All Children Can Learn...

Practical Theory

Who I am: Chris Lehmann

What I do: Principal of the Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia, PA (Opening 9/06).

What I did: Technology Coordinator / English Teacher / Girls Basketball Coach / Ultimate Coach at the Beacon School, a fantastic progressive public high school in Manhattan.

Email: chris [at] practicaltheory [dot] org.

Flickr Photos

Jim Nesbitt Layout D Making a Robot Success!!! Dragging the Back Legs Sweet GeorgiaBrown

Comments

Gary Stager about New Year... New Challenges... New Goals... New Excitement
Tue, 31.08.2010 05:14
I may have linked to the
wrong Merrow article -
http://takingnote.learnin
gmatters.tv/?p=4433


Gary Stager about New Year... New Challenges... New Goals... New Excitement
Tue, 31.08.2010 05:05
Dear Chris:

We've had this discussion
privately, so I hope you
don't mind that I involve
the [...]


Julie Strong about New Year... New Challenges... New Goals... New Excitement
Mon, 30.08.2010 13:35
I'll be curious to see
how #5 evolves. In
independent schools we
rarely lack for parent
[...]


dcollins about New Year... New Challenges... New Goals... New Excitement
Sat, 28.08.2010 07:32
Those are great things to
look forward to! At my
alternative school, I'm
looking forward to seeing
[...]


Andrew Marcinek about New Year... New Challenges... New Goals... New Excitement
Sat, 28.08.2010 06:42
I am sure it will be very
weird vibe without your
original class in the
building, but now you
have [...]


Subscribe to Practical Theory

Blogroll Me!

Subscribe in NewsGator Online

Subscribe with Bloglines

Creative Commons

Blog Administration

Open login screen

Syndicate This Blog

Powered by

Serendipity PHP Weblog
< Teacher Learning, Student Learning and School 2.0 | Eight Random Facts >

Sunday, August 5. 2007

All Children Can Learn...

... but how and what can they learn?

Things influencing this post:
  • Sir Ken Robinson's TEDTalk on Why Schools are Killing Creativity
  • The ongoing debate about NCLB reauthorization.

    The hallmark of NCLB is that "Every Child Can Learn," which is a noble thought, but it's also misleading because, given the way that we assess students and schools for NCLB is the high-stakes test, the assumption is that every student learns the same way. This isn't new. This isn't revolutionary.

    But then watch Sir Ken Robinson talk about the dancer who never fit into the regular class. Then go visit City As School or any other school where kids learn in non-traditional ways. Then ask yourself this -- in making the arrogant assumption that the only way that the state can measure educational results is with the test -- what are we losing?

    There are more questions... like... what is important for all students to know? What is more important -- demonstrating recall or demonstrating problem-solving skills? Immediate ability or the ability to produce over time?

    What are the schools we want? What are the schools we need? And how can we enact policy that might actually get us there?

    There is, of course, another question as well... what does a well-educated person have to deeply understand? What content is so vital that all Americans (and sorry Graham Wegner, I'm thinking about US education here) must know it? The funny thing is that, for me, the most important content, we don't test for... civics knowledge. Beyond that, I think all students must know how to read at a high level, and I think that all students must be able to understand mathematics and statistics so that they can take part in our society. I think students should have an understanding of a scientific view of the world, but I don't think there's really any one fact that is essential in science for all Americans.

    All of this is on my mind as I transition from my summertime experiences as a speaker / consultant back into the day-to-day of SLA. We're trying to build a school for a diverse group of learners. We're trying to prove that there are multiple ways for students to succeed and learn. And we're trying to prove that there is something higher than skills, higher than content on the hierarchy of learning, and that's understanding. But it does worry me that we -- and all the folks in schools like ours -- are swimming upstream against the tide of educational policy in this country. And it does worry me that there are a lot of kids -- future dancers, future artists, future designers, future thinkers -- who are being told that, according to the testing coin of the realm, they are not learning. And worse, given the coin on the realm, they are being taught in schools that deny them the chance.
    • Posted by Chris Lehmann in General Ed at 20:10 | Comments (6) | Trackbacks (0)

    Email Entry

    Comments
    Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

    I agree that this one size fits all approach misses a great deal.

    While it may help some students in some schools, (albeit indirectly--by forcing schools to "get with the program"), it oversimplifies a myriad of other questions and problems, and is far from a revolutionary policy.

    Your questions are right on the money.

    But maybe it boils down to a simpler question for me--do we have schools that enable students to become life-long learners?
    Are we enabling, developing, and supporting their ability to read, construct meaning, question, to pursue their interests, and to take responsibility for their own learning? Do we help learning become an intrinsic value rather than extrinsic?

    If we are only teaching them to comply, respond to tests, and pursue what any given teacher is interested in, then they enter the world unprepared to be original and analytical thinkers.

    Maybe that's more than one question ;-)
    #1 Carolyn Foote (Link) on 2007-08-06 05:57 (Reply)
    I agree with the thrust of your argument against testing. Too much testing dumbs down, and testing that does not provide feedback for future improvement doesn't support learning.

    Still we need to be careful about the distinction between recall and testing. That is, choosing between recall and problem-solving skills is a false dichotomy. The two work together. You can't solve a problem without some recall of information, some background knowledge, unless you've already solved that problem before--which then isn't problem-solving. Immediate ability is tied to the ability to produce over time.

    So, rather than separate recall and problem-solving/understanding, I would ask, How do we have them reinforce one another?
    #2 Charles Nelson (Link) on 2007-08-06 07:38 (Reply)
    I have taught remedial reading for over 30 years. I can tell you that one size fits all is the most ridiculous idea that our government has had about education.
    I love the idea of what we want a well educated young adult to know. They may take longer to get there or go a different route but the end result is what is important.

    We also haven't mentioned works well with others. ;-)
    #3 readerdiane on 2007-08-06 08:18 (Reply)
    Hey Chris-

    As one of SLA's history teachers am intrigued by notion of testing for civics knowledge. Kids definitely need a better grasp of the basics of government, but I wary of creating a system that suffers from most of the problems of content-driven testing. For that reason I am all in favor of the distinction that Charles Nelson makes in his comment to you post of a "problem-solving" approach rather than relying on test that measures "recall".

    My question is how can we develop a more dynamic way to teach and test for civics knowledge? I can go ahead and create our own model as usual, but I would love to hear if somebody else has tried to throw out the traditional way of teaching and testing for civics. My approach so far is to create a deeper understanding of political systems (monarchy, representative government, etc.) inside of our 9th and 10th grade courses before we address the U.S. in particular in 11th next year.

    One thing to think about is whether or not we do civics in a course entitled "Civics" or whether SLA should make this a critical element in history class to cover the basics.
    #4 Matt Baird (Link) on 2007-08-06 10:12 (Reply)
    Your "problem-solving skills vs. recall" point struck me, too, as interesting. As a science teacher, I strongly lean towards the problem solving side of things. However, I've found that there's also an important recall aspect to learning science. Sometimes it's just for efficiency (memorizing symbols of common elements or formulas, for example, instead of having to look them up every time.) Although I hate to admit it, there are some scientific concepts we probably can't prove in the classroom. Perhaps these things should just be memorized for later recall?

    In the end, though, I think it's all about problem solving and critical thinking (and reading well, as you mentioned.) Problem solving and critical thinking are what science is all about. We use these 2 ideas to deliver the bio and chem content, and working with the content in this way, the students naturally have a deeper understanding of it. It's a heck of a lot better and more interesting than memorizing everything.

    One more idea to bring up: I think most would agree that there are certain things in each discipline that students should just be able to recall. In our online world, however, is the need for recall diminishing? How important is it for students to be able to remember a physics equation, for example, when they can look up the formula online in seconds?

    By the way, I wish I learned more about civics...
    #5 Tim Best on 2007-08-07 07:27 (Reply)
    I think I may have drawn too great a dichotomy between recall and problem solving, because yes, I agree, we do need both. But for me, it's a question of focus. When we look at standardized testing, recall becomes primary. (And yes, it's not that standardized tests don't have any problem solving, they do... it's about what's primary.)

    In the end, one of the reasons I love UbD is that, as Tim writes, understanding becomes the primary focus and both skills and content serve the deeper understanding. But I don't believe that understanding is measured by the measures called for by NCLB. And that's really the problem.
    #6 Chris Lehmann (Link) on 2007-08-07 08:59 (Reply)

    Add Comment

    Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
    Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.

    To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
    CAPTCHA
     
     

    Speaking Engagements



    Supernova Conference - July 30, 2010 - Philadelphia, PA


    EdWeek Leadership Conference - Oct. 5, 2010 - Washington, DC


    Tech Forum Texas - Nov. 5, 2010 - Lost Pines, TX


    EduCon 2.3 - Jan. 28 - 30, 2011 - Philadelphia, PA


    Calendar

    Back September '10
    Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
        1 2 3 4 5
    6 7 8 9 10 11 12
    13 14 15 16 17 18 19
    20 21 22 23 24 25 26
    27 28 29 30      

    The Quote File

    "For me, I believe that a song has to be useful"

    Quicksearch

    Archives

    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    Recent...
    Older...

    Twit This




    Categories


    All categories

    EduBlogs

    Del.icio.us Links

    (More)
    Locations of visitors to this page

    Blogged.com Blog Directory