Author: sylviamartinez

Sylvia Libow Martinez is an education change agent, writer, speaker, consultant, engineer, maker, and mom.
Posted on

Counting what matters in professional development

As some smart person once said, you have to count what matters to make what matters count.

Professional development plans often have “measurable outcomes”, accountability, and other such means to prove that professional development is successful. But very often, the evidence of success is simply “showing up”. You go to a workshop or conference, you get credit. It doesn’t matter if the workshop was boring or if you knit a sweater instead of participating. The measure of success unfortunately has little to do with the intended outcome.

As Mike Maloy pointed out in the comments on my recent post, What is Professional Development?, some of this is a matter of finding better ways to document what’s happening. What is the evidence that any professional development works. In the big picture, you hope that professional development makes a teacher better, and a better teacher will produce better results in the classroom. How do you measure better results in the classroom? Saying there is a certain amount of disagreement here may be the understatement of the century.

What Matters is Your Vision
When we work with schools as part of a grant, there is often an evaluation design that seeks to measure the effectiveness of the grant. When we sit down to talk about what to evaluate, we always advocate that the evaluation actually measures all the outcomes you would like to see. Not just the usual suspects that are easy to measure, like test scores.

What’s your biggest dream? What would like to shout to the clouds when you are finished?

Isn’t the real vision that you hope to see kids more engaged, teachers who feel that they are doing a better job, parents who see that their kids education is more relevant? So why not ask those questions. There’s nothing wrong with combining test scores with a survey that asks questions that go to the heart of the matter. If you don’t ask what you really want to know, the opportunity is lost forever.

It’s often dismissed as “touchy-feely” to include subjective questions and measures, and yet, this is often exactly what we hope happens when we implement a new project. Somehow, affective and subjective have become a dirty words.

Blending PD Models to Produce Measurable Results
In my recent post, Six Degrees of Professional Development, I grouped PD into these types: Academic coursework, Workshops/sessions, Formal research, Informal, Classroom embedded, Action research. The reason I these particular groups is that 1) they situate the PD and 2) illustrates the strengths and weaknesses of each model at creating evidence of success.

Some of the more informal PD types are notoriously bad at creating measurable results, because documenting them undermines the reason they are interesting and easy. Imagine documenting your Twitter interactions, as an extreme example, or counting your Diigo friends and getting a “score” based on friends and how many bookmarks you post. That’s a sure fire way to stop participation!

But sometimes it really makes sense. Blogging, for example, is something that creates “evidence”. As I outlined in the post, Six Degrees of Professional Development, combining the informal practice of blogging with the discipline of action research can give you the best of both.

Say for example that someone blogged every day and gave a “score” for how they felt the day went. For example, a teacher could rate their own feeling of satisfaction that the lesson went well, or how well behaved the class was, or any other item that might be important. A simple scoring system from 1-5 would end up giving you data. After a time, you could extract data from the blog. Maybe you’ll find that scores are always better on Fridays, or worse after a 3 day weekend. To delve deeper, you could try to connect events actually recorded in the blog with the scores. You may notice that every day you go to Starbucks, it’s a better day. You might keep track of greeting the class in a certain way, or using an active whiteboard, or turning up the air conditioning. Just because the criteria is subjective doesn’t mean it can’t be measured.

What matters is counting what YOU think will make a difference, and proving it by measuring what YOU think counts.

Next: Why situating PD is critical

Sylvia

Posted on

6 degrees of professional development

In my recent post, What is Professional Development? I proposed six types of professional development that most teachers have access to. Today I’d like to take that a step further and talk about blending these models together to provide teachers a more balanced diet.

Here are the six types I came up with: Academic coursework, Workshops/sessions, Formal research, Informal, Classroom embedded, Action research.

If we represent these as a graph, we would probably see a pretty common pattern. Teacher professional development is overwhelmingly done in in-services and workshops. If it was a pie chart, it might look like this.

picture-19.png

Not much of a balance here.

For teachers excited by new opportunities with Web 2.0 tools, technology, and probably readers of this blog, it might look a little different. The concept of building a personal learning community, documenting your own teaching in a blog, or building your skills by reading popular blogs about education creates new opportunities for learning — but only in an informal sense.

For lack of a better term, I’ll call it an “edublogger” PD profile. It might look something like this:

picture-21.png

And of course, someone who is getting a degree might look completely different for a while.

picture-22.png

Now, none of these show much balance. And I think balance could be a really good thing to bring to professional development. Doing things only one way leads to complacency and a lack of perspective.

Bringing balance to professional development
So what might that look like? Just like a balanced diet, I think brainstorming blends of various types of PD is a terrific way to open your mind to new possibilities. Blending these models also provides a way to leverage the strengths and minimize the weaknesses of each type.

Take a look at this:

picture-24.png

I’ve shown 4 different blends:

  • informal + action research
  • classroom embedded + workshop
  • classroom embedded + informal
  • academic research + workshop

So what do you get when you cross informal PD with action research? One idea might be that if a teacher is seriously blogging to uncover patterns in their professional practice, that’s a worthwhile form of professional development. A strength of informal PD like blogging is the personal passion and commitment people bring to it. A weakness is that it’s hard to measure or plan. But by incorporating some of the discipline of action research, you could come up with a plan that turns blogging into a more objective reflective practice.

classroom embedded + workshop: What does it look like if you move a traditional workshop into a classroom environment, complete with students? Imagine that you give the usual podcasting workshop directly to students, with teachers looking on. What might happen is that these teachers will see that students pick it up quickly, and can create podcasts without much direct instruction on the tools. They will see that their own reluctance to try podcasting is not shared by students, and the roadblocks that they have created in their own heads don’t apply to students.

By pushing the workshop into a live classroom, it solves the problem of teachers creating false complexity out of the technology and being the roadblock to classroom implementation.

classroom embedded + informal: I’ve seen a few examples of teachers video-streaming their class presentations and discussions, announcing them on blogs or Twitter, and random educators just showing up to take part. The connection to the outside world is great for the kids, but what this is doing is providing examples of classroom practice that might otherwise be hidden from view.

By drawing these lines and brainstorming the possibilities, we can find new approaches to a more balanced diet of professional development. And I think that instead of trying to define them all, it’s a better idea for these ideas to grow organically from the people who actually are involved in local professional development planning.

Next: Counting what matters so that what matters will count – how blending models of PD can provide new evidence of success.

Sylvia

Posted on

Quote for today

“Service-learning addresses three major issues in education: relevance of the curriculum, level of rigor, and relationships. It is about hope, inspiration, and learning for kids.”

-Miami-Dade County Public Schools Superintendent Rudy Crew

Posted on

What is professional development?

Everyone knows that “professional development for educators is important.” It’s one of those phrases you hear all the time without really thinking about it. I did a session at last year’s K12 Online conference called “Challenging Assumptions About Professional Development” that talked about some of the myths we believe about professional development, especially regarding technology. But even then, I didn’t think much about the question, “what is professional development?”

I’ve done some web research, and found lots of terrific resources about things like the essential elements of professional development, methodologies, how to do it, and much more. But what I didn’t find is a simple breakdown of the kinds of professional development that teachers can participate in. Because in my mind, breaking down the kinds of professional development into simple groups gives us a “map” of the possibilities. Sort of like food groups – it can help create a balanced diet.

Here’s my list – I’m open to suggestions…

1. Academic coursework

  • degree/professional certification awarded at completion

2. Workshops/sessions

  • workshops
  • in-services
  • conferences

3. Formal research

  • publish research
  • participate in research
  • apply research to your own situation

4. Informal

  • collegial activities
  • Personal Learning Networks
  • mentoring
  • being a mentor
  • reading, listening to podcasts, watching videos about education/teaching
  • blogging or creating other content related to education

5. Classroom embedded

  • learning from/collaborating with students
  • workshops given in a real classroom situation
  • in-classroom mentor teacher
  • team teaching
  • student teaching
  • observation

6. Action research

  • deliberate reflective practice to change your teaching

My suspicion, of course, is that most professional development falls mainly into one or two traditional groups. I’ll explore this in a future blog post, and how we might create a more “balanced diet” of professional development for teachers by combining different forms of professional development to balance strengths and weaknesses of each type.

Sylvia

Posted on

Have a Learning Adventure This Summer!

Just announced, a fantastic adventure in computers and learning for educators this summer – the Constructing Modern Knowledge Institute. I’m excited to be participating in this event.

Constructing Modern Knowledge

Constructing Modern Knowledge will be a minds-on summer institute for educators July 28-31, 2008 at the Radisson Hotel in Manchester, NH. In addition to four days full of computer-rich learning adventures for creative educators, Constructing Modern Knowledge features amazing guest speakers, a BBQ at a minor league baseball game and a night on the town in nearby Boston.

Since knowledge is a consequence of experience, Constructing Modern Knowledge, is designed to create a context for remarkable learning experiences. Instead of spending a conference listening to an endless series of speakers, Constructing Modern Knowledge, enables participants to spend time working on hands-on projects, learning how to create minds-on classrooms, and interacting with educational pioneers and colleagues from around the world.

  • Alfie Kohn – one of education’s most provocative speakers and bestselling authors
  • Bob Tinker – director of the Concord Consortium, inventor of science probes for learning, and a foremost authority on technology for math and science education
  • Cynthia Solomon – co-developed the Logo programming language with Seymour Papert
  • Peter Reynolds – beloved artist, software designer and children’s book author

The rest of our team has expertise in creativity, multimedia authoring, student empowerment, programming, robotics and a whole lot more. I’m honored to be part of this team – this is so in the GenYES spirit and I hope to see some GenYES teachers there!

Hotel accommodation is affordable and Manchester, NH has one of the most convenient and affordable airports in the United States. Constructing Modern Knowledge is also within a reasonable drive of most cities in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern states.

I can’t wait to spend four days working on creative projects with like-minded educators.

Space is limited, so register today!

Sylvia

Posted on

Why Does Daniel Pink Hate Me?

Phrenology ChartIt’s been an interesting phenomenon to watch so many educators flock around Daniel Pink’s best-selling book, A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future. The book is a rallying cry for more creativity and arts, especially in K-12 education. It’s hard to argue with that. Stories of schools canceling recess, arts, music, even history and science to focus on boosting math and reading test scores makes your heart hurt. It’s beyond tragic to know in your bones that we are boring kids, wasting their time prepping for tests that don’t matter, and ultimately losing them.

It’s a gift to be able to raise a bestselling book like a golden shield against this insanity. Right?

But what if this gift is actually fool’s gold. What if it’s a misleading accumulation of misinterpreted anecdotes, pseudoscience, made up “exercises” and a profound misunderstanding of math, engineering, and science. Does this help or hurt educators who are trying to improve schools? Can you build a solid case for change on a foundation of sand?

Plus, I think Daniel Pink hates me.

Pink describes so called left-brain characteristics as “sequential, literal, functional, textual, and analytic” and assigns them to programmers, accountants, and people who got good grades in school. According to Pink, these attributes are “…prized by hardheaded organizations, and emphasized in schools.” This is in contrast to right-brain people who are “creators and caregivers, shortchanged by organizations, and neglected in schools.”

I’m a woman who loves math and science, earned an electrical engineering degree and worked as a programmer in the aerospace industry. Obviously I fall into the “left brain” camp. But although I got pretty good grades in school, it was spotty. I did great in Algebra and Physics. I was terrible at Geometry and Chemistry. I have no idea why. Maybe I was only “left-brained” in even years.

As I read Pink further, I became more and more puzzled. Right brainers are the future, the key to staying globally competitive. They are more caring and probably better looking. What did I do to deserve this life sentence of obsolescence? Where does all this animosity towards me and my kind come from? And shouldn’t I be making more money from some “hardheaded organization”?

It’s incredibly divisive to create two types of people and set them up in competition for grades and good jobs. It’s also ludicrous and misleading. You might as well say that all artists have emotional problems or all musicians have long hair. It plays into silly cliches and jealousy (or fear) of people who aren’t like you.

There are many types of people who happen to be good at math, science, or programming. Some are good at the school version of these subjects and some aren’t. To draw a hard line between the sciences and creativity shows a profound misunderstanding of both. I can tell you that programming is as close to composing music as anything else. It’s something that you feel, that you can lose yourself in, that comes from a place inside that is sometimes unexplainable.

I guarantee you that programmers out there are going, “w00t! tell it sister!” – and everyone else is thinking, “are you kidding?” But you have to believe me. Math, science, programming, and engineering are deeply beautiful and creative. Look — I believe you when you tell me that opera soothes your soul or that paint poured on a basketball is art. (I don’t really, but I’m polite enough to take your word for it. So take my word for this, OK?)

It’s a shame that this beauty is often lost in the K-12 curriculum. But that’s a problem with curriculum, not a problem with people’s brains.

Building his case on such an impoverished view of creativity in the sciences weakens everything Pink says. It shows a profound misunderstanding of people who aren’t like him and sloppy thinking about the cause and effect relationships he claims exist.

I’m suspicious of his analysis especially where it relates to children and learning. Pink tells a story about an artist visiting a school. He asks each classroom full of children if they are artists. In the kindergarten class, all hands go up with enthusiasm. In the first grade class, fewer hands go up, and so on, until by the sixth grade no hands go up. He concludes that the world doesn’t value creativity.

Oh, please. If you ask kindergartners if they want to be scientists, ballerinas, firemen, astronauts, or pretty much anything, you will get an enthusiastic show of hands. Sixth graders won’t. It has nothing to do with the value of art and everything to do with understanding the difference between 5 year olds and 13 year olds.

In another vignette, he takes us to a charter school for architecture and design, where students work on real world, interdisciplinary projects. He reveals that this school is safe and orderly, colorful murals line the halls, it has no metal detectors, and attendance is high. According to Pink, the success of this school is due to the “design” focus of the curriculum. However, anyone with any sense can see that creating a caring, lovely, safe school with a relevant curriculum is the reason for its success. But apparently, looking at facts is simply old-fashioned “left brain” (hiss, boo) thinking.

Pink has no qualms about using anecdotes like this that not only don’t support his conclusions, but stand in direct contrast to what he is saying. Luckily for him, he is an accomplished writer. I stand in awe of his ability to enthusiastically plunge past inconsistencies on his way to trumpet unsupported conclusions.

I’m all for encouraging creativity in schools, but treating A Whole New Mind as a blueprint seems rash and insubstantial. This book celebrates fake science and entrenched stereotypes about people that are harmful and hurtful. Schools need to celebrate the gifts of all children, not label them as “new” or “old”.

Besides, he hates me.

Sylvia

Posted on

Service learning prevents dropouts, engages and motivates students

An op-ed article in today’s Christian Science Monitor by John Bridgeland contains some powerful evidence that service-learning could be a key factor in lowering dropout rates, increasing engagement, and motivating students.

Service learning tackles high dropout rates and civic disengagement

Service learning programs like our own GenYES create win-win situations where students are empowered and engaged to solve real problems in their schools and communities. In GenYES, students learn how to work with teachers and staff in their own school to solve technology problems and help teachers use more technology in the clasroom.

Service learning is an educational technique that combines classroom learning with community service. What’s critical is that it is not only key to getting more students engaged in their communities, but, according to a report released last week by Civic Enterprises, it is also a powerful tool to keep students on track to graduate from high school.

This report, called Engaged for Success, is well worth downloading – it contains research, case studies, and much more. And it’s not just drop-out prevention. This research would be useful to support adding service learning to improve student motivation, increase engagement, and encourage student voice.

A nationally representative survey of high school students, including at-risk students, paints a hopeful picture. Eighty-two percent of all service-learning students said their view of school improved because of their service-learning classes, and 77 percent said that service learning had a big effect on motivating them to work hard. Furthermore, 64 percent of service-learning students claimed that service learning would have a fairly or very big effect on keeping them from dropping out of school.

Although we hear a lot about “research-based” programs. But many times schools only look for research to justify what they are already doing. Research should be informing the search for innovative solutions, not done as an after-thought.

And it’s something students want. They are looking for opportunities to make a difference, to be somebody, to count and to be counted on.

Although high-quality service-learning programs are cropping up across the nation, such programs are still unjustifiably rare. Eighty-three percent of students said that if their school offered it, they would enroll in a service-learning program. Yet only 16 percent of all students, and only 8 percent of students at low-performing schools, reported that their school offered service learning. All too often students do not have access to, or do not even know about, such programs offered by their schools.

You don’t need to look outside the school walls to find authentic problems that students can solve. Technology integration is just such a tough problem for many schools. The research is clear here too – technology integration improves student achievement. And yet, it remains at the bottom of the to-do list in far too many schools.

This makes GenYES a double-impact research-based innovation. By helping teachers use technology in all classrooms, GenYES students provide a much needed service in their own school and gain much in return. GenYES students learn more than just technology skills or how to help teachers. They learn that they can make a difference, that their talents are useful and needed, and that they can have a say in improving education for all.

Research proves it.

Sylvia

Posted on

Students say filtering hurts their learning opportunities

SpeakUp logoProject Tomorrow has just released the Speak Up 2007 National Findings.

Over 319,223 students, 25,544 teachers, 19,726 parents and 3,263 school leaders shared their ideas through Speak Up 2007 surveys.

From their website: Speak Up 2007 revealed a growing “digital disconnect” between students and their teachers and parents about the role of technology for learning, and how well schools are preparing students for the jobs of the future. This disconnect is evident in the fact that school administrators (66%), teachers (47%), and parents (43%) say “local schools are doing a good job preparing students for the jobs and careers of the future,” but over 40% of middle and high school students stated that teachers limit their use of technology in schools. Forty-five percent of middle and high school students indicated that tools meant to protect them, such as firewalls and filters are inhibiting their learning.

“Students continue to be on the leading edge in terms of adopting, modifying and re-using digital content and technology tools to enrich both their personal and educational lives. The students in many ways are far ahead of their teachers and parents not only in the sophistication of their technology use, but in the adoption of emerging technologies for learning purposes,” said Project Tomorrow CEO Julie Evans. “It is in our nation’s best interest that we support and facilitate student usage of technology for learning.”

Other findings:

  • 54% of students are interested in STEM careers
  • One-third of teachers say they would like to teach an online class
  • 84% of administrators say educational technology enhances student achievement
  • 63% of parents say they know more about child’s schoolwork and grades because of school technology

 

Posted on

Quote for today

“Virtually all learning difficulties that children face are caused by adults’ inability to set up reasonable environments for them. The biggest barrier to improving education for children, with or without computers, is the completely impoverished imaginations of most adults.”

– Alan Kay (Scholastic Administrator, April/May 2003)