Twisted Perceptions

I was quite amused by Don Tapscott’s depiction of today’s generation.   At first glance many educators would likely agree – would you?  Kids these days…  Easy to say, huh?  Great for the self esteem, too.  We are quickly counting them out and throwing in the towel of the future.

So what is behind the generational disconnect?  Why can’t we see their potential?  Could it be that we are asking them to do the same things in the same way that we did many years ago?  Do generals tell their soldiers to follow the same strategy and use the tools used a generation ago because they are not comfortable with the weapons of today?  We have an educational arsenal at our fingertips that we aren’t using.  What a waste of talent! 

We need to guide this generation to help them develop into what they are capable of becoming.  Our strategy needs to change…  Maybe it is time to look in the mirror and ask, “What can I do to reach them?”  This is our responsibility.  Thank goodness Don Tapscott seems to understand the need for reaching today’s generation. 

 

And as for the belief that kids today are bad (bullies and thieves) – I don’t buy it either…  In fact, some less than perfect behavior was occurring back in the day at even the best schools, including the elite junior high I call my alma mater.

 

 

 

 

 

Defining in the 21st Century

Vocabulary assignments should evolve with the times.

This past week marked the beginning of my last semester of graduate course assignments. One of the courses I’m taking is EDUC 295, Quantitative Methods II. The week’s assignments were somewhat typical – reading the online lecture, participating in asynchronous discussion, and reading online articles and textbook chapters. Next came an assignment that at first glance looked quite typical, but ended up as anything but traditional –

Our small group, consisting of 5 students (located geographically across the country and in the Middle East), was to come up with definitions for a list of 13 research terms. We were asked to define the terms in our own words. It sounded somewhat traditional, I thought, but with a collaborative flair. Once I looked at the terms at hand, however, I was surprised to find they didn’t sound familiar. Surely the text or article I just read would assist. Maybe the words wouldn’t be in bold, but certainly they were discussed. My first reaction was that I missed something – was my mind wandering while I read all about null hypothesis?

I quickly realized that no, the definitions weren’t provided for us in our readings or through Dr. Watkins’ lecture. Individually, we had to call upon a combination of research skills and web literacy — using multiple reliable sources to come up with a definition that made sense to us. Then came collaboration, which involved synthesizing our findings into one negotiated, concise, and clear definition. Not quite the “copy these definitions” task so often assigned.

What a strong foundation to start the semester! Assuming his role as “guide on the side”, Dr. Watkins had us work together within the content to accomplish the goal (becoming comfortable with the research terms). Sure, Dr. Watkins could have handed us his definitions to study, but how much would have copying and memorizing helped vs. the constructing and combining we accomplished? I’d love to see such assignments more in K-12 education. It is just one simple way to give more depth to content vocabulary.

Photo courtesy Visual Thesaurus

Reviving Curiosity

naturally curious

“Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly.”  Arnold Edinborough

Curiosity is healthy and should be fostered in our classrooms.  According to Sugata Mitra’s Hole in the Wall experiments, children, motivated by curiosity, will instruct themselves.  Two additional caveats are that the children have to be in groups and adult intervention must be lifted. 

I hoped to catch a glimpse of that same natural, refreshing curiosity as I worked with an 8^th grade English class just before our holiday break.  The students were working on a project and were asked to find 1940s music on the web to get a sense of the times and to use as a reference for their project.  Apparently, each student had a list of such period music from prior research, so they weren’t starting from scratch.  Surely students allowed to look for music on the web would respond with interest.

Instead, they seemed frustrated immediately and when they realized they would have to dig deep to find a particular audio clip, they gave up almost as instantly.  They wanted the formula, or better yet, the exact answer (go to website XYZ).  After searching for five minutes, a few students even told me their music was not out there.  “So you mean to tell me in 5 minutes, you’ve seen it all?” I questioned.  This reminded me of the commercial several years back about “finishing” the Internet. 

Disappointed by their lack of initiative and curiosity, my first reaction was to blame it on their lack of perseverance.  You know, kids just want to take the easy way out.  Next I wondered if they just didn’t know where to begin (I would gladly help them if this was the case), but they didn’t want tips on how to search; they wanted the url of the exact website. 

I began to wonder — Have we as educators, actually blocked natural curiosity?  Are we enabling students, and possibly perpetuating the problem?  Students are used to seeking the immediate and single correct answer.  How did they get this way?  They were trained – Yes, by us.  Think about the textbook questions often assigned – definitions, short answer, and multiple choice.  Quick responses – the kind that are either right or wrong. Many students have experienced this since their first years of school.  So when we suddenly ask them to go off and explore, it doesn’t feel natural and they are disoriented– at first.  We have actually squelched their curiosity. 

The next day began with my pep talk about searching for the music, including reminders that patience would be needed.  Holding strong to my refusal to give them any specific sites, I watched the results.  They came through.  Brandon was successful at finding his music first.  He began to share tips with the others.  It seemed that once the sharing began, the curiosity and confidence kicked in.  I was relieved, but it was way too close of a call…

How can we foster curiosity in classrooms?  Create an atmosphere in which the process is just as important as the final answer or product.  Let them have the freedom to discover the “answer” and understand there is more than one way to get there and sometimes more than one destination.  Lift adult intervention and allow students to share their discoveries with their peers, as Brandon did.  It may not seem natural at first, but don’t give up.  Don’t stifle curiosity, encourage it.

The Sky’s the Limit with Skype

 

connecting classrooms

We’re willing to pay thousands for computers, interactive whiteboards, the latest software, document cameras, and digital video cameras. Yet, how much are we willing to pay to connect classroom to classroom, school to school, district to district, state to state, or even country to country?  What is the value of being able to interview content experts or authors, conduct discussions or debates, or collaborate in real-time?

We did it today.  Once my friend and I each bought a $50 web cam and installed Skype, we connected from school to school with ease.  I was thoroughly impressed by the clarity of the audio and video feed.  All you need is free Skype software, Internet access, a microphone and speaker (the web cam is optional to send video along with the audio).  I just used the speaker from the laptop and the microphone from the web cam.

Imagine the possibilities!  Connecting and collaborating are key 21^st century skills.  It struck me as odd that this tool has not been marketed more often for education.  And I wondered where I’ve been.  How could I have missed this?  I really haven’t heard much more about Skype since I returned from the VSTE Conference in February.  Yet, as Alan November reminded us at the VASCD Conference, we need to teach students to connect with real people across the curriculum.

 So is $50 worth connecting classrooms of kids from around the world?  I’d say so!  In the 21^st century, we can’t afford not to…

Defining Dimensional Learning

In an increasingly flat world, learning has the potential to become more and more dimensional.  So, what exactly is dimensional learning?  There is really no brief way to describe it.  However, it can be easily contrasted to less desirable, flat learning.  Yes, that’s right–  In our flat world, dimensional learning is much more preferable than flat learning:

Flat learning is passive learning, whereas dimensional learning is active learning.  Flat learning is bound by time, location, and someone else’s ideas.  Dimensional learning offers opportunity, choice, and a different perspective. 

Whereas flat is status quo and stagnant, dimensional is innovative and ever-evolving.  Flat learning scratches the surface and can be easily reproduced. Dimensional learning is a one-of-a-kind and value added.  Flat learners merely consume content; dimensional learners produce and share it.  For learners to grow dimensionally, they need to have freedom to discover their potential, find their talents, synthesize, and apply.  Such learning is timeless. 

As we spot evidence of dimensional learning every day, we long to see it more frequently.  How can we capitalize on the atmosphere our flat world offers to give learning more dimension?  It is with this question that we start the conversation…