Advent of Hope

Advent.

Its a great season. Not so much for the harried shopping, the wound up kids in class or the incessant pull to attend one more party.

No, I like advent because of the word. Advent.

The coming of something momentous. The arrival. The reaching of an objective.

It feels like hope. As though a sunrise was about to come up on a dark night.

I have recently spoken to my students about what makes the world go 'round. Money or Love. And I pointed out the many, many times in our past and current history how when children are not loved it bends and breaks them, but if they don't have money they still survive and even thrive (please don't misunderstand me, poverty is a real and pernicious issue, and I don't mean to minimise it - but I have seen very happy communities which have no money at all). Hope springs from Love, because Love fuels Hope.

Love is what drives us as educators. Love is what makes us refuse to rest on our laurels (or pre-made lessons/old plans) and pushes us to continually improve. Love is what keeps us up at night working on lesson ideas, worrying about 'that kid' or wondering how the next day will go.

Love lets us go up against entrenched bureaucracies, corporations or ideologies. It makes us tired, driven, joyful, hopeful in the face of despair. Love always, protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. (1 Corinthians 13: 7-8)

I feel so privileged to be connected to such an amazing body of people who Love their students and their practise deeply. Who challenge me daily to be better than who I was and give me Hope to reach it.

I remember this during this Advent season and I gratefully bless all of my PLN for how they have blessed me and wish them a warm, enjoyable and restful break.

The Elementary Flip

Ok, so I finally got in touch with the inestimable Rick Mccleary, who wanted to talk about some ideas around flipping middle school LA. An hour and forty minutes later, well, we had touched on the LA thing (but we're both kinda stumped, especially when it comes to vocab and grammar) but we had talked about many more issues we have found in our classrooms, including education innovation, flip and the daily grind.  


It was truly illuminating, and further proof that connected teachers who are passionate about changing their practises need the time to interact with each other.


And truth be told, I am a little in awe of this guy. A great teacher, just check out what he's done on his site if you don't believe me.


Anyways, back to the 'Aha' moment of our conversation. Rick asked about the Canflip conference, and while I told him it was awesome (it was - seriously, sign up for Canflip 13, June 20, 21 in Kelowna) but I was inhibited by the lack of other lower middle school and elementary teachers there. Then he said something which he later tweeted

#flipclass In my exp this is the 1st grassroots change in Ed 2come down from HS. Weneed 2 share how it applies 2 yongr grs


Which kind of blew me away. I had never thought about it that way, but everywhere I look there seems to be an abundance of High School Flippers, but relatively few Elementary Flippers. And the problem seems  to be a perceptual one.

See, I've never felt that as a Flip Teacher I need to rely on video lectures for my students. I've always believed the technology was a way to leverage my class time to ensure students met the goals of mastering curricular outcomes, developing independent work habits and developing their strengths (which I guess is actually a blending of Inquiry with Flip goals).


But most teachers out there, rightly or wrongly, believe that Flip begins with video lecture. This is anathema to most elementary teachers, who rightly recognise lecture as an ineffective way to get information across to their students. Which means most elementary teachers would have little interest in pursuing Flip.


As I say, this is a perceptual problem, since the majority of Flip teachers would argue that it is not about video. But the problem remains, especially in regards to Flipping Elementary.


I don't have the solution at hand, but I think it begins with an intensive discussion among elementary teachers about how to meet the goals of elementary teaching (basic skills and the development of such), while still developing critical thinkers who are able to work independently.


And I think those Flip leaders who have spent so much time developing such excellent thinking around Flip in the HS setting need to seriously examine how to implement Flip in the elementary classroom. 


Just imagine if the students you had arriving at your high school were not already pre-trained in playing school (read a piece of paper, regurgitate info on another piece and grub for marks) but were independent learners who complain to those teachers who are not willing to let them go further and deeper into curricular material than a 45 minute lecture would allow! 


I can envision a legion of students turning learning on its head, not becuase we lead them but because they demanded it.  And I think the solution lies somewhere south of grade 6.

Flipping Without Video

I see one of the most common questions about Flip being "can it be done without video" a la Dean Shareski's tweet today:

Can you flip a classroom without video? And if so was assigning reading like my teachers did in 1977, a flipped classroom?
— Dean Shareski (@shareski) July 3, 2012

So, as a non-video-creating flipper, I figured I should write about what I do to make my classroom flipped.


First, why don't I make videos? Vanity and practicality. I don't like my voice on video (let alone my ugly mug! kidding, I'm actually devilish handsome!) and I don't see my students having success trying to take notes from a video. Grade 6 is simply too young to take notes as a learning method, at least without some serious training, which defeats the purpose of flipping, imo.


So, what do I do? Well, I set up the structure of my class like a college class, with each unit being given in advance, syllabus style. I post my "I can" statements for the class, explain each of them and then let the kids know they will be able to explain all of these to me by the end of the term. And, then I let them know they get to approach whichever outcomes they want, in whatever order they want, in any way they want. This means my students who are physically oriented could make dances or models, kids who are musically oriented can make songs, boys (often) can make Minecraft representations to support what they are doing. 

And for each of these outcomes, I am available to help with as much or as little as they need. I provide all the resources, all the classtime (and lunchtimes if desired/needed) and all the encouragement they need. Then I can ask them to adapt or change what they have done if they do not head in the right direction (part of this is that the kids have certain outcomes they must meet for provincial testing). Plus, the goal is that for each outcome they meet, I can provide a assessment so they know how they are doing against the provincial requirements.


I feel it is the right balance of freedom and structure which my students need as pre-teens and for the parents who send their children to my school for high achievement.


You can check out my (pre-refurbished) flipclass for the unit I did for Air & Aerodynamics here

Update

There has been a sea change where I work. I am now in a position where I can reasonably hope some of the dreams that died last year will be re-imagined.

I am excited.

Opportunity missed

I will not be very specific in this post. The stuff I am talking about has implications within my professional code of conduct and since I don't fully understand what the rules are, (I don't go to enough of my mandated meetings nor do I try to comprehend what is said when I do go) I figure the more vague the better. CYA


This year was a bit of a loss.

At the start of the year, after several months of dreaming and planning, my grade was going to implement something I was really excited about doing. We called it Collaborative Teaching, but it was my hope that it could be a PBL encompassing all subjects (except math, we always exclude math, fooey!) where we got to be very innovative about all our education possibilities.

We even set up the schedule to allow for the maximum flexibility in achieving this goal. I mean, seriously, it was a thing of beauty. All the subjects in different 'homerooms' (which optimally only existed on paper) ran at the same time, so if we needed a smaller group of students we could do that, or if we needed everyone together, well we could do that too. Plus, we had groups divided up by gender during the week, again if we needed to do a project that was more male-oriented (running around, hammering stuff into other stuff, etc) then there was the time built in for it. The only thing we as a grade team did not have control of was options, and hey, we needed a break every now and again anyways.

There was even TEAM BUILDING/PLANNING TIME set aside every week (something no other grade team had).

An embarrassment of riches. Seriously, every little thing we could want, including oversized classrooms.

So, naturally, you know what happened.

Explosions of learning. Children eagerly running to school to take advantage of the bounty their teachers were offering. Parents arriving enraptured to tell us of how their previously reluctant learner was excited about school again.

Well, actually, what we did was create a team who was generally unsure about this experiment and had to have the whole concept explained (hey, its a new thing, of course there is some discussion required) but even then, it was only half-hearted acceptance of the value in trying this out. Then upon looking at the schedule, there was a meltdown. "Where's my classroom in all of this?" Because, without a group of kids who were assigned to a space, there was a loss of professional identity, of the ability to establish personal plans and stake out intellectual territory.

Ok. I can bend. Let's adapt a little.

But then, the death knell came, but I didn't know it.

We tried a completely new and unprecedented activity that took us away from the school for four days to begin the year. There were a number of good reasons to do it and it was a valuable activity in and of itself. The problem came with the four days of planning for it, which took up all of our extra time at the start of the year. And when we got back from the activity we were a week into the school year and hadn't even moved our books to our new rooms, let alone done any decorating.

So yeah, putting uncertain teachers in the hole by implementing a totally new system, without a second of PD, planning or completed room.

Needless to say the timeline went like this.

Week one. Split up the combined time for specific classes.

Month two. Take apart the schedule and reconstitute into a more 'school-like' configuration. No gender classes. No opportunities to combine teaching.

Term Two. Situation back to normal. And get to listen to 'war stories' of how our grade had to survive the first term and how it made the year so hard.

But hey, we got to keep our team planning time. Which we could use to talk about whatever we wanted. Just not how to work together.

It was hard to watch this dream die. I didn't complain (much) because I still work in a very privileged situation. I get to do whatever I want in my classroom, innovate however I choose (I Choose Flip!) and still get admin support, even when something bombs (or smokes, or stinks - I teach science after all). I am given advantages teacher the world over dream of having.

But I remember what could have been. I remember the possibilities. And I remember with my failure (not just mine, but still) the idea of the classroom that I wanted so much to succeed is now an exemplar of what not to do.

Ouch.

Musing on Multiple Choosing

I tweeted yesterday that I am through with multiple choice tests, and I meant it too. 


The problem is that I teach grade six in Alberta where students are expected to perform Provincial Achievement Tests at the end of the year which are, you guessed it, multiple choice. So I am left with a problem. 


How do I, a flipclass enthusiast interested in valuing formative, authentic assessment also train my students how to have success in a multiple choice format? The trite answer is to believe that students with substantial knowledge of the subject will demonstrate that knowledge in any format. Hey, if they know it, they know it, right? Of course, as practical experience shows, this is folly. My students, who show great ingenuity in solving problems and displaying knowledge performed poorly on MC tests all year. In fact, one girl who has been working hard and creating pages of documentation to explain her knowledge in a deep and rich way, scored 65% on the summative MC exam.  This is due, in my opinion, to the multiple choice format which needs to ensure there is at least two correct answers, the right and the righter. When I have kids who are looking at the whole concept and identifying many facets to an issue, to hive off one is too simplistic. Thus, the right answer could be argued to be as correct as the righter answer.


So, I am left with the problem that I need to teach kids how to do the multiple choice exams and I need to make it a part of my practise during the year to ensure they get familiar with it, as opposed to cramming a 'how to write MC exams' unit in at the end of the year.


Which means I need to create some good, robust assessments of content in a multiple choice format. And I say I need to create them, because then I can avoid the problem of having questions from another teacher's point of view and not my own.


I have a second problem. I am not a sequential, logical thinker. The tests I make are error-filled and demonstrate the success of failure.


Sigh.

Teachers Saving the Wooooooorld

I love to learn stuff. I would sit at a desk and read all day - NY Times, hockey blogs, Bio of Abe Lincoln, History of the Byzantine Empire, explanation of nuclear fusion - anything that taught me something. I know that is one of the reasons I got into teaching, because I get to learn stuff right along with the students, and if I do it (teaching) well, then sometimes the kids teach me stuff.

And this curiosity about everything is really the only thing I want to communicate each and every year. I always get up at some point and say "if you leave this classroom having a total interest or obsession with one thing, a passion to know or get better at this one thing, then I will be happy." And I always mean it, because I know that none of the content that I cover will likely be in my students' heads by next week, let alone next year, but that curiosity or excitement to explore should never leave.

Which is why I flip out every time I read some well-meaning politico/liberal thinker type extol the need for something to be included in the curriculum. We need to educate our kids about the importance of recycling! Don't leave out the (name your disenfranchised group) when you cover the history of our country. Make sure they understand that bullying is bad!

Not that any of those things that gets talked about is bad, in fact generally when I see what is being suggested, I nod my head in agreement. Absolutely they need to understand the importance of budgeting and saving. Fer shure, you cannot undervalue the need for good oral hygiene. Expecting teachers to solve social ills simply because they teach something is foolish at worst and naive at best.

Because those things ARE NOT education. Education, in my view, is exposing a kid to the world, showing them how to explore that world and guiding them when they get stuck. I do my worst teaching when I get in the way of that.

Unfortunately, I am constrained to get in the way, because I am given a whole set of obstacles, more commonly described as the curriculum. The curriculum is great in that it sets objectives and outcomes and skills that can be learned. What it doesn't do very well is allow for curiosity.

Let me give an example of what I mean. I teach grade six social studies. And in the course of teaching this fine subject, we come across ancient Athens. Now the curriculum says I need to teach students how decision making processes (democracy) were developed here. What it says I can't do is feed the flames of excitement in each and every one of my students (mainly boys) who say, is this ancient Greece? Can we learn about the mythology? What about the Romans? Can we learn about them too? What I have to point out to them is that we don't have time to even look at the traditional rivalry between Athens and Sparta, let alone Alexander the Great, the Seleucids, the Roman Republic and the rise of Julius Caesar. And I am forced to tell them that they won't get the chance to learn about anything like that until university. And the reason I can't, nor can any of their teachers from here to eternity, is that the subject of ancient Europe, medieval Europe and modern Europe has been ruled out of the social studies curriculum. (this particular vent is my own soapbox, but it could equally apply to the science curriculum or math for that matter).

What would be nice in one of these interminable curriculum reviews would be if someone said, Y'know, these subjects are all pretty full of stuff. What if we eased off a little and assumed that teachers want to teach, kids want to learn and if we give them some space they will do exactly that?

I think it would be fabulous if there was a month of non-structured exploration built into each and every curriculum, for most of the grades. Perhaps some suggested subjects or areas of inquiry, but mostly non-mandated with the only requirement being that the interest of the class must lead the way. Shoot, one of these years I might actually learn about Chinese history from my students (I had never heard of Zheng He until one of my students objected to only learning about Canadian explorers and made her own presentation on this ancient Chinese admiral).

For you nay-sayers that feel there is not enough covered, I point out the Language Arts curriculum, which has very little in concrete outcomes, but yields the most amazing products of all the subjects. Good teachers can let their students roam as far as they want and they very frequently do.

If we take the political/social/pragmatic agendas out of what we teach, or rather what we force kids to ingest, then imho, we would have students who were far more capable of providing nuance and balance to our culture, having discovered their own brains and how thinking for themselves is good.

Oh, and that teachers really aren't the be-all-end-all of knowledge. That would be good too.