Posted on

Science = Curiosity + Skepticism

Okay, so there is more to science than just curiosity & skepticism- but if my young students leave my class with that understanding, I'd be a happy human.

I've been grappling for awhile now with how to introduce my 14-15 year old freshmen to what it means to be a scientist. Science is too often presented in our schools as static: Here are the facts; this is the way the world works.

Our state standards push us towards teaching science as sets of information. Even the "inquiry" standards provide a fairly rigid framework for what it means to "do" science1. This is a gross misrepresentation of what it's actually like to be a scientist2.

In all reality, the official science schooling students receive is 12-16 years of scientific background knowledge that they might be able to use later. Background knowledge is important. It forms the framework for new investigations and observations. However, I've heard several research scientists note the hardest thing for them once they started their own investigations was switching from focusing on that which is known to that which isn't. Interesting and exciting scientific research happens on the border between the known and the unknown3.

I can remember a couple events from my childhood that helped foster my current insatiable curiosity for the world around me:

  • Cross-country skiing. There were literally miles of open fields behind my childhood home. I would go out skiing for several hours- out to the creek, the river, the field of tall grasses, and small forested areas- often causing my mother to worry I'd fallen into the river or been picked up by the police for trespassing. I can remember following animal tracks, sitting still listening to the snow-muffled sounds surrounding a small creek, and the shock when I encountered others out in what I considered "my wilderness." Above all, I learned how to observe.
  • Playing with fire. I was a first class pyro back in the day4. When I found some rare time alone at home I often took to burning things in the garage or shed. I was fascinated by how different materials burn in often weird and amazing ways. Did you know burning plastic drips from a milk jug make an amazing whistling sound as they fall? Or that a burning charcoal briquette is nearly impossible to stomp out? Amazingly, I never burned myself or cause serious property damage in my investigations. Looking back, I can see that what I was doing were essentially scientific investigations. They'd start with, "I wonder..." and conclude with an experiment (or quickly trying to hide what I'd been doing as my parent's car pulled in the driveway. "Smoke? I don't smell smoke!").

Michael Doyle does an amazing job on his blog communicating what's important in science education: "A few children chasing butterflies, mucking in the pond mud, and otherwise doing their best to confound our educational system." I'm giving a more investigative learning environment a go this semester. I'm not saying we equip every freshman with skis or hand them each of box of matches, but we need to do more than simply get through the standards. I was lucky to have a supportive home environment for exploration and learning (other than playing with fire, that wasn't supported much). Not all students have those opportunities at home. We can't expect a schooling system where students have to learn to be curious and investigative outside of school to be successful. We need to build it into the system.

______________

Image credit: Myself. That's Mom & Dad skiing in the Huron National Forest near East Tawas, MI

___

  1. i.e. CS 9.0 INQ3: Formulate a testable hypothesis and demonstrate logical connections between the scientific concepts guiding the hypothesis and the design of the experiment.     [↩]
  2. If you are a scientist, I'd love to hear your agreement or disagreement with this statement.     [↩]
  3. I can't remember exactly where I heard these platitudes from research scientists, though I'm pretty sure it was a podcast: most likely Science Friday, Quirks and Quarks, or RadioLab. They're all good. Check them out.     [↩]
  4. Sorry, Mom. Not that you didn't know about this already. I never did burn down the shed.     [↩]
Posted on

A start to the conversation?

Yesterday's "21st Century Skills" PD session marked milestone of sorts. While there has been much talk about using computers and technology in our classrooms, the conversations among colleagues yesterday had a different tone than anything I had previously been privy to.

About 15 people came to the session I helped facilitate. I was glad the participants came ready to think about new ways of engaging students and discuss the challenges and obstacles that stand in the way.

Among the positives:

  • Discussion on how our school's filtration policies are preventing us from moving forward
  • Discussion on the futility of trying to ban cell phones
  • Teachers sharing anecdotes about students planning and organizing school events using facebook
  • Brainstorming ways that technology can benefit our students and the challenges that come with them
  • Getting to share some resources with each other (I shared Dean Shareski & Jamie Raeburn Weir).

I know there's still a long way to go with lots of obstacles to overcome, but I feel like we've finally started to have these important conversations. Let's hope we continue to move forward as a school and staff from here.

Special thanks to Dean Shareski (visit his blog) and Jamie Raeburn Weir (visit her blog) for providing the 60 second shout-outs. I believe the participants were quite impressed.

___________________

cc licensed flickr photo shared by pfly

Posted on

On programming and standards, part 1

There's a lively discussion going on over at Ben Grey's joint related to whether programming should be something students are required to encounter during their time at school. This discussion started at the Constructing Modern Knowledge Summer Institute (CMK09)- which I was lucky enough to attend. Several speakers at the conference stated that programming is something that all students should do. I tend to disagree with this1 , but for me it quickly raised a larger question.

This larger question came up during discussion with participants at CMK09 when discussing our views on mandating students experience some programming in the classroom. There is no doubt that programming can help students learn many valuable things (see Alec & ColleenK's comments, for example) and that including it as part of a school's regular curriculum isn't outlandish. However, many of the valuable aspects (collaboration, authentic engagement with math, creativity, usefulness in real life, etc.) might also be gained from students taking a woodworking class.  Why should programming be mandatory when woodworking isn't? This then led to: How do schools decide which subjects are necessary and which aren't?

This question almost seemed silly to me at first. "Schools teach classes that meet the state standards, duh."

Wait. a. minute. The more I thought about this the deeper down the rabbit hole I went:

"How are state standards determined? What is their view of the purpose of education? How does that purpose affect the standards that are chosen?"

And then: "What purpose do the standards themselves serve? How does having predetermined standards affect the education of our students?"

Your local state board of education would probably say that standards are used to make sure that every student in the state gets the same quality of education. I'd argue that standards do more to prevent real learning from occurring- especially experiences that might help students learn to become better learners.

During both my junior and senior years in college, I was required to do research on a topic that interested me in geomorphology and structural geology. This was not supposed to be the type of research where you read a bunch of articles and report back what the articles say. I was supposed to generate new knowledge, not simply reorganize old knowledge.  I actively struggled with this. In my experience as a student thus far, I had been expected to show that I knew what the standards said I should know. Brian Silverman at CMK09 noted that he marveled at the attitude of his professors toward their research. The professors got excited when their experimentation told them that what they thought was happening was wrong. It meant there was something new to learn that hadn't been discovered as of yet.

State standards make learning a checklist. In my experience as a student, I was good at figuring out how to check items off that list. However, I was a bad scientist (and a bad learner). I was uncomfortable when asked questions that might not have neat and tidy answers. I had yet to learn how to be a true learner.

How can we mesh standards with helping students become life-long learners? Can standards be made flexible enough for students to be able to engage in activities that might take them (and their teachers) down unforeseen and unpredictable paths? I don't have the answers here. I just know that standards-based assessments in areas like science, programming, or wordworking won't create students who think like scientists, programmers, or master woodworkers. Students who are instead given a challenging task (i.e., discover what food ants like best, program a kitty door to snap a picture everytime it is opened, or build a chest of drawers) and the support to help them figure things out as they go seem much more likely to have a love of learning- all the while gaining knowledge in the content area.

[UPDATE: Read Part 2 of this post]

_

  1. I'll save my comments specifically on this topic for Ben Grey's post since the conversation's well established over there [↩]
Posted on

danah boyd on teens and social media (great posts, pt. 1)

I haven't been utilizing this blog to great effect lately. I consider this a place to air ideas I'm formulating, put my reflections down in writing, and share items that I've found noteworthy. However, my less-than-regular posting schedule the last couple months has seen many ideas, reflections, and noteworthy items come and go without being recorded here. Hopefully this post will mark the start of slightly more regular postings.

In the past couple weeks I've come across three posts that have resonated with me deeply. I'd like to share them with you. This post is the first of the three. The other two will follow shortly.

Living and Learning with Social Media by danah boyd

This is a transcript of Dr. boyd's talk at Penn State's Symposium for Teaching and Learning with Technology. danah boyd studies teens and how they interact with social media. This talk is probably the best pieces I've seen (evar) on social media and its implications for the students in our classrooms. Let me hit you with some highlights:

On differences in populations using MySpace & Facebook:

More problematically, I've heard many of you talk about using Facebook directly in the classroom. And I've heard you talk about recruiting through Facebook. What kinds of assumptions are you making? Are you aware of these issues?

A refrain I'm starting to hear as the norm from those I follow online that I couldn't agree with more:

Just because youth are using social media doesn't mean that it can fit well into the classroom. It needs to be thought through pedagogically and y'all need to understand how it's being used in everyday life before bringing it into the classroom.

Describing why using social network sites in the classroom is probably not a great idea:

On social network sites, you have to publicly list your Friends and you have to have the functioning network to leverage it. What happens if you're an outcast at school? Does bringing it into the classroom make it worse? [...] Bringing social network sites into the classroom can be very very tricky because you have to contend with social factors that you, as a teacher, may not be aware of.

And lastly, describing why teens have a lot to learn about social media even though they may use it regularly:

For all of the attention paid to "digital natives" it's important to realize that most teens are engaging with social media without any deep understanding of the underlying dynamics or structure. Just because they understand how to use the technology doesn't mean that they understand the information ecology that surrounds it. Most teens don't have the scaffolding for thinking about their information practices.

So much of what boyd says flies right in the face of how many educators view social media. In my experience social media- especially social network sites- are seen as a disease. They think it puts teens into dangerous situations and prevents them from doing "productive" activities. danah points out that much of what teens do online is normal teenage socialization using a new tool. She's careful to point out that there are differences between socialization on Facebook and socialization in real life.

Dr. boyd also notes that we shouldn't assume that teens have a deep understanding of how social media even though they may use it all the time. For me, this point emphasizes how important it is to teach students about social media in our schools instead of simply banishing it. Internet filtration is well-intentioned but often their main effect is to lock out some of the most relevant teaching and learning opportunities for our students (as I've mentioned before). As educators we need to have an open dialogue with our students about these technologies- something danah boyd points out and I coudn't agree with more.

If you haven't read any of danah boyd's other research and writing, I highly recommend it. Her website contains many of her articles

Posted on

The power of talking with (not at).

Deborah Meier:

"There's too often a very off-putting kindergarten teacher's voice, and so on all the way through the grades. I catch myself speaking that way on occasion. What would schools be like, I imagine, if we learned to use our conversational adult voice within its four walls. It might immediately remind us that we are keeping company with kids, not lecturing at them. It might also suggest to them that they might speak to us in the same way. After all, our way of talking, arguing, persuading, and thinking aloud are, however unintentional, models for those we share the space with. How might we, in short, create for the young settings in which they learn how to join us in the adult world?"

A student critiqued my discipline style this week: "Is that how you yell? It's not very scary. I think you should yell louder when you get mad."

I wasn't trying to yell, but clearly the student (and I doubt he's alone) has certain expectations for how he'll be talked at by teachers. I'm pretty laid back to begin with, but I try hard to not let those moments of frustration lead me into moments I'll regret. I'm not an authoritarian. I tried it out for awhile when I first started teaching but it didn't agree with me. I just ended up feeling like a jerk. And my students, though perhaps quieter, were more distant and no more engaged in their learning.

As my authoritarian regime failed, I began focusing on engagement. If students are engaged and interested in what they're doing, they're not going to be planning a coup d'etat. Too often teachers are only interested in keeping their students quiet and looking industrious. Learning in real life is usually loud, awkward, messy, and full of failed attempts. I'm still not very good at incorporating authentic real life learning in my classroom, but when I get do it's full of beauty, relationships, and often complaints from teachers in rooms neighboring yours that your class was making an ungodly amount of noise. They couldn't be further from the truth.
_______________________________
Quotes from Bridging Differences: Keeping Company With Kids, Not Lecturing at Them

Posted on

The new kid at school

Do you remember your first day in high school? Perhaps you were in a new building- more likely than not surrounded by many new, unfamiliar, and large faces? I vaguely remember being excited, yet apprehensive and anxious. Would I be able to hack it? Would I make some good friends? Would it be a fun experience or drudgery?

Waiting for the bus

Today is my first official day to report for my job teaching at a new school in a new state, surrounded by new teachers (and soon enough new students). I feel very similar to how I felt nearly 15 years ago on my first day of high school. Will I fit in to the existing school culture? Will the district and school be supportive of my desire to try out new projects, teaching methods, and technologies with students? Will I find a good group of teachers to collaborate with?

This feels very different than my first day teaching ever. Back then, I was scared. I was scared because I really didn't know what I was doing. In retrospect, I really didn't have a clue. Through some very long hours and watching and listening to well-respected teachers from all over (plus several years of practice), I've reached a place where I'm confident in my abilities. Not complacent- I feel it's very important to constantly strive to improve even if you're already the best (I'm not)- but confident that I'm able to engage students in learning instead of "forcing" them to learn. However, if I was teaching back in Michigan again this year, students coming into my class would already know me somewhat. They would at least know of me, and know what I was basically about. Now I'm in a situation where I have to earn my respect from students, teachers, and administrators alike. Will it initially mean more disruptive students testing the boundaries? Less flexibility from other teachers and administrators?

I'm again anxious and apprehensive heading into a new high school. Though this time, I bring so much more with me than I did 15 years ago- or even 6 years ago. I also bring with me the confidence that my anxiety and apprehension will be my drive to constantly improve the learning experience for my students.

I'm ready. Let's go!

____________________________________________________________________

Image Source: The Dreaded Yellow Thing by Frazzled Jen via Flickr

Posted on

Telling a Story

Rocks

If you poll my students on what they feel is the most boring subject matter in geology, you would almost certainly hear: "rocks." Let's face it, even for this teacher with a degree in geology, rocks aren't the most compelling of subjects. Now, let's imagine you need to cover a whole assortment of technical information¹ about rocks. It's not exactly a teacher's dream subject matter.

We (students, teachers, Homo sapiens) don't pay attention to boring things (Brain Rule #4). As an educator, it's my job to convey information to individuals that may not initially be interested in the material. Professionally, some of my favorite moments are when I can successfully connect students to material that is often considered above their heads or too "academic."

RadioLab

Earlier this week I was listening to the RadioLab podcast of Robert Krulwich's commencement speech at CalTech this spring. In the speech, Mr. Krulwich makes the argument that the new graduates shouldn't be afraid to explain to non-science people what they do with their lives. Not only that, he makes the case that these young scientists should use metaphors, examples, and basically explain the technical information through telling a story.

Mr. Pebbles

Mr. PebblesSo, how do you connect students to technical rock information? Why, through telling the saga of Mr. Pebbles², of course! Mr. Pebbles is a pebble (surprise!) who goes through a crazy journey of being melted, reformed, and then dragged through the rest of the rock cycle. I made a little (poorly drawn) comic strip³ depicting Mr. Pebbles' travel (and travail), which just happened to touch upon the required content. I worried it would be to "kiddie" for my high school sophomores, but they enjoyed it. They enjoyed it enough that I had them create their own comics later on in the unit.

Stories add emotion and connect listeners to the subject matter. Connecting content to students is something that educators, regardless of subject, are (hopefully) trying to do.
_______________________________________________________________

¹ i.e. Fractional crystallization, partial melting

² Yes. I drew that.

³ Which I unfortunately don't currently have in a digital format

Posted on

Authentic learning without technology? No way!

Walden PondThere' s a school in them there Woods. Matt Schlein raised the funds to purchase 260 acres of land and open the Walden Project- an innovative high school where class is held outdoors (except for when they have it in a motley-looking tent). The curriculum is based around Thoreau's writing, but by no means is no means limited. The NPR article notes:

"There's no need to go out in the hall or grab a new book. That's because everything is related, so class discussion about the recent primary vote in neighboring New Hampshire is just another aspect of the school's simple mission. Like Thoreau, students are supposed to be exploring their relationship to self, their relationship to culture and their relationship to the natural world."

This sounds quite similar to all the edu-talk about creating authentic learning environments through the use of global personal learning networks and other technological tools. The Walden Project doesn't utilize technology (though, as a joke, their tent has a satellite dish), but yet it sounds like authentic learning is taking place. One student is managing a corner of the forest. He's selectively culling some trees to determine if he can increase the biodiversity of plant life.

Personally, I'm drawn to the Walden Project model- I love the outdoors and would love to get to spend my days teaching in such an environment. I realize this isn't a feasible solution for the vast majority of schools and students. However, I do find it interesting that while many of us edu-bloggers are talking incessantly how technology can create authentic, interconnected learning, here's an example of a completely different solution that seems to basically have the same goals in mind. Perhaps technology is just a filler for those of us who don't have 260 acres of land to teach on...

From NPR :: via Treehugger

Photo credit: Storm Crypt via Flickr