Difficult Students are MY Responsibility

I'm reading a book about math differentiation and it talks about the negative attitudes many students have towards math. WHY? What did math do to these children? NOTHING, of course! So where does it stem from? Is it that math is naturally frustrating, or maybe it is that teachers have frustrated students through their perspective on math or their inability to effectively teach it.

The deepest question from all this is, does any of that matter? Nope, none of it does. I have no control over any of the above, nor does any other teacher. In fact, to justify why students don't learn math, or any other subject where it inserted in math's place, is to scapegoat the failures in our classroom to the others before us (oh how we've become so like the politicians in Washington.) Of course, the failures of others does make the tasks in our own classrooms that much harder, but when did EDUCATORS decide that they weren't going to educate? That is our job! However, many teachers have determined that if they can't simply speak it and a student learn it, it must be because of the student's home life, previous teacher, or their own lack of effort. Accountability, professionalism, and commitment are lacking in the field of education. What are your thoughts?

The Worth of Technology

I'm reading a forum discussion in Classroom 2.0 and find myself questioning the value of a SMART Board. What did it change in the classroom? Nothing, really. Sure, it does have some redeeming qualities. For example, I LOVE that I can write on the board without having to always erase to make more room on the board. The fact that I can hit the board just the same as I can click a mouse is also nice. Despite such niceties, the smart board is just a convenient, more efficient way to do all the things you could do with a computer and projector.

What is it really worth, though? A projector is easily purchased between $200-800 and then connected to a computer. A SMART Board and it's software are easily several thousand dollars. At that price, one must consider its real value. If teachers are worried about having to be at the computer rather than the front of the room, a bluetooth slate easily fixes that for an extra $200.

The real question behind a SMART Board's worth is, what advantages does it offer students? The idea with performance standards is to have students perform, but how does the SMART Board really make this happen? One post in the Classroom 2.0 forum wrote:

" I view the smartboards as a "look at me, the teacher. I'm up in front, you're in your seat listening" type of technology, while the projectors and laptops change the dynamic of the classroom in a more powerful way. Now what I really want is a wireless projector!

ps--yes, I know the kids can go up and interact with the board, but in the last century the kids could go up and do a problem on the board too."

And there you have it. The SMART Board is a neater, more efficient white board. How is it to be used beyond a traditional manner? Aren't we simply doing old things in new ways?

Web 2.0

Lately, I've been searching and searching for valuable tech resources to use within the classroom. What has impressed me the most are the websites that offer social networking, which is often referred to as Web 2.0. Despite the sometimes slow internet at our school I believe that this is what needs to be used as a regular part of instruction so that students are more engaged/motivated.

Unlike any other time before, the internet has made it possible so that students can easily create projects and then make it viewable for all their peers to comment on. It makes collaboration easier as well. Perhaps the most valuable aspect of using online resources is that it is time saving. Students can log on to voicethread.com, bighugelabs.com, or their own google site to create projects quickly and as effectively as they would with a piece of cardboard and crayons.

What do you think? Is this the next big thing in education or simply a neat idea that might not be very effective? What have you found in your searches?

Who has the time? A multitasker...

I find myself multitasking a lot. You do to. I mean, we are always washing our hair and thinking about our day. In the classroom, teachers have to be a super-multitasking fool. From the time students walk in, to the time they walk out, a teacher is responsible for the management of billions of items. Consider all the behavior, assignments, student ability levels, teaching strategies and assessment a teacher has to keep track of. The ability to multitask is a must have skill. And the biggest issue is that this list doesn't even begin to consider all the extra stuff that comes from administrators.

Managing a classroom is the most important aspect of teaching. Teaching is secondary to the management of all the things listed above. You can know the content, deliver it perfectly, but if the classroom is mismanaged, all is lost. You have to ask, considering all that must be done in the classroom, and the demands that MUST be met, who has the time? The only answer is that you have to multitask to get everything done. With the expectations placed on teachers, the idea of simply teaching is a ridiculous notion.

The question of the day, maybe of our teaching careers, is how do you effectively manage the classroom without losing track of all the goals you have?

From a Student's Mouth.

How often do educators excuse themselves from breaking outside the box with their pedagogy? This is a pretty decently spelled out reason why we need to teach differently than our teachers did.

Writing about his generation, a high school student writes

"In contrast to the consumer generations before us, my generation is growing up a generation of producers. We are the YouTube/LiveJournal/Facebook generation. Mass media which has long been a one-to-many institution, allowing only the big and wealthy to transmit their messages, is turning into the many-to-many world of the internet and cheep consumer devices.

Whether it is posting videos taken on cell phones to youtube or photos taken on pocket-sized cameras to facebook. our generation expects to be able to broadcast their messages. We expect to be able to create and to share.

And, it is this expectation that makes our generation different. We are no longer content to be consumers of information. That is, we are no longer content to consume an education. To connect with today’s students, you must not only teach them, but encourage them to teach back."

For me, 25% of my teachers were probably pretty progressive, during the mid and late nineties. By progressive, I mean they weren't the traditional "preacher teacher." These 25% used the available technologies that appealed to us students and made learning relevant. But much of that 25% was in Lehigh Acres, Florida, not Pierce County, Georgia where I finished up my k-12 career. Unfortunately, most everything I did at Pierce County High School was done in a traditional manner except in Mr. Baker's class. That dude put us to work making videos, essays, power points, and took us on field trips that excited us. Any other teacher, if they used it at all, only used technolgoy because the curriculum forced them to. Mr. Baker used technology as an asset.

Even in college the percentage of teachers that used available technologies in the classroom only jumped to maybe 50-60%. I'd say that jump is somewhat indicative of a transitional period in technology, however. Maybe they weren't familiar enough, or hadn't even heard of some their technological resources. If that 50-60% was still the amount today, then the professors. I'm not a perfect practitioner of these things I've mentioned, but we should not be lagging. At this point Facebook, You Tube, My Space, Blogging, and Chatting all have been around for at least 5-6 years. Many educators use these technological instruments and aren't afraid of them. The problem is, we haven't realized their power in the classroom. Maybe now we'll have to. Apparently, some students expect us to, and those that don't would probably appreciate it.

For the full post that was quoted click: Innovate or Die

Education

I heard a guy on talk show radio, a teacher, call in and explain that all the free and reduced lunch children were not really in need of the free food. He explained that since students didn't take advantage of free lunch during the summer, and the parents could get by during these summer months, there was no real need to provide for students during the school year.


This seems logical to me. The alternative has always seemed logical to me, too. Why not provide school lunch at no charge? After all, some students don't get fed well, some parents can't afford to feed their children, and a school might be a child's best resource. So what to think? Do students need free and reduced lunch?