Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Critical Thinking and the Intentional Non-Learner

In the fall of 2008 I attended the CELL conference in Indianapolis and was privileged to hear Katy Haycock, of the Education Trust, (The link will take you where you can hear Haycock's keynote.) speak about student achievement. Among many gems that I tried to capture with my cell phone keypad, I recorded Haycock as saying that the United States is the only country that believes kids can catch up by slowing down. She was speaking about the importance of providing a rigorous curricula for every student. I've been thinking about what that means.

Many schools are guilty of slowing down the learning of the struggling learners in a well-meaning effort to improve learning. There is sound reasoning in doing this, to some extent. Students learn at different rates, some faster and others slower. It is reasonable to allow more time for those who need more time, if it results in learning. But I don't believe that such is the problem with the "remedial" learning that is provided for the struggling students. Often, the struggling student is assigned to an education of low-level thinking. Recognizing that the student struggles with knowledge, comprehension, and application, we educators determine that the student needs more work with the same. When the student shows proficiency in the low-level thinking, we'll give him a shot at some higher-order thinking.

Every student needs the opportunity to engage in higher-order thinking--in analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Through critical thinking a student is able to experience greater engagement in the learning experience and perhaps the joy of learning. Through engaging in higher-order thinking the student sees a reason to know, comprehend, and apply the other learning--lower-order thinking--that to this point has been meaningless.

Before I became an administrator I taught English to resistant freshmen and sophomores. I engaged these students in Socratic Seminars. When I wrote quizzes over something they were to have read, I wrote six questions: one from each of the six levels of the taxonomy of knowledge attributed to Bloom. I found that my students did well on the higher-order thinking questions but struggled on the lower-order thinking questions. However, as the semester progressed, students began to answer all questions better. Now, this only leads to a hypothesis and I do not suggest this to be anything more. But it does lead me to suggest that students will benefit from a more rigorous curriculum focused on challenging students to engage in higher-order thinking.

If we believe our students are not capable of higher-order thinking, we are right. And if we believe our students are capable of higher-order thinking, we will find this also to be true.

Why not give a kid a chance?

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Smoke on the Water and Pseudo-learning

My son plays guitar. (I do as well but not nearly as well as he. Indulging in father-pride, I've provided a Youtube video of my son playing "My One and Only Love." Enjoy it.)

He also gives guitar lessons. Teaching is teaching is teaching is teaching, and the frustrations that my son has as a guitar instructor are the same experienced by the classroom teacher: a lack of commitment, a reluctance to practice, and a tendency to be impressed with having done only a part of the lesson. These points are well illustrated by my son's having taught a student "Smoke on the Water."

When my son comes home from a day of teaching guitar, his mother and I always ask him how the lessons went. On this day my son told us how he had taught a student "Smoke on the Water" and how that was the end of the lesson, because that was all the student wanted to play. The half hour slipped by with my son listening to the kid play. I thought to ask my son if he had taught the kid the chorus. My son said he had never taught any student that part of the song because they never asked to learn it.

I now have this vision of perhaps thousands of kids with guitars (not because my son has taught thousands but because I surmise that the experience repeats itself all across the nation) with kids playing memorable licks from songs, grinning, then playing others and never playing a full song. We have all been to a party and seen this happen. The guitar guy plays the opening of "Stairway to Heaven" and people are amazed. Then he plays the opening of "Sweet Home Alabama" and everyone goes wild. Then he plays the opening of "Stranglehold" to show his diversity and people are so impressed that they are shaking their heads. But the guy never plays a complete song.

It sometimes seems that everyone plays guitar--or says that they play guitar. But my son and I will both tell you that there is a difference between playing guitar and being a guitar player. A guitar player practices scales, works to learn new chord progressions and to understand how they work, and learns to play songs in their entirety, if not for public performance then for self-satisfaction and awareness. Real learning requires commitment, requires risking monotony, and rewards deferred gratification. But kids learning guitar don't want that. They want to impress their friends now.

And that is part of what is wrong with education. Okay, I've identified a problem. Let me suggest a solution: teach not only subject but also values. We can pass on through our teaching those things that we value as a society. Through doing so, we will not only improve the minds of our students, but also improve our society.

Thursday, February 12, 2009

School Climate

Creating and maintaining a positive school climate is at the heart of having a great school. A school with a positive climate is one in which students feel safe, not only from the physical or mental harm or abuse, but also to take risks in learning. As such, a key to promoting a positive school environment where people are allowed to be people and are treated with the respect that everyone wants and deserves. In other words, follow the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I used to phrase it this way when I was in the classroom: Was I the kind of teacher today that I would want my own children to have every day? What did I want for my own children?
  • I wanted them to be encouraged to take risks and to pursue their natural curiosity.
  • I wanted them to be held to high standards and to be challenged to meet high expectations.
  • I wanted them to be supported in their efforts to meet those high standards and expectations.
  • I wanted them to be encouraged to ask questions and to find the answers, as opposed to leaving questioning to the teacher and waiting to parrot what they had been told.
  • I expected that if their behavior was inappropriate that they would be reprimanded in a respectful and professional manner. (I believe one can be stern without being mean.)
  • I expected their teachers to demonstrate high morals, strong ethics, and admirable character.
I expected a lot from their teachers. And I expected as much from me as a teacher. And I expect as much from every teacher in my building because that is what will make for a positive school climate.

I've got much to say on this and will edit this blog over the next couple of days. But I wanted to get a start. I'd certainly appreciate any thoughts you, the reader, might share.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Reaching the Intentional Non-Learner

I've sometimes said that we Americans are very good at identifying problems; we are less proficient at finding solutions. That seems to be what I did in my last blog. I identified that there are students who are intentional non-learners, those whom the education system has failed, and that we cannot afford to fail any students. (I'm not talking about the policy in Grand Rapids where students no longer receive an F.) So what do we do? How do we motivate underachieving students.

I found this information, credited to Mike Muir (I haven't had time to research much on Muir, but I found this to be good.) Muir suggests there are nine essential elements to motivating underachieving students:
  • Positive relationships & school climate
  • Feedback and helping students succeed
  • Hands-on, active work
  • Variety and attention to learning styles
  • Tying learning into interests and making it interesting
  • Avoiding bribery rewards
  • Giving students voice and choice
  • Making connections and higher order thinking
  • Putting learning into context and making real world connections
There is much to consider here, and I want to post some thoughts on each of these. I'll begin tonight with positive relationships and school climate. See you then. Have a great day.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Three Types of Students

First, I apologize. There are certainly more types of students than those that fit neatly into the three categories that I will suggest. However, it is, to some extent, beneficial to classify, to categorize students for the sake of considering what best affects student learning.
I often speak of there being three types of students. The first group of students are those who really do not need teachers and schools. These students are driven by curiosity and a desire to learn. They will learn in spite of all that we do as teachers. These students are not always the highest achievers in a school, because they may not be interested in learning what we are teaching. But without a doubt, these students will be learning.
The second type of student is the one who needs teachers only to do their jobs--prepare engaging lessons, provide challenging assignments that allow the students to use what they are learning, and provide an assessment of the students' work--feedback and praise. These students may be teacher pleasers and high-achievers, or they may be quite average. These students do not tend to be driven by their own curiosity as much as their need to please, their desire for rewards and accolades, or the fact that it is easier just to follow along.
The third type of student is the one who needs the teachers most desperately. These students often resist every effort of every teacher. They have often rejected school--perhaps because school has rejected them. Many of these teachers are what are referred to as intentional non-learners. It is not that these students cannot learn but that they are not interested in what we are teaching or have encountered too much negativity to risk trying. Often these students have learned that when they try, they fail. Therefore, if they do not try, they may still receive a failing grade, but they did not earn the grade. The teacher merely gave it to them. Sometimes the failing grade is their "badge of honor," for they set out to earn an F and the teacher's giving them the F is validation that they should not try. These students need us desperately to break the cycle, to give them a reason to try, to let them believe in themselves.
I often get ridiculed for being idealistic. I hope more teachers will be idealistic and we might help more of the students who need us.