http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY
An interesting, and amusing discussion on the problem of the lack of creativity in schools. KRob, as I call him, always has something worth reading/listening to.
One of the more salient points that he makes throughout his lecture is that as educators, we're killing creativity in schools and in classrooms. The "system" is set up to reduce the importance of creativity in evaluating our children. An interesting tidbit that supports this claim is the fact that Howard County schools (Maryland) removed originality and initiative in 1999 from their grading system claiming that there was no way to measure how creative a student had been in the process of actually completing the work that had been assigned. How can we encourage creativity if we're not willing to find ways to reward it? Try to teach a dog to be obedient without any praise, rewards, or acknowledgement-- it's almost impossible... and that's just the half of it. From there, you hope that the dog can apply the principle of obedience to things like responding to various commands, resisting the temptation to urinate on the carpet (something Skippy is failing to do in his old age), and sitting/staying when the situation requires it. The same goes for creativity. We don't encourage creativity enough to expect it in our classrooms. And hear me out, I'm not just talking about telling your kids to be creative on a project or to give creative responses to a question asked. In that sense, we've simplified creativity to an adjective-- something that you produce is/was creative.... failing to acknowledge the fact that the approach, the process, and yes, ultimately, the end result was creative.
Creativity has to be an ongoing process--especially in schools. Too often, I hear, "You can't teach creativity--either you have it or you don't". I tend to disagree with this premise holding the belief that our minds have to be sustained and nurtured in creativity. Children, and especially young children are some of the most creative individuals out. The artwork that children produce is expressive and somehow always seems to come with an explanation of sorts. I agree with KRob's belief that school's indirectly discourage creativity. One of the more unfortunate realities of the education system is that we've stopped seeking the truth and have started to look for the right answer. Truth be told, if we took the time to ask the whys and hows of everything we study, we'd spawn an intellectual thirst that could not be quenched. Debates on the logistics of the "right answer" would lead us to understand that sometimes the "right answer" isn't synonymous with truth. Too often, we give the, "That's just the way it is"-- and unfortunately... the response is discouraging our kids from finding out more... from wanting to know more.
What better place to encourage creativity than in a place that's supposed to support intellectual curiousity and individual student acheivement?
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Guess who's bizzack
http://education.yahoo.net/degrees/articles/featured_five_hot_futrue_careers.html
Apparently I have one of the top 5 hot future careers... who would've thought? It says something about how people are beginning to recognize the value of not only education, but of educating and providing services for those who are most in need. It would be real nice to see a salary increase for those in the education sector-- I know I've had this conversation with most of the people that read this blog, so don't take it as me going back on what I originally said-- let me clarify. I'd hate to see teaching all of a sudden carry the luxury of having a 6-figure income. I think we've all encountered those people who go in to practicing law or medicine or whatever other sector because of the financial security that comes along with it. I'm not knocking the desire to be financially stable, it's something that we all want and are concerned about, but there's a difference between stability and wealth. With that said-- for those who do their job because they love it and are compensated generously... that's the best of both worlds. I'm leery of those individuals who are motivated more by their salary than they are by the purpose and potential impact of their work. I want to work with individuals who are working to improve the lives and situations of those they are serving. There are certainly some that are working to get that paycheck-- the ones who watch the seconds, minutes, and hours tick off the clock and avoid interaction with children as much as possible (bizzarre, I know). If teaching became a 6-figure profession as some have "promised" (Ms. Rhee and http://www.tepcharter.org/), there will certainly be those who are qualified (TEP charter deems qualified as being in the 90th percentile on both the GRE and GMAT--WHOA!) but in it for the wrong reasons. Then again, there are many teachers in it for the wrong reasons now! Anyway, I digress, only to say that I think a reasonable increase in pay for educators might bring about some more respect for the profession. It shouldn't take money to change people's perception of what one does, but that's how a capitalist society operates.
My apologies for the rant-- it's probably because my wallet is empty, HA!
I've been wanting to update for quite some time. My conundrum was founded on wanting to write about something positive, but always having something on the forefront of my mind that might be perceived as being negative. I remember reading through TFA blogs before joining the corps last year and thinking, "Yo, these people hate their jobs", or "I must have just signed up to work in the psych ward of a hospital or something". It's too easy to write about the little things that get on your nerves and stay on your nerves for what should be a few minutes but somehow turn in to a few days/weeks/months. To convey that on my blog wouldn't be reflective of my experience, and of the success of my students.
While I avoided the urge to post about things like dealing with adults (or children trapped in adult's bodies), losing a semi-final basketball game, and grad school, I could not resist the urge to write about standardized testing and how it has become the bane of my existence. For those of you who don't know what the testing game is all about, there is one test that determines whether a school has made adequate yearly progress or not (AYP). I'm sure there are a number of other categories that might have some influence on your AYP report card, but the test seems to stick out as the one factor that can make or break a school. The test is given for English and Math, and students are labeled as being below basic, basic, proficient, or advanced depending on their performance. To date, we've taken four practice tests, the last of which was completed today. From here, we will take the real thing in April.
Our goal: to be 100% proficient as a school. Our mandate (to meet AYP): 60% proficiency or something along those lines. I currently have 5 students that are proficient. The rest are either basic or below basic. On the first pre-test, 70% of my students were below basic, having only answered two or three questions correctly. On the third pre-test, not only had the majority of students moved out of the below basic range, but they had also moved much closer to a level of proficiency. Now, I'm excited because kids are improving at a rate of 3 points per test. Most of my kids started around the 6-7 point range. They will need at least 21 points to be proficient. I try to take the time out to recognize my kids for their tremendous growth as much as I can. I feel like they're insulted by the label of "basic"-- and rightfully so. Basic doesn't encompass how much they know, or how much knowledge they've gained over the course of the year. Basic doesn't acknowledge their motivation, or their desire to succeed. Basic really doesn't tell me a whole lot about where my kids are at. So my question is, what does basic tell you? For the big-wigs who are determining whether we, as a school, have made AYP: what does BASIC tell you? And what do below basic, proficiency, and advanced tell you? I'm really curious to know how we've come to the point where one 90 minute test can measure a school's adequate progress.
My conclusion: testing is an easy solution. It's convenient. A test is measurable, and it accounts for "how well a school is doing in terms of educating its students". What it certainly doesn't do, however, is account for those priceless moments where a student is truly learning something. The most valuable moments, in which light bulbs shine brightest and teachers communicate the most complex ideas in ways that students can understand and master. These moments happen daily... I've seen them. Let's start focusing on the moments that matter. There's only so much that a student can show in 90 minutes on paper. Come and see what's going on-- check out some of the good things that are happening. Don't let a test tell you about our school, our kids, our teachers-- come see them for yourselves. Do it early and do it often-- then, you can be the judge of whether or not we're making adequate progress.
Apparently I have one of the top 5 hot future careers... who would've thought? It says something about how people are beginning to recognize the value of not only education, but of educating and providing services for those who are most in need. It would be real nice to see a salary increase for those in the education sector-- I know I've had this conversation with most of the people that read this blog, so don't take it as me going back on what I originally said-- let me clarify. I'd hate to see teaching all of a sudden carry the luxury of having a 6-figure income. I think we've all encountered those people who go in to practicing law or medicine or whatever other sector because of the financial security that comes along with it. I'm not knocking the desire to be financially stable, it's something that we all want and are concerned about, but there's a difference between stability and wealth. With that said-- for those who do their job because they love it and are compensated generously... that's the best of both worlds. I'm leery of those individuals who are motivated more by their salary than they are by the purpose and potential impact of their work. I want to work with individuals who are working to improve the lives and situations of those they are serving. There are certainly some that are working to get that paycheck-- the ones who watch the seconds, minutes, and hours tick off the clock and avoid interaction with children as much as possible (bizzarre, I know). If teaching became a 6-figure profession as some have "promised" (Ms. Rhee and http://www.tepcharter.org/), there will certainly be those who are qualified (TEP charter deems qualified as being in the 90th percentile on both the GRE and GMAT--WHOA!) but in it for the wrong reasons. Then again, there are many teachers in it for the wrong reasons now! Anyway, I digress, only to say that I think a reasonable increase in pay for educators might bring about some more respect for the profession. It shouldn't take money to change people's perception of what one does, but that's how a capitalist society operates.
My apologies for the rant-- it's probably because my wallet is empty, HA!
I've been wanting to update for quite some time. My conundrum was founded on wanting to write about something positive, but always having something on the forefront of my mind that might be perceived as being negative. I remember reading through TFA blogs before joining the corps last year and thinking, "Yo, these people hate their jobs", or "I must have just signed up to work in the psych ward of a hospital or something". It's too easy to write about the little things that get on your nerves and stay on your nerves for what should be a few minutes but somehow turn in to a few days/weeks/months. To convey that on my blog wouldn't be reflective of my experience, and of the success of my students.
While I avoided the urge to post about things like dealing with adults (or children trapped in adult's bodies), losing a semi-final basketball game, and grad school, I could not resist the urge to write about standardized testing and how it has become the bane of my existence. For those of you who don't know what the testing game is all about, there is one test that determines whether a school has made adequate yearly progress or not (AYP). I'm sure there are a number of other categories that might have some influence on your AYP report card, but the test seems to stick out as the one factor that can make or break a school. The test is given for English and Math, and students are labeled as being below basic, basic, proficient, or advanced depending on their performance. To date, we've taken four practice tests, the last of which was completed today. From here, we will take the real thing in April.
Our goal: to be 100% proficient as a school. Our mandate (to meet AYP): 60% proficiency or something along those lines. I currently have 5 students that are proficient. The rest are either basic or below basic. On the first pre-test, 70% of my students were below basic, having only answered two or three questions correctly. On the third pre-test, not only had the majority of students moved out of the below basic range, but they had also moved much closer to a level of proficiency. Now, I'm excited because kids are improving at a rate of 3 points per test. Most of my kids started around the 6-7 point range. They will need at least 21 points to be proficient. I try to take the time out to recognize my kids for their tremendous growth as much as I can. I feel like they're insulted by the label of "basic"-- and rightfully so. Basic doesn't encompass how much they know, or how much knowledge they've gained over the course of the year. Basic doesn't acknowledge their motivation, or their desire to succeed. Basic really doesn't tell me a whole lot about where my kids are at. So my question is, what does basic tell you? For the big-wigs who are determining whether we, as a school, have made AYP: what does BASIC tell you? And what do below basic, proficiency, and advanced tell you? I'm really curious to know how we've come to the point where one 90 minute test can measure a school's adequate progress.
My conclusion: testing is an easy solution. It's convenient. A test is measurable, and it accounts for "how well a school is doing in terms of educating its students". What it certainly doesn't do, however, is account for those priceless moments where a student is truly learning something. The most valuable moments, in which light bulbs shine brightest and teachers communicate the most complex ideas in ways that students can understand and master. These moments happen daily... I've seen them. Let's start focusing on the moments that matter. There's only so much that a student can show in 90 minutes on paper. Come and see what's going on-- check out some of the good things that are happening. Don't let a test tell you about our school, our kids, our teachers-- come see them for yourselves. Do it early and do it often-- then, you can be the judge of whether or not we're making adequate progress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
