Practical Theory

A former student of mine was doing a research paper for an education class she's taking, and one of the prompts that she had to deal with was the following statement:

"Testing is the best way to measure a students potential to succeed"

So she asked me what I thought about the quote... here's what I wrote back.

Tests don't come close to measuring potential. At best, a test measures what a student can repeat back, what content a student can demonstrate at a moment in time. But a test often doesn't even measure knowledge or ability because it is too often based on the assumptions and biases of the test-makers.

But the problem is even deeper than that. With a test there is a right answer... a finality. Cram for the test, take the test, forget the test, and once the answers are right, what more is there to do? But in project-based learning, the student must find their own entry into the material, their own path and their own end. There's no such thing as a 100% on a project, because there is always room for revision, reflection. There's always another question that research creates. Project-based learning can measure the snapshot of what skills and content a student has mastered in a moment better than a test, but more importantly, project-based learning allows students to see learning not as something with an end, but an ever-expanding journey.

What do you all think about the statement?

There has been a lot of talk about the New York Times story about schools like Scarsdale High considering not giving AP classes anymore. It's something I've thought about a lot. SLA is not a test-based school, but it is a college prep school and many parents have asked if we will have AP classes for the kids when they get to junior and senior years. It's something that we've had to consider really carefully.

We don't have the luxury of being Scarsdale High School or Fieldston (which has done away with AP classes) in that we don't have a long history with college, and we have to quickly establish our reputation, and AP scores are a quick and easy way to impress colleges.

But it's an issue that troubles me, because I do feel that AP courses aren't exactly in line with our mission. I think that Fieldston's experience would ring true at SLA:

Fieldston tried to make new courses as rigorous and quite sweeping. A.P. European history became European Intellectual History. Students lost some of the “march to the sea” comprehensiveness of a survey course, but spent more time wrestling with the ideas of Luther, Montesquieu, Marx and Freud.

Given the amazing teachers we have at SLA, would I want them necessarily teaching to an AP science class? Is there a reason to teach AP Biology instead of a course in bioengineering? Is there a reason to teach AP Physics instead of a class in astro-physics? And given four years of benchmark projects, a senior year of capstone projects, does it make sense that the last class a student might take at SLA would end in a high-stakes test?

At Beacon, our senior year English courses were all teacher electives. We taught the courses we were most passionate about. My class -- Connection and Disconnection in the 20th Century -- was as rigorous as any AP course, but I could create meaning with students, we could spend our time on reading and writing, not on test prep. For me, that was more meaningful, and from the feedback I got from our students when they came home from college, I don't think that course shortchanged them at all. At Beacon, we did give APs, we chose to give them in the sciences, math and foreign languages, although we did keep debating the issue every year.

I don't have a right answer here. I hate that so much of high school is seen as a sorting mechanism for colleges, but I know that it's a big part of what we do. In a perfect world, if we created communities where kids love to learn and learn the skills needed to take part in the world ahead of us, the colleges would come calling. We don't live in that world. We have to market our students, we have to market our schools. AP courses are currently part of that.

We have to, in the end, find a balance. At SLA, we'll have some science and math APs. We'll balance that with the capstone class. We'll balance that with interesting science electives that allow our faculty to share their passion for science with our students. We'll balance that with dual enrollment at Drexel and other schools. And we'll balance that with a full-court press with the colleges (starting with Wellesey coming to visit us tomorrow) so that by the time our first class are seniors, the colleges have all heard of SLA.

But yes, the kids will have AP class options, and I'm sure that many kids will take the APs, not because it's the course that's the most interesting to them, but because it's the course that looks best on a college application. And I can't even argue with that decision. It's why we'll offer the classes.

And I wish I felt better about that.

I've been thinking a lot about the recent spate of school shootings. I've been thinking about them on a lot of levels. I think, as most of us in education do, about the recent shooting at the Amish school and I do think about how we can ensure that the kids of SLA stay safe from the outside world. As a teacher, a principal, a parent... my biggest fears about our kids are not what they might do to each other but what the world might do to them.

But then I also worry a lot about stories like this one -- about how PA lawmakers are taking up the issue of safety in schools, and this one about Radnor High closing for a day and then reopening under lockdown because of a note scrawled on the bathroom wall, and I worry about the cure being worse than the disease.

I'll fess up to this right now -- I don't know how to keep children completely safe. I worry every time a car comes down our street when Jakob and I are in front of the house, because you never know when someone could lose control of their car and fly up onto the sidewalk. I triple-check the locks on our doors at night, because, well, you never know. And the thought of my own children navigating their teenage years is something that is rather terrifying at this point in time.

But Jakob and I still walk on the street. And we even still take bike rides together. I try to mitigate the risks we take together while still letting him grow up without too much fear.

I'd like to think we can create cultures in our schools that do the same.

I believe deeply in keeping our schools safe. There was one moment in time last year where we weren't sure that SLA was going to get the budget for a full-time school safety officer, and you can be sure that I worked with several folks to ensure that we would.

But I also don't believe in making kids feel like they are walking into prison when they are walking into a school.

I think we need to look at the issue of school safety from several points of view -- how do we keep outsiders out, and how do we create safe cultures within. Outsiders out are easy -- every school should have someone, a safety officer, at the door, making sure visitors sign in, have a reason to be there, etc... is it failsafe? No... but it's a good start, and it does just make sense. I don't think there's anyone who would argue with that one. Some cameras from the Main Office to the front door and a buzzer system for after-hours? Done and done. Absolutely.

The harder question is -- how do we create safe, nurturing environments within schools that that the tragedies of Columbine and other school shootings don't happen as frequently as they seem to be happening these days?

First -- let's remember that the vast majority of our schools are safe. I think it's important to remember that. A quick google search turned up the Youth Violence Project down at the University of Virginia School of Ed, and their data reveals a drop in the total number of shootings over the past decade and a total number of U.S. school homicides in 2005 of 13. Considering the millions upon millions of students in U.S. schools, we're doing o.k. overall.

But I do think that the closing paragraphs of a paper entitled Myths About Youth Violence and School Safety found at the YVP web site bears repeating:

Schools are not dangerous places. The perception that schools are dangerous is a misperception
generated by a series of extreme, high profile cases that are not representative of most schools. In
fact, very few serious violent crimes take place at school. From the standpoint of violent crime,
students are safer at school than at home. Moreover, schools have become even safer during the
past decade, such that the serious violent crime rate at school is less than half what it was in
1994. Although there are relatively few serious violent crimes at school, there are many less
serious crimes and there are numerous discipline problems—primarily disorderly conduct and
fights that do not result in injuries—that demand attention. Bullying, teasing, and harassment are
common problems that deserve attention in every school, too.

Schools are relatively safe, but they are not crime-free and we have an obligation to keep them as
safe as possible. To keep schools safe, it is important to recognize what kinds of crimes are likely
or unlikely to occur, and to base decisions on facts rather than fears.

So let's look at what we do see, and what we can do. National data suggests too many students (11% of boys and 6% of girls) were threatened with a weapon at school, even though there are only 6 cases for every 100,000 students of serious violent crime in schools. And bullying and gang activity rates remain too high. What can we do?

It goes back, for me, to the most important value we need to hold onto in our schools -- we teach children before we teach subjects. Bag checks and metal detectors don't stop bullying, they increase it by creating a culture of fear from the moment kids walk into the building. We need smaller classes. We need teacher-student interaction beyond the academic classroom and into advisories. We need teachers and principals who listen to what kids say, who want to educate the whole child, who reach out to get parents involved, and who make sure kids feel valued and listened to.

Will we ever stop bullying completely? No. Never. Kids come to use with all sorts of issues in their home life, and they also come to us as kids, not adults, so some problems will just come with the territory. But we can make those kids who feel left out of the process feel included. We can give kids something positive in their life. We can make sure that no one feels invisible in our schools. And we can let those kids who may otherwise become the bullies know that a) we still care about them, but b) our schools are places where all kids must feel safe, and no student or teacher has the right to take that away from someone else.

Let's make sure we don't overreact to the tragedies we've seen lately. Let's make sure that whatever reactions we have as a society to the recent spate of school violence do not damage the first mission of all our schools -- to create spaces where students can learn about themselves and the world.

The safest communities are the ones where all members feel valued and safe. Let's keep working proactively to find a way to give that gift to our children.

O.k. -- my apologies to any Dallas-area readers out there, but...

GOOOOOOOOOOO EAAAAAAAAAAAAAGLES!!!!

Beating Dallas is always fun, but beating T.O. is even sweeter.

And in a truly fun note, Jakob is a football and Eagles fan. He didn't want to take his nap this afternoon until I said, "Jakob, when you wake up, we can watch football!" He ran into his room and dove under the covers.

Got to love it.

Marcie Hull and I are presenting at the Montgomery County Community College Technology and Learning Conference. Marc Prensky is the keynote speaker.

Here are my notes from the presentation... with very little commentary, just the stuff that I was hearing and seeing as he spoke... Marcie and I were both really struck by how much his points were echoed in what we're trying to do at SLA.

"Engage Me or Enrage Me" --> Educating Today's Digital Native Learners

Twitch Speed --> the speeed at which our fingers move on a controller

"Are we generating engagement?"
Are we doing New Things in New Ways
Are we fostering mutual respect?

What's So Different about the 21st Century?
The need to understand and deal with change...
---> our expectations have changed because of digital technology.
---> "Nothing Ever Wears Out." Our tools change before our old tools wear out.

How much change is coming... it doesn't end. The change, the speed, the new tools... and no one -- not educators or anyone else -- really understands what it means.

Maybe our kids know. Why? They live it.

Ender's Game -- is the game the test? Is the game the reality?

Educators are having problems because:
1) The World is Changing
2) Our Students Are Changing
3) Engagement is Changing
4) Tools are Changing
5) Education is Changing

What do our students want?
-- it was our list.

We can no longer give kids content, we have to ask.

We must co-create knowledge.

We have to experiment and invent. We have to change. We have to adapt.

How do we combine random access / hyper-text with logical thinking?

Linear Processing v. Parrallel Processing

Stand-Alone v. Connected

We have a Digital Immigrant Accent
- Printing Out Our Emails
- Not Going to the Internet First for info
- Needing a Printed Copy for Editing
- Not Using or liking IM
- Thinking "Real Life" happens only off-line
- Assuming teaching equals learning
- Knowing DOS

We must Generate Engagement
-- If a learner is motivated, there's no stopping him." -- Will Wright
"Learning comes from passion, not discipline." -- N. Negroponte

Learning Feels like Play when you have engagement.

Engagement is more important than Content because content will change.

Invent New Tools to Solve Problems

We are all learners
We are all teachers

Today's Games --
They are complex --> 8-100 hours.
A complex game take the same amount of time as a course (30-100 hours)

What are the lessons of the video games:
- Goals (be a hero) -- if you learn skills, they are in service of the goal.
- Decision Making
- Adaptivity
- Iteration
- Cooperation and Competition

We should use simulations because learning to DO is good, especially when combined with the language of why.

Marcie Hull, SLA's Technology Coordinator, and I submitted a proposal for the 2007 NECC conference. Since Tom has posted his, I figured I'd post ours.

Starting From Scratch -- Building School 2.0

At the 2006 NECC, the Department of Education announced their School 2.0 vision. But what does School 2.0 really mean and how do we create schools that can realize that vision? What is the link between pedagogy and technology -- how do we build schools with a pedagogical framework that allows all stakeholders -- students, parents, teachers and administrators -- to harness the power of computer and communication technologies to change the way we think about schools and create a transformative experience for all involved?

The Science Leadership Academy is a new high school that opened in September 2006 in partnership with The Franklin Institute and the School District of Philadelphia. Opening with a powerful School 2.0 vision and a 1:1 laptop ratio, SLA looks to redefine the learning spaces and tools our students, parents and teachers use. The school uses open source tools such as Moodle, Elgg, Gallery and homegrown school information system software to create a robust school-web portal to support the learning that happens in classrooms. Our goal is to create 24/7/365 learning environment for all members of the community.

The workshop will examine both the planning process and first-year implementation of the Science Leadership Academy as a launching point for a discussion of School 2.0 school design. Participants will look at issues of technology infrastructure, staff development, curriculum design in a 1:1 environment, home and school interaction in School 2.0 and the pedagogical framework necessary to realize School 2.0.

We have to complete a School Improvement Plan for the city and state by October 13th. It's a little tough because it is not a document that is meant for new schools, but we thought we'd take it as an opportunity to reexamine our plans through the lens of the SIP document.

So we started looking at all of the things we've been building over the past year of planning and now into implementation. I'm not sure this list will not mean as much outside of our staff model, but with every thing we've listed, there are hours of planning that have gone into it. But for us, listing everything up on this board and talking about how each of these ideas / features / concepts will enhance learning and further the SLA vision was a really amazing moment.

There was the moment when we stepped away from the whiteboard and really were amazed at what we've done so far.

Then, the moment passed, and we realized how much more work we have to do.

Broad SLA Features
Core values
Project-based inquiry & rubric-based assessment
Integrated curricula & EQs
Weekly PD
Community & national PD
Technology infusion (laptops & Moodle)
Understanding By Design curriculum design
Constructivism
Differentiated learning and co-teaching
Advisory program
Partnership w/ TFI & Drexel
Parental involvement & parent portal
Benchmark projects


Course-specific Features
Partnership w/ Horticultural (Science)
Partnership w/ Moore (Literacy)
Partnership w/ MIT (scratch)
Electives (interdisciplinary/core values)
Summer reading (Literacy)
Student-directed research
Capstone planning
Author chats
Guest-speaker program
21st Cent. Library & online database
Digital portfolio


Miscellaneous
After-school activities
Summer Institute
Reduced teacher load
Lower teacher/student ratio
Small school
CSAP
Distributed leadership

Wes Fryer and I happened to accidentally Skype each other today. (How many edu-techs does it take to learn Skype? Don't ask...) But we took the opportunity to catch up and touch base, which is always fun. I was in the middle of banging my head against an Elgg install that was befuddling my sys admin and me. (It's working now.)

But as we try to put together some of the pieces of the Moodle / Gallery / Elgg / SquirrelMail / etc... puzzle, a few things questions percolate

1) How can we create APIs for these amazing edu-web apps so that they talk to each other more easily -- to wit, why can't Moodle and Elgg share a user table? (and if anyone has done this, please let me know before we attempt to reinvent the wheel.)

2) Can Open Academic please hurry?

3) We're starting to build amazing course-management / student publisher tools, but where are the open source tools that allow schools to run more efficiently and how can they be integrated with the CMS / Content tools?

Nine years ago, I started writing the code for Beacon's Web Portal. It was long on school community software and short on CMS stuff. But as it evolved, it allowed teachers to post homeworks, write web-based narrative reports, track student progress across multiple classes over a period of time, create lesson-plan databases, post course-descriptions and a few other nifty tools aside. Now, I'm enough of a hack programmer that it really is nearly impossible to strip out the "Beacon-ness" of that code to make it publishable and usable for others. (Although, any developers out there are more than welcome to try!) But it makes me sad that I haven't seen open source developers try to create similar tools.

Now's the time to bring it all together, I think. With the amazing work being on the course side with apps like Moodle and Elgg, with the imminent release (I hope!) of OpenAcademic, with SchoolTool hopefully on the way, we're moving closer and closer to that KillerApp. Any developers out there want to work with SLA? We're in.

(And if anyone knows of an easy way to port users from Moodle into Elgg, please let me know.)