Monday, September 10, 2018

"It's Hard to Be What You Can't See." So, read more.

In 2015, Marian Wright Edelman, president and founder of the Children's Defense Fund, wrote an article with the title "It's Hard to Be What You Can't See." In the past few years, the phrase has been co-opted by STEAMsters who use it as a clarion call to educators about student opportunities for their futures. The phrase has become "They Can't Be What They Can't See." I've used it myself and, for many reasons, I think it true.

But just recently two things occurred to me. First, perhaps the way we're currently using it is too narrow and second, perhaps we've completely missed Marian Wright Edelman's intent. And so began my research journey.

The article itself was easy to find. Ms. Wright Edelman, born in 1939, is still active with the Children's Defense Fund. She wrote the article in 2015 and it was updated in 2016. Before I address the article and my thinking, a few notes. For those who don't know me, I'm a white female of a certain age; I have a doctorate in education; I've worked in various capacities in education, both corporate and non-corporate, for decades and oh my goodness that sounds like a really long time! Why does that matter? Because I know my age and my color influence my perceptions of context.

Another lengthy note. I worked for Pearson for several years. I was a director in the Teacher Education and Development Group which was, I think, the final name for our little business unit. I got to work with some amazing people as we crafting professional learning experiences and graduate programs for our university partners. We had video. Beautiful video filmed and edited by the ridiculously talented Jules Burke, founder and president of SMART Productions, and managed and frequently voiced by the also immensely talented Vikki Myers, who is one part of Kingdom Impact Ministries with her equally talented husband Michael. So yes, I was surrounded by talented people.

What's important here is that Vikki is not white. As we talked about video options and as we searched for schools that could help us capture the video we needed and wanted, Vikki ever-so-gently taught me the importance of faces of color in the classroom.

We often heard teachers talking about how they couldn't replicate a lesson taught by a 4th grade teacher because, for example, they taught 2nd grade. Or they couldn't use anything from a particular video clip because that teacher was elementary and the viewer was high school. Gadzooks people! But we knew that people found it hard to translate a learning experience when the ones they were watching did not look like or sound like them.

Even when the grade level and the content area matched, some teachers might say, "Oh sure, but she's only 23 students and I have more," or "Yea, but my school is Title I and urban and his isn't," or whatever nuance and detail did not match almost precisely. By the way, we modified the content to help teachers make the transition though this was often one of the more frustrating parts of our jobs. In this case, they couldn't be if what they saw didn't match their expectations perfectly.

Sure, it could be a simple matter of choice or a willingness to be creative and collaborative or any one of a number of things. However, we heard this from new and veteran teachers from all kinds of situations and demographics, and even from those who seemed to want to learn.

So my first corollary is this: "Sometimes it's hard to be what you can see."

But let's go back to Wright Edelman's article and the points she was trying to make, or the points I think she was trying to make.

She speaks first of diversity and global connection. When speaking of diverse books, she notes "it’s not because necessarily everybody needs to see themselves reflected in every book, but because we need that sense of connection." People have been making connections without those reflections, but why should they have to work that hard? And here is the crux.
It’s hard to be what you can’t see. Children of color need to be able to see themselves in the books they read. Just as importantly, all children need to be exposed to a wide range of books that reflect the true diversity of our nation and world as they really are. 
Deep in our heart of hearts we know that. Years and years ago I got to teach literature at the college level, and I'd do that again in a heartbeat (including teaching freshman composition because yes, I enjoy it!). I taught Children's Lit and Adolescent Lit, too, poor me. Because I taught some of the diverse literatures courses, I was always looking for books that reflected those that were rarely seen in my classrooms. Why? Because I knew, knew, in my heart of hearts that books might be one of the few ways to introduce students to those who were not like them. They might never meet someone like Okonkow in Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart, or any of the characters in In the Pond by Ha Jin or The Chosen by Chaim Potok or Silence by Shusaku. My goal was to help them see the characteristics that were reflected in their own skin and to figure out what differentiated them, other than accent or geography or skin color and how accent, geography, skin color, and more contributed to that differentiation.

Not too long ago a friend recommended Front Desk by Kelly Yang. The story itself is good and the characters are wonderfully crafted. I recommended it to a teacher in a neighborhood school and she wondered why they would read it since there aren't many Asian kids in the school. So we talked about the correlations her students might be able to draw with those of other races, ethnicities, and religions. And that's when it hit me.

Yes, using the catch phrase "They can't be what they can't see" is GREAT for STEM/STEAM programs, for promoting all kinds of options for kids who think their choices might be limited or who have no clue what possibilities might exist.

But let's go back to Wright Edelman's statement: "Just as importantly, children need to be exposed to a wide range of books that reflect the true diversity of our nation and world as they really are." Kids in rural schools need to have a realistic glimpse of what life is like in suburbia and cities, and vice versa. Kids in white bread schools need to know what life is like when your very being isn't privileged or when it is suspect because your skin isn't some weird beigey pinkish tan (you know we're not actually "white.").

So my second corollary is this: "Sometimes it's hard to imagine what you don't know, can't see, and haven't experienced."

I know of some students of color who have really limited ideas of the possibilities for their lives. I talked to one of the 6th graders who loves to run and loves to run fast. I asked her if she dreamed about being in the Olympics, if she dreamed of being the next Jackie Joyner-Kersee. She had no idea who I was talking about so I bought her a couple of books about African American women runners, including Wilma Rudolph and, of course, Flo Jo. A few weeks later her teacher sent me the most amazing thank-you letter written by this sweet girl. I know the books have changed some of her thinking and I know the experience of getting books was pretty cool for her. My hope is that now her dreams for herself will change.

And so, my third corollary, taking quite liberally from Wright Edelman, is this: "We all know more about what we might be and could be when we get to read a 'wide range of books that reflect the true diversity of our nation and world as they really are.'"

If we want our kids to be better equipped for this world and the world of their futures, they need to read more.

If we want our kids to have more information about what could be possible for them, they need to read more.

If we want our kids to begin to imagine what could be possible, they need to read more.

And they need to read "a wide range of books that reflect the true diversity of our nation and world as they really are." So have them read Front Desk, Long Way Down, The Hate U Give, Holding Up the Universe, I'll Give You the Sun, and so many more.

New City Library
Let them choose.

Let them discuss and reflect in ways that are meaningful to them.

Let them discover and grow.

Let them learn to imagine.

Let them imagine possibilities.

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Design thinking in school: Students as designers, creators, and tinkerers

Amy Poehler and Nick Offerman are co-hosts of a new show called "Making It." Makers from around the country tackle projects using their own preferred medium. Because it's a competition, the least successful is eliminated each week. I adore this show and not just because it highlights the maker movement in a wonderfully creative way, or that it's hosted by two of the funniest people on TV. Participants have a limited amount of time to create their projects, but there is no way they don't know ahead of time what some of the projects are. They have to have time to figure out their materials and notify the show so each participant has access to sufficient amounts of the requisite materials. My point is that while they may make it look as though they are designing on the fly, the reality is that they have given some thought to what they are doing and how. Enter design thinking in a very real way.

Okay, you're thinking that's all very well and good for a television show and grown-ups who do crafty things for a living but let's talk about a classroom full of kids and limited resources since your classroom isn't backed by advertisers and a major network. Sure, let's talk about design thinking in the classroom. (If you feel like you need a little catching up, please read my blog post "Design thinking is not an output only process.")

First, I'm just going to say this: what we're calling "making" shouldn't be, needn't be limited to a particular place and time and it doesn't always require duct tape or a glue gun. Sometimes the process of making might require only a pencil and paper. I know, right? How droll.

The good folks at the University of Texas describe and define making in this way:
Making is an iterative process of tinkering and problem solving that draws on a DIY mindset. Making is collaborative and allows for self-expression through the creation of a personally meaningful artifact that is shared with a larger community. UTeach Maker Advisory Group, 2016 
Making promotes creativity and engages students in problems of their own invention. Making helps students develop identities as designers, creators, and tinkerers. Through making, students gain access to sophisticated tools for building and thinking critically.
Hang on to that. Now let's review what we're talking about with design thinking.
Design thinking is an approach to learning that includes considering real-world problems, research, analysis, conceiving original ideas, lots of experimentation, and sometimes building things by hand. The projects teach students how to make a stable product, use tools, think about the needs of another, solve challenges, overcome setbacks and stay motivated on a long-term problem. The projects also teach students to build on the ideas of others, vet sources, generate questions, deeply analyze topics, and think creatively and analytically. Many of those same qualities are goals of the Common Core State Standards. (What Does ‘Design Thinking’ Look Like in School?)
A.J. Juliani and John Spencer developed the LAUNCH cycle as a way for teachers and students to navigate design thinking. It's a great structure and you should most definitely visit their website for loads of resources. But I have to say this: all of the projects you see at this site and at many others are about engineering, about constructing something, about science or math. Nothing wrong with STEM or STEAM. I'm a believer. I'm a STEAMer myself. However, limiting design thinking to STEM/STEAM projects is, well, limiting.

Let's back up to the components of design thinking: empathize, define, ideate, prototype, test. I talk about design thinking and how I used it as a computer engineer/systems analyst in this post, "Design thinking is not an output only process." Or, to simplify: identify the problem and figure out the POV, think about the end user (or reader), brainstorm possibilities, pick an angle and design an approach, design a prototype (write or create that draft), and redesign (revise that draft). How does that work for any content area?

First, you have to start with the right question, which may not be an actual question. I'm not going to talk about the "right question" strategy in this post but will in another. I'll make the connections for you, I promise. The not-question might actually be a concept or a broad area of reference or, my favorite, an "I wonder. . . " statement. Why not a question? Because students infer you want a specific answer if you ask a specific question. And they get frustrated if the question is too general.

Eons ago I did a high school paper on the religious and political implications of nursery rhymes. I did that paper because I'd heard someone mention that "Little Robin Red Breast" had religious and political implications about a particular Cardinal of the Church and I found that fascinating. That was an "I wonder. . . " moment and I had a fabulous time doing that research.

Let's think about social studies. The Treaty of Versailles was signed by Germany and the Allies in January 1919 at the end of World War I. The United States, Great Britain, France, and Italy negotiated the treaty. However, in November 1919, the United States rejected the Treaty of Versailles and refused to join the League of Nations. Rather than give a specific assignment or ask a specific question, I might offer up some "I wonder" statements to give students some idea of possibilities and then let them go from there. For example, I wonder what it felt like to be one of the allied countries negotiating that treaty. I wonder how one of the negotiators might explain what was going on to people back home, politicians or family. I'd also leave the "what" wide open so maybe students would write a series of letters from the POV of one of the negotiators. Or maybe do a series of news bulletins or broadcasts.

Design thinking might not work for every lesson or every assignment, but once students get in the habit of thinking in terms of empathize, ideate, design, prototype, and test, they will use those strategies whenever they can.

As a former English teacher, I get that you don't always want to read papers and not just because students don't always want to write them. Yes, they need the writing practice, which is one of the reasons we make them write papers, but there are other ways for them to convey that information. Even if they do a green screen presentation or use Adobe Spark or Book Creator or maybe even assessment tools like Nearpod, Quizlet, or Quizizz to present their content, they could easily use design thinking. And how much more interesting for them and for you if you ask them to write for a different audience. You could let them choose or you can use something like Wheel Decide to randomize options; that could be FUN.

Let's go back to that making definition, specifically this part: "Making promotes creativity and engages students in problems of their own invention. Making helps students develop identities as designers, creators, and tinkerers. Through making, students gain access to sophisticated tools for building and thinking critically." Think about tools your students use or could use. Even if they're creating a rough sketch or draft using pencil and paper, isn't that a form of tinkering? If they're working with classmates and they're pointing and grabbing at the pencil and erasing and talking over each other to adjust lines or numbers or ideas, isn't that tinkering? isn't that making? And while they're working alone or with each other working on that draft, whether using pencil and paper or a computer, they are thinking about the end user, they are thinking about the best approach, they are thinking about what will work and what won't: they are, probably almost by default, using elements of design thinking.

The more we encourage students to use design thinking, formally and informally, the more likely we are to help them tap into their skills and "identities as designers, creators, and tinkerers." Having said that, however, let me strongly encourage you NOT to formalize design thinking or laminate the steps as an anchor chart. There are ways to encourage this way of thinking without making it too formal.

Years ago, when I was still teaching literature as a general education class, I decided I could not read one more 20+ page research paper written under duress. I thought about why we were asking for such papers and I knew it was a culminating project to demonstrate learning. Okay, so why torture the students and me? So, way before all of this stuff was cool and trendy, out of sheer exhaustion and in self-defense, I told students they could do a final project however they wanted and for whomever they wanted as long as the audience wasn't me. They could create a video, design a game, create a sculpture or a painting, etc. Whatever as long as it expressed something about something in the class. And, of course, they could write a paper if that's what they wanted to do. I asked for an abstract so they could tell me what they were doing, explain the intended audience, and how it connected to the course which enabled me to create a simple rubric. I told them they were NOT being graded on the level of craftiness but on how well that product connected to what they wanted to say about what they learned in the class. I got some amazing work.

They were designers, creators, and tinkerers and I got student work that enabled them to express themselves in ways that truly reflected themselves as learners. Younger students might need more guidance and help with resources, but don't underestimate what wonderful creative thinkers and designers they can be when given the opportunity.


Additional resources
5 Ways to Use Design Thinking in Your Classroom
8 Steps to Implementing Design Thinking in Your Classroom
Design Thinking in Education
Introducing Design Thinking to Elementary Learners
Improving Schools Through Design Thinking
The Beginner's Guide to Design Thinking in the Classroom

Tuesday, August 14, 2018

Reading with BHH. Book. Head. Heart.


I love Kylene Beers and Bob Probst. I love the way they write. I love what they write. I love them and yes, I'm privileged to know them. I'd love to hang out with them pretty much any time.

All of their books are useful and insightful, infused with that Beers/Probst humor. Their Notice and Note books are amazing but I want to talk about Disrupting Thinking: Why How We Read Matters.

Herewith some highlights and observations although it will be much, much, MUCH better for you to just get the book and read it. In fact, use it as a book study with your colleagues. Follow Kylene (@kylenebeers) and Bob (@BobProbst) on Twitter. It's entirely possible Kylene and/or Bob will agree to Skype in to talk with you and your colleagues about the book.
Too often, the right book created a compliant one-book-at-a-time reader, that kid who will willingly read the book we promise him he will enjoy. And yet, he doesn’t become the committed reader who searches on his own for the next great book.

And then we wondered if we were trying to solve the wrong problem. . . . Perhaps what was missing was helping students have the right mindset while reading. Once we reframed the problem, we began to understand why how kids read matters so very much (p. 17)
I was in a school library last year when kids were trying to finish all of their AR requirements. Kids were looking for books with the right colored dots. A few kids had finished their AR requirements and were looking for books to read for fun. For fun! Elementary students!! The library staff was making all kinds of great recommendations (that I was writing down for my own reading stacks). What was particularly fun was how enthusiastic the librarians were as they were describing the books they were recommending. Some of the books were not the right color dot, and the librarians would encourage the students to give the book a try. Calloo! Callay!

Students learn to extract information from texts and most of the work they do is about extraction. The following quote reminds us of the importance of flexible thinkers, which is often a challenge to the way we tend to want to do things in our classrooms.
We would argue that in today's world, learning to extract information is not enough. It's not enough to hold a reader's interest and it's not enough to solve our complex problems. . . . [Students] need to be flexible thinkers who recognize that there will rarely be one correct answer, but instead there will be multiple answers that must be weighed and evaluated (p. 21) 
I'd never thought much about a reader's responsibility to the text, but this section of the book was eye-opening. Beers and Probst state "While we, of course, want students who pay attention to what's in the text, we know that the most responsible reading requires that students pay attention to their own responses, their own thoughts, their own reactions" (p. 31).

Please note the emphasis on the word "own." Reading teachers like to talk about making connections: text-to-text, text-to-self, text-to-world. I remember startling a group of students by asking them what they didn't like about a story. When they were reluctant to answer (it probably felt like a trick question), I told them one of the things I didn't like about the story. Small light bulbs exploded as they began to realize that part of reading is recognizing what they like, how they connect, and, yes, what they don't like.

Heidi Weber sketchnote (p. 37)
If you're familiar with the Notice & Note books, you're familiar with the three big questions: What surprised me? What did the author think I already knew? What changed, challenged, or confirmed my thinking?

These questions assist students in their process of becoming responsible readers. These questions provide a means for expressing text-to-self and, quite possibly, text-to-text and/or text-to-world. But that's not the whole point. These questions also help students begin to think about what affects them, and why.

I'm going to fast forward a bit to the BHH part; otherwise, we'll be here all day.

I really, REALLY wish I had a recording of Kylene reading this part of the book and I'm going to quote from the text at length because it gives you insight into how they came to the BBH framework.
Our experiment with getting kids to read with the possibility of change in mind, willing to let the text be disruptive, got off to a rocky start. . .
We visited one classroom and said to the fifth graders, "As you read, we want you to think about the textual, intellectual, and emotional aspects of the text. In other words, we want you to read responsively and responsibly." We won't even record here how poorly that lesson went.
I must interject. These are two very experienced teachers who get to work with students often, so it wasn't lack of experience or perspective. I can't begin to tell you how helpful it was to me to understand this journey.
Next classroom: "Reading can change you. It can open up the world for you. But as you read, you need to think about your responses and you need to think about what's in the text. And you ought to ask yourself how this will help you be a compassionate person." One student responded, "Will you two be here all week?"
 My guess is that was not a question posed with joy and excitement.
Another day. Another class.  "As you read today, we want you to think about what's in the text and at the same time think about what your responses are to what's in the text." The response from the girl on the third row, middle seat: "Did you say if this was for a grade?"
Finally: "Okay. Today, as you read, think about what's in the book, what's in your head, and what's in your heart." Kids looked up. No one said anything. We took that as a good sign and wrote three words on the board: Book. Head. Heart. One boy repeated, "Book. Head. Heart." Another said, "Like what for the head?" We said, "Just ask yourself, 'What surprised me?' Then you'll be thinking about what was in the book while thinking about what you already know." He nodded and said, "Cool." Another asked, "What's a heart question?" We said, "Try 'What did this show me about me?' or 'How could this change how I feel?'" More nods. We held our breath.
The room was quiet. Kids studied our three words as we added some prompts. Then they shrugged and said, "Okay." And there it was. Three words. Book. Head. Heart. Our frame to remind kids that they need to do more than simply extract information from the text. . . .
 It's simple. Direct. And it keeps kids focused on where they must begin--with what's in the book--and where they must end--with how it's changing them. We tell kids, "Of course you must read what's in the book. The author put those words there for a reason! But you also must read thinking about what's in your own head, your responses. And finally you must read thinking about what you took to heart--your feelings, commitments, and values" (p. 62-63).

Why should you read this book? Why should you think about adopting some of their ideas and strategies? Because reading is meant to inform, entertain, and yes, can change us. It can change the way we understand. It can expand and change what we know or what we think we know. But we have to know how to read effectively, doing more than simply extracting information.

At the beginning of the book, Beers and Probst explain that disruptions begin because someone realizes there is a need for change. They note there are two questions asked: 1) What needs to change? and 2) What assumptions make that change hard? (p. 7).

We want students to be willing readers. We want them to be responsible readers who are will to reflect on what they are reading, who are willing to question what the writer has made them think and feel. It's possible that to help our students become disrupted thinkers, we have to disrupt our thinking and our teaching about how (and what) our students read.

You might also check out their Ten Tips:
Tip 1 Teach More by Talking Less
Tip 2 Value Change
Tip 3 Reading as a Transaction
Tip 4 Let Kids Reread
Tip 5 Book, Head, Heart
Tip 6 Give Kids Choice
Tip 7 Reading the Same Book
Tip 8 Books You Haven't Read
Tip 9 When Your Child Says "I Don't Get It"
Tip 10 Understanding Non-Fiction

Sunday, August 12, 2018

SEL isn't just another edutrend

A couple of years ago I would have scoffed at myself. I would have said that SEL is a new touch-feely trend in education destined just to add one more thing to the already overcrowded plates of teachers and administrators. And then I started paying closer attention to students and to teachers, and to the interactions of students and teachers.

In one of "my" schools, I witnessed a young boy slamming open the classroom door, then slamming it shut, and then heard him walking down the hall pounding on the wall. Second grader, maybe third. It was an explosive response to a teacher's quiet request. She looked at me. She had 24 or so other kids in the classroom. The phone was across the room. I got up and went after the student.

I pulled him down to sit on the floor next to me. It was easier than trying to kneel to be eye-to-eye and then we didn't have to be eye-to-eye. "So," I asked, staring at the opposite wall, "what's going on?" I felt him shrug because he was leaning towards me. I leaned back. He tensed, then relaxed a little.

"Oh. Okay. I thought you were upset the way you slammed the door. My bad."

After a few minutes of quiet, the two of us just sitting there, came the torrent of what was bothering him that had little to do with what the teacher asked or how she asked it but that she asked and, in that moment, he felt picked on. We took a few minutes to discuss why he felt picked on and it turns out he'd had a really rough night and a not very good morning. Lots of family stuff.

"So now what do we do?" I asked him.

I got a quiet "I dunno."

I told him I had some ideas and shared those, then asked him what he thought he might do. He started to get up and, because he's young and I'm not and I felt like he needed to feel in charge and needed, I asked him if he could help me up which was really funny because he really didn't know how to do that so we got the silly giggles which helped a lot.

As we walked back to the class I asked him if he was good for now. And he said, "For now."

Yea, for now. He was an elementary school student but old enough to know that our solution was for that moment and only temporary because there was still stuff going on at home and it would be there when he left school. He wasn't old enough to know how to manage those emotions and fears.

In my conversation later with the teacher, I told her what had transpired and she said something I've been hearing in schools for a while. She told me they needed school psychologists or people who could be in the halls when a kid has a meltdown so the student would have someone to listen to them and help them talk through whatever is going. She, like every other teacher, has other students who aren't acting out, who aren't throwing chairs, who aren't tossing books or iPads or Chromebooks out of frustration or whatever attitude is gripping them. She couldn't chase the one. Because I was there, she could attend to her students knowing that the one was being taken care of.

If I hadn't been there? She would have interrupted her lesson even more to call the office so someone could come to get him to take him to a buddy room or the timeout space or whatever they have for kids who aren't behaving. And what happens during that time? Nothing. The kids sit in those spaces still angry, still frustrated, and even more convinced that no one cares about their feelings or them as a person, even if they can't frame it in those terms. Then that student eventually returns and because the emotions haven't been handled, that student is still simmering or even angrier or more frustrated AND further behind.

That is just one of many examples of how I've learned firsthand the value of social emotional learning.

But let's start with what that is if it's not some eduspeak buzzword. According to CASEL, SEL "is the process through which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions." Their wheel of the five core competencies provides a framework for their work in SEL.

Okay, so that's a definition with a nice graphic, but what does that mean for students and teachers in the classroom? Because SEL cannot be a one-way street: kids have to be part of the conversation. Ideally parents or guardians would be involved, too, but starting with the kids helps.

Researchers Roger Weissberg, Joseph A. Durlak, Celene E. Domitrovich, and Thomas P. Gullotta try to explain this more in their book Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning: Research and Practice. They explain each of the core competencies and explain the value of students being able to manage themselves, make better choices, etc. Right on. That's good for everyone.

If you're anything like me, you want to know how. How do I integrate SEL? How do I help students learn to sort out whatever is going on at home or even at school and make good choices, manage their emotions, etc.?

Emelina Minero offers 13 activities. Okay, some of those make sense for some students and some classes. If you've read them, you're already thinking of the kids who will try to make a joke of some activity because it makes them uncomfortable, perhaps touches too close to an emotion they don't want to feel, or perhaps it just seems stupid for reasons they don't quite understand but that's their usual defensive posture.

Elizabeth Mulvahill offers 21 ways to integrate SEL. These are mostly designed for younger students but can be adapted for older students, of course. There are some growth mindset and mindfulness in this as well as the other activities, all good.

One of the 21 ways is simple: a check-in. Teachers stand at the door and greet their students, getting a sense of how they're doing that day. I've seen teachers do a check-in as students arrive and that's it. And even if the student is feeling sad or grumpy, the teacher might offer a few words of encouragement and that's it. Why? Because 14 kids have already arrived and there are 9 more straggling into the classroom and he has to keep the 14 in check or focused on a task and he has to hurry the 9 stragglers into the room so they can get started. Will he check-in with that student or any others any other time during the day? Probably not. Why not? He's got standards to address and a lot of work to do before the end of the class period or the end of the day.

I can hear kids thinking, "If you don't really care how I feel, don't bother to ask me." Why? Because then they'll lie so the teacher doesn't think the student is a loser--student's thought process, not mine--or they'll sink further into whatever funk they're in because the teacher is just one more example of no one really caring about them.

We have to remember that they're kids. Even if they're in high school, they're kids and there are a lot of emotions running rampant for a lot of reasons. Kids learn to hide things really well. It's one of the ways they survive. Overly dramatic? Not to them. Yea, I remember being one of those kids and for the majority of my school years.

Posters in the classroom might help some students. Games to build community will help many students. Whether the kids are from at-risk homes or apparently nice middle-class suburban homes, students struggle with figuring out their role in the emotional mess. I remember thinking that some of my mother's behavior towards me had to be my fault even though I knew she was angry with my dad. At some level, I understood the vicious circle of my parents' emotional battles.

So, like many other students, I learned to play the games, to participate when and where as needed to keep up appearances. One of the reasons I was hospitalized with an ulcer in high school is because I internalized my emotions and found other ways of expressing my anger, fear, and frustration, some healthier than others.

I'm not belittling posters or any of these strategies. I think the more resources and options teachers have available, the better. But I also know that many of today's kids need to know that someone cares, really and truly and deeply cares about them and, perhaps most importantly, that someone will listen to them and help them figure out how to make sense of whatever chaos is churning their lives.

We forget how much one or two kind words can matter because then a teacher gives the student the sense that he or she matters; that someone cares about them as a human being. It might not shut down the anger or help with the frustration, but it might.

Angela Maiers is the disrupter and innovator behind the Choose2Matter movement. She's incredibly driven and incredibly passionate about reminding people of the value and importance of these two words: you matter. I have the privilege of knowing Angie and yes, I promote her work whenever I can. If you don't have 20 minutes right now, watch the first 5 minutes of this video to give you a sense of how she's been trying to reconnect people to remember the value of the sense of community, the need we humans have to matter to one another and to belong. Then call her or email her. Book her to speak to your school district AND the community because Angie has been promoting and investing in SEL since well before it was a thing.

And even if you don't work with Angie, even if you don't completely buy into SEL as an important component of your students' lives, I can't encourage you enough to invest in your students as individuals. Do more than just check in with them first thing in the morning. Check in with them throughout the day. Let them know that they matter and their presence in the building makes a difference.



Additional resources:
The Future of Education Depends on Social Emotional Learning: Here’s Why (2018).
Social Emotional Learning: A Short History (2011).
"The Need for Social Emotional Learning. (1997). Promoting Social and Emotional Learning.

Wednesday, August 1, 2018

What about a student's WHY?

You've probably heard about Simon Sinek's books Start with Why and Find Your Why. You may also be familiar with his TED Talk; if not, check out the edited version. In this video, Sinek talks about his idea of the Golden Circle and the center of that circle is, of course, WHY.



Now Sinek's idea was for organizations and leaders. One of his key lines in this video is that people don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it.

In the past year or so, there have been a lot of videos, articles, and more for teachers to reconnect with their "why." It's sort of like purpose-driven teaching. WHY do you teach? If you had to articulate a vision statement for you as a classroom teacher, how would it read? Would your statement be anything like this?
I am an educator because I love to use my skills and talents to help students be successful in every area of their life. Every student in my school is my kid. They have value. They have the potential for greatness, and I am dedicated to provide them the best education possible.
Finding and holding on to your why has become something of a business in some quarters, and for others it's simply a matter of asking some fundamental questions, though it mangles the Golden Circle because these questions start from the outside rather than the inside:
  1. What do we do?
  2. How do we do it?
  3. For whom do we do it?
  4. Why do we do it? What value are we bringing?
Sinek believes you should start from the inside of the circle and start with why because WHY informs HOW and then WHAT. Think about your approach to teaching if this was your WHY:
Everything I do as a teacher, I believe in helping my students identify as citizens, scholars, and individuals whose voices matter. I believe our world is better when individuals understand their value, believe in their capacity to cause change, and take action to better the world around them.
I think this is important, but the teacher's WHY is only part of the equation. As teachers are preparing for a new school year, they're thinking about those critical first few days and ways to start to build rapport with their students. They are thinking about how students see them as teachers and how they can learn more about students as individuals and as learners through different activities.

But what if teachers were to ask students about their WHY? What if students were given this prompt: "Everything I do as a student. . . " or "I am a student because. . . "? Sure, the responses from 1st graders might not be very deep, and you'd hope to hear something a bit more profound and insightful from a 9th grader and certainly from an 11th or 12 grader. But I have an itchy feeling about the kinds of responses we'd get from most students.

I had an interesting revelatory moment late last spring about which I was very uncertain because it seemed so odd: kids don't understand WHY they are going to school. I think most students know they go to school because it's what kids do, but they don't really understand what learning is and what learning could be. They don't really understand the potential of learning. They don't have the capacity or the experience or the exposure, maybe, to dream about what they could be or do because of learning?

Last year one of my big phrases was "they can't be what they can't see." I still believe that. Learning is a window to possibility.

If we want to help students be prepared for the world, we need to expose them to possibilities of the world. Yes, we need to be realistic about what we can do, about what they can do. At the same time, we can't underestimate their capabilities and capacities for learning. So we need to read them books and show them videos about scientists, engineers, mathematicians, inventors, writers, cartoonists, artists, and more. And we have to encourage each of them to think expansively and imaginatively about what learning is and what learning could be for them as an individual with all kinds of potential we might not yet recognize.


Resources
Defining your WHY – Keep Yourself Inspired as a Teacher
Starting with WHY

Monday, July 16, 2018

Form follows function: For office space and classrooms

www.siue.edu
"Form follows function" is an axiom in architectural circles. Those of us outside of that circle can try to parse its meaning, but let's just go to those who know something of Louis Sullivan. According to ThoughtCo, "Sullivan argued that a tall building's exterior design (form) should reflect the activities (functions) that take place inside the walls of the building."

UX Collective also quotes Sullivan and at length:
Whether it be the sweeping eagle in his flight, or the open apple-blossom, the toiling work-horse, the blithe swan, the branching oak, the winding stream at its base, the drifting clouds, over all the coursing sun, form ever follows function, and this is the law. Where function does not change, form does not change… . It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.
The UX Collective article is actually quite fascinating, so go ahead and digress to explore that quick read. In the user interface context, the writer believes that today the credo might instead be "function follows human needs, form follows human behavior." And that is rather interesting. An example in this article is a chair and you might learn that designing a chair can be pretty complicated.

My current reading chair is a wing back armchair. It's comfortable but sometimes when I want to shift positions, I end up flinging one leg over the arm of the chair. Not good for my back; not great for the chair. Would a recliner be better? Maybe. But I'm thinking about this human behavior thing and wondering how that might impact the design of a reading chair for someone who occasionally would rather be sitting on something that's almost a chaise. Is it the sideways thing I like or just being able to put my leg or feet up? Good question and something a designer might think about.

You might be asking what on earth that has to do with office space and classrooms, but I'm guessing you're already there.

Recent articles have made it clear that the open office experiment has not been successful. According to Ars Technica, open office space is actual less conducive to collaboration and productivity. Inc. reports on the same Harvard study which indicates that face-to-face interactions increased as walls went up as did email and texts.

When I last worked in an office, we had walls. People would email to colleagues who were within a short walking distance. Why email rather than get up and walk? The perception of time saved in that I could send an email and rather than wait for a response, I could continue with other projects. . .and emails. At some point, the emails became ridiculous--even if they did provide a paper trail--and it was easier to get up and go to someone's cubicle or office, gathering others along the way, to finalize the conversation and decisions. And that's kind of my point. The email permitted us to get through some of the chaff to figure out the real issues and determine who really needed to be part of the conversation and then, after a 10-minute confab while leaning against someone's door frame, tidy up the details.

Could we have done that in an open office? I suspect not. Concerns about others eavesdropping on the conversation and offering unwanted, unneeded, or unnecessary suggestions; or others overhearing a conversation they shouldn't be overhearing. Or, for those of us who might have been trying to do other work while the conversation is happening, too much distraction because of that conversation which might or might not be relevant to me and my work. Which is why we see so many people wearing headphones and earbuds if they're working in that open space.

So when we think about the function of an office area or the form of human behavior in that particular office space for that particular organization and type of work, we can imagine how that office space might be organized differently depending on the work.

Does that apply to classrooms? After all, kids are in a classroom to learn. How complex is that after all?

3rd graders & Padlet
Ahhh, well, let's think about that. What does learning look like?

I'm not going to bash the "factory model of education" that has been prevalent for the past 100 years, which is where so many like to go. That's a tired trope. While I work with some teachers who have desks in their classrooms, sometimes those desks are grouped, sometimes they're in rows, sometimes they're in a circle or rectangle. It depends on how much space they have and what's happening in class that day, though it also depends on the teacher and how willing he or she is try something different.

Kinders: floor vs desk
I often ask teachers what they think a particular lesson is going to sound like and look like. I want to know what they see in their mind's eye and what they imagine they would like to hear; I want to them to think about what that learning experience could look like and sound like.

Some teachers can't help wanting Voice Level 0 or Voice Level 1 but I suspect that's because they're more comfortable with quiet than noise. Some teachers have that eye-widening recognition of how they're constraining kids because of the vision they have for what learning should look like and be.

Is learning always linear?

Is learning always hushed conversation and silent reading?

Is learning always tidy work spaces?

No, no, and no. So learning could be messy and noisy. It could be quiet and reflective. It depends on the learning.

Standing, sitting, however
I worked with a school that tried open classroom space for elementary students. The concept was that teachers would have a large space for team teaching and a smaller walled space for small group work, targeted student work, etc. The first challenge was the team teaching and when that didn't work quite as well as hoped, they found ways to create walls. Team teaching worked well in a couple of grades because the teachers figured it out and were okay with controlled chaos. The students adjusted for their classes. The open space for library work and some of the specials were less successful; they are still sorting out solutions.

Does learning really ramp up when form follows function? Maybe. I know a first grade teacher who gave her students choice of where and how to sit when they were reading their books. I was often amused by how students chose to sprawl or sit, but they were focused on their books. Of course, she's not the only one to give students options of choosing to stand or sit and where to sit or where to stretch out.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: pedagogy first. Cool furniture, nifty rugs and wall hangings, far out lighting, bean bag chairs, and chimes. It's all for naught if your teaching is below par.

I think it's great that school architects understand how students learn--and I agree. I think some of the findings in this article are spot on. But they also have to understand that what works in one second grade classroom might not work as well in another and it might not work at all in a sixth grade classroom. There are many influencing factors and many of them are not the same across grade levels. Classroom dynamics between teacher and students. This group of students is different from last year's and next year's will be different from this group. Curricular changes. District initiatives. Parental involvement. Community involvement.

Just as I believe we shouldn't generalize how office space should work across businesses, I don't think we should generalize how classroom space can help students in their learning.

Just as I believe we shouldn't generalize professional learning experiences and just as I don't believe we should generalize all student learning experiences, I don't think we can generalize how classroom space impacts student learning.

I think there are some fundamentals for classroom space: enough accessible outlets, options for teachers to store laptops or tablets so students can reach them as well, options for creating spaces so students can work individually or collaboratively, accessible white boards or smart boards for whole class instruction but also for students to use as they're figuring out their learning, options for media and technology so students can learn individually or collaboratively. The ideal, I think, is for teachers to be able to mix and match what they need for their classroom that's appropriate for their grade levels/content areas, and for how they wants to see and hear learning in their classrooms.

I know there is never enough wall space in a classroom and schools use hall space in various ways. I love the idea of grade level hallway space for posting student work (or QR codes that link to student work) as well as common anchor charts or whatever else they might need. That means kids need to be able to leave a classroom on occasion, which I do see in many schools. And then wall space in the classrooms could include a couple of smaller student-level white board for working out solutions to any kind of problem or learning task.

artspace.com
I also know that teachers like to set up their classrooms in specific ways based on their resources, what and how they teach, and the space they have available. I understand that and believe it makes sense. However, let's assume that function follows human needs, form follows human behavior.

I wonder what could happen if teachers paid close attention to the ways students interacted with the resources in the room, how students tried to make adjustments based on their individual instincts, and what students asked permission to do.

I wonder how teachers might opt to change the room to reflect how students were asking to be able to learn.

I also wonder how teachers might reflect on how they teach and make adjustments to their pedagogy to reflect how students were asking to be able to learn.

Function follows human needs, form follows human behavior. Apparently on multiple levels.

Friday, July 6, 2018

Design thinking is not an output only process

An Education Dive piece suggests that design thinking can help students with creativity and empathy. There has been a lot of conversation around design thinking because it's one of the current buzzwords in education. Some see it as an opportunity, some see it as an answer to a question they've not yet formulated, and others are waiting to see if this becomes an actual thing in education.

As the article notes, the concept of design thinking is generally associated with Stanford's d.School. The specific elements of that design thinking process are empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test. Eons ago, when I was a systems analyst and programmer, we used the ADDIE model. There are some similarities though "analysis" sounds colder and more disconnected than "empathize."

So let's look closely at the elements of "empathize" in the Stanford model: interviews, shadowing, seek to understand, non-judgmental. As a systems analyst, I would have read a customer's project request so I had a very high level view of what the customer thought they wanted. Then we would do a version of 20 questions as I sought to have a clearer understanding of what the customer really wanted. They would be surprised by how much information they hadn't provided simply because it didn't occur to them. While I might not have been able to shadow in person, we would talk through processes, where things worked and where things needed to be improved or changed. My job was to understand what they were trying to accomplish and then provide a path to a solution that worked for the near-term and the foreseeable future. By often frustrating and painstaking review, we might uncover systems or processes they hadn't thought about or even situations they hadn't considered.

Then I could craft a design. We would review the design and make adjustments because by then the customer was thinking more clearly and more specifically. I'd have people tell me that every time they went back to their shop or their office, they would notice something they'd stopped seeing over time. Sometimes that mattered to my project and sometimes it didn't. When we were comfortable with the design, I would develop a prototype. We put together test situations to see how the system responded and would put it through its paces for the customer.

It was never right the first time, but we were often very close. We could then make adjustments, make sure we were really going in the direction the customer wanted, then fine tune the design and the product to a more final version.

Let me make a note here: there were times that the prototype showed the customer that their thinking was not quite accurate. By helping them notice more particularly, they often became aware of other issues that needed to be resolved. Sometimes that could be within the purview of whatever we were building but most of the time it did not. I've never had a customer scrap a project at the prototype, but I have had them make some serious adjustments to the final product or realize that the current project was an interim project.

Now, what does that have to do with the classroom? A.J. Juliani refers to the IDEO variation of design thinking which can provide students with a framework for thinking about how to find a solution to a problem and references other models for the design process.

So let me make another note here: what teachers are asking students to do is use a particular process to find a solution to a problem or situation. As a result of using this process, especially if they use the process regularly, they begin to adopt it and use this design process as a natural part of their thinking.

I've never stopped being a systems analyst in terms of the way I approach a challenge or problem, whether the project is for me or someone else (though I probably think through potential problems less when I'm working on a project for myself). So by using a design process--Stanford's d.School design process or IDEO's process or even ADDIE--students adopt and adapt the way they think about finding solutions.

John Spencer and A.J. Juliani developed what they called the LAUNCH Cycle for design thinking. It's pretty cool and definitely student friendly.
  • L: Look, listen, and learn. The point is for students to develop awareness. . .of the situation, of the audience who might need or want to use the end result, of the problem to be solved and why it needs to be solved, etc.
  • A: Ask tons of questions.
  • U: Understand the process or problem. In my opinion, this comes from asking tons of questions and doing research, maybe even seeing and trying to use the existing system or process or product to see why and how it might be improved or refined.
  • N: Navigate ideas. This is the ideate phase in Stanford's model and the design phase in ADDIE. Brainstorm, create a DFD or flowchart (seriously, a flowchart can really help!), test ideas, combine parts of ideas, and be prepared to do more research and ask more questions. This is most definitely an iterative process.
  • C: Create a prototype. This could be digital or it could be something made with craft sticks and duct tape or a glue gun. The prototype has to be testable.
  • H: Highlight and fix. This makes sense, of course, because once students start testing the prototype they'll see what works and what doesn't. This too is an iterative process. And, as Spencer notes, it's "where every mistake takes them closer to success."
Design thinking isn't new, but the names and some of the elements are new. Back in the late 70s, programmers used the Ganes and Sarson Data Flow Diagram (DFD) model, a model that was used through the 80s. In fact, the concept of DFDs can still be seen in agile modeling. Anyway, it was the same premise. Design something based on all of the information you have and can gather. Poke holes in it. Figure out where things could go wrong. Ask lots of questions. Redesign. Poke more holes in it. Figure out where things could go wrong. Ask more questions. Redesign. Once they determined they had covered as many known bases as possible, systems were built and tested. First came stub tests, then more complex tests depending on the nature and complexity of the system. I'll stop there because I can sense your eyes glazing over. ;)

But that testing piece is important and it is often overlooked in student-focused processes. So kids asked all of those questions at the beginning of the process to figure out how to build a prototype to get to a final product. But they use little of that data to figure out if the prototype really works because they don't design good tests. They design the basic "does it work?" test. And maybe that's enough.

What engineers and systems designers know about that the "does it work?" test is that it's not nearly enough. Does it work if the conditions are perfect? Excellent. But what if the conditions are not quite perfect? What if you try a heavier weight? What is someone tries x instead of y? Is that x variable a likely option? One of the challenges of testing is thinking about what users are likely to do and within reason. Asking students to design tests a bit more complex than "does it work?" will help them see flaws but also help them see potential.

My point is this: design thinking becomes a part of the way a student engages in learning and the world. Design thinking is a natural part of PBL. Design thinking can also be a logical and natural way to approach Genius Hour. After a while, design thinking will become a logical and natural extension of the way students approach any learning situation.

It is not limited to PBL or STEM/STEAM or Genius Hour. Design thinking can become the way students think. Period. The framework they use--whether Spencer and Juliani's LAUNCH cycle or the ADDIE model (more recognizable outside of schools) or the Stanford d.School model--doesn't matter.

The end result is thinking differently about a challenge or problem to be solved.

The end result is learning to think about how to find a solution that works and makes sense for the situation rather than simply how to solve a problem.

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

Digital Transformation: This is NOT a drill

Sometimes when I talk with educators about digital transformation, I get the slow nod. You know what I mean: that nod that says "Yep, I agree with you but hey! not gonna happen because, well, you know, we've got a fire hose of other stuff coming from the district and the state." Though sometimes it means, "I'm nodding because I know I'm supposed to know what that is, but I have absolutely no clue and I don't want my colleagues to know I'm clueless."

Either way I can get a little frustrated because I know educators are going to return to their buildings and that will be that. So I could share videos helping them understand WHY digital transformation matters, and that's great for those educators in the room but if their administrators and the district officials and their colleagues don't have the same information, they'll get the slow nod when they try to express the value and importance, no, the imperative of digital transformation. Herewith, then, a nominal attempt to spread the word a bit further and a bit wider.

Why Digital Transformation?
Corporations are anxious about digital transformation in their businesses. Why? “Digital not only accelerates the pace of change but also brings new opportunities for firms that can embrace the technology fast enough” (p. 3, The Digital Business Imperative; Feb 15, 2017). Businesses know that purchasing is different, expectations are different, products and employees are different. “There’s an app for that” used to be a funny tag line, now it’s truth.

Digital literacy and digital skills are only part of the equation for a successful digital transformation. Students can’t be digitally literate without having some digital skills and the greater their repertoire of digital skills, the more digitally literate they are. But having skills and being literate, digitally or otherwise, isn’t the same as using those skills and abilities to transform how students learn and express their learning. Students need to be taught how to use their skills to express their learning.

For example, students need to be taught that “the cloud” is more substantial than some wispy digital storage space. That digital cloud can be more organized. Because students are not accustomed to managing files on their iPads and can’t store anything on their Chromebooks, they often don’t
understand how to organize storage, whether it’s on a hard drive or part of a server farm (that has no resemblance to an actual farm) thousands of miles away. Because so many just get a new phone or delete old stuff when they run out of memory on their smartphones, they don’t understand the limitations of memory, of storage, or even the correlation between the memory on those smartphones and cloud storage. Understanding these fundamental elements of computing as they relate to digital skills and digital literacy is no small thing.

In the work place, managers talk about systems thinking, design thinking, and computational thinking, each of which is a way of thinking about processes. There are intersections between each of these models and elements of each of these are often seen in classrooms. When a teacher teaches a student how to break down a problem, task, or reading passage into smaller manageable chunks and focus on working through that part first, the teacher is introducing her students to components of computational thinking. When a teacher helps a student go through the process of creating an outline to organize his thoughts before writing a paper or working on a project, that student is learning elements of systems thinking and design thinking.

Teachers help students develop schemas for their learning. Imagine if students (and teachers) knew that grown-ups working on large and small projects around the world were using similar strategies to do their work, too. And imagine if students understood the nature of systems thinking, design thinking, and computational thinking, and were able to learn how to choose the best tools--sometimes pencil or crayons and paper, sometimes something digital--to complete the task. That’s digital transformation.

So how do you drive towards digital transformation in your school? Well, I could spend some time talking about Knoster's Change Model. Have a plan, have a plan, have a plan. But I know that's too broad for a lot of people because they know it's something they need to do but don't quite know how and where to start.

Let's assume the vision is to have complete digital transformation in the building by the end of 2019-2020. (Sheesh. I can't believe I just wrote that AND that 2020 is only two years away?!?!) That's a good start. The next step is to establish some goals to make that happen. Let me help you get started with that. The following goals make not make sense for your school, but perhaps the list will give you some ideas of how and where to start, or how and where to continue.

Goals for Digital Transformation at <school name>
  • Teachers are having conversations about blended learning practices in their classrooms (#dowhatmakessense) and at the grade levels, reflecting on the ways digitally-based and digitally-enhanced learning supports, stretches, and builds student engagement and learning.
  • Teachers are using stations (content and tasks/activities change) and/or centers (content focus is static--writing center, reading center, math center--while tasks/activities change) as ways to integrate digital transformation.
  • In their grade-level meetings, teachers are sharing ideas and practices for integration digital tools and resources, thinking first in terms of student learning, then about pedagogical practices, and then about appropriate technology.
  • From the beginning of the school year, <school name> teachers are finding ways to integrate technology regardless of content area and, as appropriate, in ways that complement their grade-level colleagues.
  • By the end of the school year, the majority of <school name> teachers are able to implement digitally-based or digitally-enhanced activities and lessons reflectively and reflexively.
  • Throughout the school year, students will be given opportunities to develop the skills and habits of mind to fail forward--to learn from their mistakes and recycle that learning.
  • Throughout the school year, students will become more comfortable taking calculated risks in the process of their exploration, questioning, and other opportunities to learn.
  • Throughout the school year, students will be given opportunities to develop an interest in “figuring it out” rather than simply looking for the right answer.
A next logical question is this: how do we know if we're meeting those goals? Great question. Hold on, an answer is coming. But first. . .

What happens when you cross blended learning with digital transformation? You may get STEAM! 

What is STEAM?
STEAM enables students to make connections in their learning across disciplines. It can remove limitations and provide opportunities for wonder, inquiry, and innovation. Collaboration and hands-on, process-based learning through exploring, observing and doing are at the heart of STEAM teaching and learning; it may include technology, or not.

STEAM is intended to be an integrated approach to learning that requires an intentional connection between standards, assessments, and lesson design and implementation. True STEAM experiences involve multiple, even overlapping standards from Science, Technology, Engineering, Math, and/or the Arts to be taught and assessed with or through each other. This is the essence of transdisciplinary learning. This is very important because we can no longer think that STEAM is only about science; science is only one component of STEAM and not always the most important.

Remind me about blended learning
The Christensen Institute is the best-known organization that talks about blended learning. From their perspective, students learn in a traditional classroom environment in a variety of ways and learn via technology in a more personalized, even adaptive approach. For the Christensen Institute, the key is that students are learning via technology at their own pace in a way that best suits what they need and want to learn. This is one way of thinking about blended learning.

Note that the first version of the Rotation Model is Station Rotation. That’s key because it works best for most teachers in most schools and, to be honest, helps teachers feel like they have more control over student work, especially as teachers try to monitor student learning and progress.

The conversation inevitably gets back to stations and centers
Keep in mind that a center is considered to be more static. That is I may create a reading center and a writing center in my classroom that is there from the first day of school to the last day of school. What changes depends on the students but students know they go to the writing center specifically for writing tasks and activities. They also know they go to the writing center, for example, at particular times and that who goes to the writing center depends on what which students need when. What students need could be remediation, could be practice, or could be more challenge.

Stations are something in which all students participate on a given day. For example, let’s say students are working on fractions and it’s time to review a variety of concepts. At one station, students could be working on a hands-on “art” project to show decomposition of fractions. At another station, students could be using BeeBot to determine the most efficient path to find equivalent fractions. At another station, students could be using Legos, dominoes, pattern blocks, and/or Cuisenaire rods to complete some fractions tasks. At another station, students could be using Scratch, Powtoons, paper slides, Screencastify (Chromebook extension/app), green screen, Padlet, or other possibilities to create an explanation of something about fractions.

Teachers wouldn’t necessarily use the same tools in stations every day because they would be thinking first of student learning needs, then about pedagogical/learning practices, and then choosing the technology that makes the most sense to support that student learning.

As you look at those examples for stations, there is a variety of technological/digital options. In fact, students could be offered choice in some stations, though that can be harder to manage. What you might also note is that because students are having to 1) think critically, 2) communicate as they 3) collaborate, and are often being given the opportunity to work 4) creatively, they are practicing the 4Cs that are critical elements of STEAM. In the math stations listed above, students are using technology, math, engineering (problem solving), and some art as they work through the stations.

What can be the guidelines for STEAM in our classrooms? What are the defining characteristics?
  • Features multiple standards across content areas; this might be one standard from ELA and one from math or science or social studies.
  • Engages students in exploring, creating, questioning, observing, and doing.
  • Builds and supports a growth mindset and failing forward.
  • Encourages feedforward learning and perspective from administrators, teachers, and students.
  • Involves students working collaboratively and cooperatively.
  • Reflects a risk-free atmosphere for students to learn from mistakes and keep trying.
One of the big differences in STEAM is that learning is often transdisciplinary.

So how do you know if classrooms are being transformed digitally?

Schools and districts are not really that far removed from businesses in this respect, so let's co-opt their six changes and make them our own. Even if we're not comfortable doing that, we know we cannot be satisfied with "business as usual." Seriously, then, how do we know if digital transformation is occurring or has occurred in our classrooms?

Digital Transformation Checklist
STUDENTS
  • Will students be able to be engaged in collaboratively and/or cooperative problem-solving?
  • Will students be able to experience digital and non-digital tools and resources in their learning?
  • In what ways will they be given time and resource/tool choice to explore, create, question, observe, and/or do something as part of the scope of their learning experience?
  • Will students have the option to use digital and/or non-digital tools to complete a task?
  • As appropriate, will students have the option to consider multiple approaches to the problem solution?
  • When appropriate and in pursuing any one of those approaches, will they feel comfortable taking a risk and learning from a possible failure?
  • As appropriate, will students have the opportunity to research possible solutions or other information they might need for the task?
  • Do they have the learning tools/skills to learn from failure and recycle that learning to figure out how to be successful?
  • Are students given the opportunity and time to “figure it out”?
  • Are students able to make authentic, relevant, and/or real-world connections with their learning?
  • In what ways are they being opportunities to practice and develop their 4Cs skills? To be creative and collaborative? To practice communication skills with each other and the teacher? To engage in critical thinking?
TEACHERS
  • As appropriate, is the role of the teacher mostly about coaching and facilitating learning? Asking clarifying and probing questions to encourage students to think more critically and creatively? To help students make authentic, relevant, and real-world connections with their learning?
  • Is the role of the teacher mostly about helping students make the best choices for the tools they might use to approach their tasks or problems rather than making the choice, whether low-tech or high-tech?
  • Is the teacher able to coach students to make transdisciplinary connections?
  • Has the teacher made clear what success looks like or sounds like?
  • Is the teacher able to coach students to practice and develop their 4Cs skills?

Next steps
  • Make sure teachers understand that digital transformation takes time and looks different at each grade and even in each classroom at the same grade level. This will alleviate some of the pressure everyone will feel.
  • Have the technology coach, instructional coach, or curriculum director work with grade-level teams to determine reasonable and measurable expectations for digital transformation and transformational learning at each grade level for each quarter. This may be as simple as identifying one digital tool they will use and for which they will try to develop mastery. Or, take a jigsaw approach, and provide some grade-level choices for each grade-level team and have each teacher on the team select one tool to use and then be responsible for sharing with the rest of the team. Regardless of the approach, plan to review these expectations at the end of each quarter to determine what was met and what needs to be revised.
  • Determine how transdisciplinary learning supports the culture of the school and work of the teachers and students. I would do this in the 2nd quarter of implementation so that teachers will have some level of buy-in and understanding. Then the teachers can speak to the ways transdisciplinary learning supports student learning and school culture.
  • If appropriate, ensure teachers are familiar with various systems and processes of thinking and doing (engineering design process, scientific method, systems thinking, design thinking) and can assist students in making use of an appropriate system or process of thinking and doing.
  • MAKE A PLAN TO HELP TEACHERS SHARE THEIR LEARNING, GROWTH, AND EXPERIENCES! You may have to crowdsource this as well because what works at one building may not be as effective at another.
Digital transformation is not a pretty eduspeak term. It's the real deal. If you haven't gotten started or if you're not where you need or want to be, all is not yet lost. But get started now. And I mean now.

(Need some help? Contact me.)

Additional resources
https://www.tasanet.org/transformation

http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/about-us/future-state/presentations-and-videos/ (Watch the Jennifer Palmer student presentation)

https://www.greenevillesun.com/special_sections/benchmarks/benchmarks_d/city-schools-fully-embrace-digital-transformation/article_50c98a9a-403b-51d0-a208-549113632d2d.html 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2017/07/18/top-6-digital-transformation-trends-in-education/2/#56607f1d2e79 (I think most schools can handle 4 of the 6, that VR/AR and AI are still a bit of a reach and even if schools have access to some VR, teachers aren’t quite sure yet how to make it work. I think that will be different for VR in 2018-2019 though AI will still be a reach too far yet for schools and most people won’t care very much about AR.)