Tyee Visit

Last week Melody and I visited the Tyee Educational Complex, which is a cluster of three small high schools housed on a campus in the Highline school district. We both came away impressed with the the professionalism, dynamism and strong chops of the teachers we saw there--and also a bit sobered by the challenges that these teachers take on.

In the classes I saw, the students appeared engaged and productive and often quite communicative with the strange lady visiting their classroom. This was pretty impressive just weeks before the end of the school year. It is perhaps more impressive if you consider that between 65-75% of the students qualify for Free or Reduced Price lunches. One of the students I met had had to leave school in October, moved back a few weeks ago and is ineligible to receive credit for this academic year. He comes to school because he likes it. Global has informally agreed to this arrangement, as has the teacher who corrects his papers and works with him.

In order to serve a broad variety of students, both ACE and Global have adopted a workshop model, which builds in a lot of room for student choice. Instead of having a "class novel" which serves as the point of departure for organizing the class, students work towards a "learning outcome" for each unit: for example, Use Academic Discourse to Articulate, Revise and Defend My Thinking about a Book--or Use Outside Sources of Information to Help Me Understand a Current Event. The teachers I spoke to acknowledged that assembling a library for this model requires an initial investment of time. Though you don't have to read all the texts concurrently with the students, you have to be familiar with the material--and it works best if the material is organized according to some sort of unifying principle: e.g., Love Stories or Identity or Social Justice. You then create small groups to discuss and write about the texts they have chosen. (This model also works just fine with using a single class text.)

The main virtue of this system, of course, is how nicely it can accommodate differentiation--working with a broad range of learning profiles in the same classroom. In a mini-lesson (10-15 minutes), all of the students are introduced to the same purpose--Understand Dramatic Structure--and given a task to help them achieve this purpose: apply Freytag's model to a text. You then allow them time for independent work, which can be organized in whatever way best meets the students' needs: students working on their own, working in pairs, working in small groups or signing up for conference time with the teacher. The period ends with a Share Out of some kind, which makes the students responsible for a result and gives them experience presenting and defending an idea.

Obviously, the workshop model requires a double period to work with. It is a bit of a radical model in that significantly prioritizes skills over content and minimizes teacher-centered time.

Research at Northwest

We were joined at our last department meeting of the year by Nancy and Ben for a discussion of research skills and projects in the Humanities department. As often happens, the meeting raised more issues than it resolved, though we began some useful discussions about academic integrity, appropriate sources and scaffolding the research process. (Each of these topics could be the basis of a future department meeting.)

Academic Integrity

Ben made the interesting observation that there is a wide gulf of understanding between American and Asian students on the issue of plagiarism and intellectual property.

Is there a productive way we could address this issue in a class or integration activity? We might compare several examples of papers that make use of secondary sources and determine if they do so in an appropriate way. It might be interesting to hear the students' feedback on papers which offer the same progression of argument and textual support as the Summary & Analysis page of Sparknotes. Do the students think this counts as a kind of plagiarism? If not, why not?

Scaffolding

Thinking about reducing plagiarism led to a productive discussion of the pace and structure of our assignments. Throughout the grade levels, students get good practice with Works Cited format, annotated bibliography and thesis formulation. However, there may be more we can do to support their work with sources. Can we build in more structured exercises using a variety of source materials? Ben offered Document Based Questions as a useful model: these are short, focused exercises that allow students an opportunity to explore a research question while interacting with both primary and secondary sources. It would be ideal if we could increase the students' comfort level with the many databases that are available through the school and the Seattle Public libraries (thus also decreasing their tendency to go to Wikipedia and Google). Perhaps we could create an exercise that required them to compare ProQuest, J-Stor and e-library?

Finally, John pointed out that it might be helpful to be more explicit about the skills involved in reading for research: scanning a source for specific information and skimming to assess its relevance are techniques that need to be explicitly practiced with international students--and perhaps with domestic students as well.

Across the Pond

I've been meaning to share a few things which stood out during my visit to Overlake this winter.

Thing One: Like Northwest students, students at Overlake keep portfolios of written work. These are stored in the classroom and periodically, time is made for students to review the feedback they've received on written work: how do thesis statements from September compare with those written later in the year? What kinds of mechanical errors are no longer showing up in papers?

Thing Two: Standard Operating Procedure is to return written work with comments but no grades. Students have a chance to respond to teacher feedback in writing; only then does the student receive a grade. The English Department Head emphasized the value of this opportunity for students to process feedback separately from grades. Students can defend their choices, make adjustments or make adjustments and explain the thinking behind their original choices. As at Northwest, students are free to fully revise written work. In our department, conferences create an opportunity for students to process feedback with their teachers, but it was interesting to see that Overlake has also built in this kind of intentional dialogue.

Thing Three: I was impressed by the systematic use Overlake makes of Diane Hacker's Pocket Manual for Writers. Many Overlake teachers grade papers using a rubric which references page numbers in the Hacker text. The teacher checks "Run-On" on the rubric; the rubric refers students to the run-on section of Hacker's text. If additional work is needed, Hacker's web-site offers an extensive menu of supplementary explanations and exercises. How efficient is that? Do we still use Hacker? Are we missing an opportunity to tap into some free stuff?

Teaching So Students Remember

The first TESOL workshop I went to was given by Kathy Olson, an educational consultant who reminded me of a veteran elementary school teacher--in a goood way. Her presentation outlined ways for teachers to capitalize on basic brain-research findings.

Naturally, she cited the alarming statistic that most of us forget as much as 80% of what we read and 90% of what we hear within 24 hours. However, she offered lots of ideas for working with this in the classroom.

Her first suggestion was about attention. She is WAY into stimuli, the more intense the better. She points out that students don't learn anything if you don't have their attention...so she recommends music, movement, humor, emotions, costumes, surprise. She points out that most of us love to guess and apparently, we try harder to remember information we've guessed wrong.

Olson recommends visuals, as vision trumps all other senses in the impact it makes on the brain. Even simple things like color can make a measurable difference: colored paper, highlights and of course pictures. (Evidently, groups using illustrated texts performed 36% better than groups using text alone.) She touted the great return you get by accessing prior knowledge. Connecting new information to information already stored in long-term memory enables the brain to process more effectively.

Her main idea is that once you have the students' attention and introduce some new material, it is important to "rehearse" or "manipulate" the information right away. This will move the new input from short term memory--where it will stay for fewer than 24 hours--to long-term memory, where it actually becomes useful to the student.

She offered lots of ideas about ways to do this: paraphrasing, summarizing, personalizing, predicting, repeating, mapping, classifying--especially classifying. The brain loves identifying patterns, charting differences and similarities, connecting ideas to each other or to personal experiences. I tried and failed to attach her powerpoint, but if you're interested, look her up on the web (Kathy Olson and "Teaching So Students Remember").

At times during her presentation, Kathy seemed a little grade school--or perhaps old-school: costumes? Really? However, I overheard a bunch of juniors yesterday fondly reminiscing about the 9th grade lecture Daniel gave dressed as Theodora of the Byzantine Empire. It's true that they remembered the costume better than the lecture, but at least two out of three remembered that there was a Byzantine Empire, with Theodora and Justinian on the throne.

Education for the Future

Howard Gardner was the keynote speaker at TESOL this year. His talk addressed the impact technology has had on education and the workplace; specifically, he has been thinking about how technology has changed our role as educators.

Gardner has identified four areas in which he believes students will need strong preparation in order to succeed in the world of the future: strength in a discipline, the ability to synthesize, creativity and ethics.

The first point concerns mastery of a discipline. Gardner feels that the acquisition of information used to be a legitimate goal of education, but that technology has changed this. Many students now have extremely efficient "personal assistants" (computers) which can look stuff up and do basic calculations. To succeed in an environment where general information is widely available, Gardner thinks expertise will become a priority-- not just knowing stuff, but mastery of a certain kind of thinking: "What does it mean to think like a historian?" "How would a scientist approach this question?" He encourages teachers to provide these kinds of opportunities for their students.

The second point was about synthesizing information. Again, Gardner seemed to be responding to the flood of undigested information that is available on the web. To take advantage of this resource, it is important that students have the skills to distinguish the useful from the useless and to discern what (if anything) all the data adds up to: students need to be able to determine significance in a sea of information.

Gardner's third point concerned deepening students' capacity for creativity. He made an interesting little jab here about genuine creativity being a challenge in "rule-and-tradition bound" institutions like schools. However, he thinks that succeeding in the 21st century will require personalities that are willing to stretch, break rules and even risk failure. Teachers should be thinking about ways we can develop these capacities in our students.

Finally, he spoke about ethics. Gardner reported that as he travels around the world these days talking to people in education, research, publishing and business, he meets young people who feel pressured by the pace of opportunity. They sometimes say that they can't afford to worry about ethics right now. First they need to "make it," then they can focus on doing the right thing. Gardner feels that whenever possible teachers should share stories of people who faced challenging situations and made ethical choices. He also recommends cautionary tales about people who failed to do the right thing and the costs of that failure.

Gardner has launched a project called Good Work. The mission of Good Work is "to identify individuals and institutions that exemplify good work: work that is excellent in quality, socially responsible, and meaningful to its practitioners—and to determine how best to increase the incidence of good work in our society."