intent behind the Common Core — namely to reflect deeper learning and more emphasis on real-world skills (and presumably less emphasis on teaching to ridiculous bubble tests) — is good.
Of course, the real test (no pun intended) will come when the new assessments come out in a couple years. If these assessments meet their goal of assessing deeper, more meaningful, real-world skills, then they, along with the Common Core, will be a strong impetus toward meaningful change in education. Students will simply have to learn in different ways to meet the challenge.
In the meantime, most groups are addressing the Common Core, not by looking at their intent and implementing meaningful reform, but by cross-walking their standards and moving existing instruction units from grade x to grade y to fill the holes.
Surely, this is not what the advocates of the Common Core had in mind. Equally certainly, it is not what our students (or teachers) deserve.
The Common Core was not a plan to do the same thing in a different sequence. It is a call to look at learning in a different ways. It demands new methods, new materials, new ways of thinking about learning.
And if the new assessments shape up as planned, and we haven’t taken the opportunity to embrace some new approaches, we’ll be in for even more vitriolic accountability discussions.
There is a lot of dissatisfaction about the current state of public education in America and as a result, calls for reform. Many are unhappy with the amount and nature of testing and the general direction of industrial era curricula. Others have concerns about teacher effectiveness. Nearly everyone agrees that our kids are getting short-changed.
But what is being done about it? The feds seem to be steamrolling ahead with the same old same old. States are in crisis. Districts are busy covering their proverbial asses. Some of the best teachers are leaving education. Proponents of ed reform seem to be mostly engaged in hand wringing and name calling.
Charter schools and other fringe initiatives seem to have little chance to make a difference for the huge number of students moving through the K-12 system.
One opportunity for real reform is in online learning. There is broad consensus that online learning is going to be a dominant part of the educational experience for many students in the future. Most states have significant online learning programs. Online learning helps address teacher shortages, which are projected to worsen in the next few years. Blended learning is being written into everyone’s plans. Schools are finding more flexible options necessary, and students are demanding it.
But online learning can take many appearances. It can be a transformative learning environment with an emphasis on deeper learning, collaboration, and 21st century thinking skills. Or it can be the same industrial model of content cramming coverage, dull textbooks, and (online) lecturing heads.
These choices are being made right now as online course structure is being designed.
Equally important are the decisions about what role public K-12 schools are going to have in online education. Will they embrace the challenge to develop and facilitate enriching courses or will they cede that role to commercial providers in the way that has been done with textbooks?
To choose the latter path will mean lots of money being directed toward traditional, proprietary content that supports the status quo.
To choose the former will require plenty of creativity, energy, professional development, support, and more. But it just could be the path out of the current morass we’re in.
There is a flood of stimulus money coming into education this summer, including a substantial amount for ed tech. This is one-time funding that is to be spent quickly, but in a way that yields significant, long-term gains.
I can think of no better way to use such funding than to develop high-quality, open-licensed curriculum resources that would be available for free use worldwide. Teachers and students in one-to-one laptop programs across the country could benefit from this content.
A more detailed concept paper of this idea is available here.
If you are with a school district that would be interested in a collaboration on such a project, please contact me at karen at k12opened dot com.
With more and more great educational podcasts out there, it’s getting hard to choose which to use in the classroom. One thing that sets some podcasts apart are those that provide teacher’s guide and lesson plans for the classroom.
Here are some podcasts with teacher’s resources that you might want to check out:
The Smithsonian’s Lemelson Center for the Study of Invention and Innovation – Podcast Activity Guide (More Smithsonian podcasts are also available here.)
NPR’s Science Friday podcast – Kids’ Connection site with a wealth of resources including curriculum activities and standards correlation
Some podcasts, like the ESL Podcast, have more extensive learning guides that are available at additional cost. A sample is included here.
If you have lesson plans for using podcasts in the classroom that you’d like to share, let us know. We hope to post a collection of these in the future.
[Image: Reprinted with permission from ClipArt.com; copyrighted property of JupiterImages used with permission under license.]
Creative Commons today announced the formation of a new division, ccLearn. This group is “dedicated to realizing the full potential of the Internet to support open learning and open educational resources” and has a stated mission “to minimize barriers to sharing and reuse of educational materials — legal barriers, technical barriers, and social barriers.”
That’s very exciting. If you’ve heard me speaklately, you know that I am a very big advocate of the Open Educational Resources (OER) movement. I believe that this movement coupled with massive collaboration has the opportunity to reshape education by providing valuable resources needed to differentiate instruction.
Stay tuned for more info on this as it develops.
