The End?

Here it is at last, the final blog. I feel there should be a fanfare or a parade to signal the end of this era, but I suspect this is just the start.

I've spent a while reflecting on what I could discuss in my final blog. Do I discuss all that I've learned? Do I expound on twenty-first century learning? Whether it is know, be or do, vertical and horizontal curriculum scanning, the different forms of education we have seen throughout this semester, it is all absolutely integral to the way in which I now view teaching.

Coming into this year, I admit, I thought of myself as more a history major than a education major. Perhaps it's the result of my program and the way in which education is integrated directly into the curriculum we see in university, it remains invisible. However, this course set us out working with documents, set up our knowledge of twenty-first century learning and encouraged interaction with education on a higher level, incorporating both the global perspective on education as well as the Ontario curriculum. As a result, I have decided that this blog would be best representative of my learning if I were to illustrate what my personal know, be and do are, coming out of this course.

Know:

• First and foremost, know your students. Although I have gone on rants about how accessible the curriculum is to them, it is their education that you are facilitating, not your own.
• This is not to suggest that a teacher cannot learn in the classroom. Quite the opposite in fact, allow your students, their perspectives and experiences to educate you. We live in a world where classroom management is shifting and student perspectives are now considered vital. So use and incorporate them whenever you can. Just know when.
• Know the new story styles of learning. That does not mean to throw out all of the fundamentals of the old story but rather to augment and update as suits your needs. Use these stories as fluid ways to shape your own individual style, based on circumstance and requirement.
• Finally, know your curriculum. I'm ashamed to admit that going into this year I didn't. Now in many ways I do and am able to use government documents in a more succinct and effective fashion.

Do:

• Analyze. Students (at least in history) are constantly encouraged to analyze and explore. This needs to be done both in classroom and curriculum building to create the greatest amount of effectiveness possible.
• Synthesize. Combine bits and pieces of what is/isn't working and move forward from there. Teaching is fluid but more importantly, adjustable.
• Empathize. Explore how best to connect to your students as well as to encourage empathy within a larger context, locally, nationally and internationally, to both raise awareness and action.

Be:

• Be innovative. Although the curriculum stipulates certain opinions and ideologies, that does not mean you cannot create a framework of your own in which to teach them. From integrated curriculums to genius hour, inspire connections and originality in yourself and your class.
• Be creative and encourage your students to be as well. I'm sick of people telling me they aren't creative when every original idea we have as human beings is original and creative in each unique way.
• Be yourself. Hokey? Yes. Corny? Yes. But everyone is different (even more hokey!) and it's about time we started recognizing that both in our students and in ourselves. It really makes all the difference in who we are as people's d therefore as teachers.

These are my takeaways, they might not be everyone’s, but I believe there is something to be said for each of these elements, and how they can enrich the general experience of the twenty-first century learner, as well as that of the twenty-first century teacher.

Thanks for reading and 'till next time,

A. Gallacher

Shakespeare and Students

I want to turn my focus this week from the curriculum and onto digital literacy and how it’s being neglected in the classroom. You see, I have a confession to make. I am a Shakespeare geek. You heard me right, I love anything and everything Shakespeare related. Now, perhaps I’ve made you wonder what my Shakespeare obsession has to do with digital literacy. Although I love the old fashion call and response read-aloud Shakespeare presentations in classrooms, I’m not such a fan of the way in which I personally, as well as a few of my friends, have never seen a teacher actively trying to make Shakespeare more accessible. 

Sure, we watched She’s the Man while reading Twelfth Night but in no way did we analyze what made these themes endure and remain relevant enough to justify a modern interpretation. Going back to digital literacy, I would argue that there has never been a more comprehensive place to get information on any Shakespearean text than the internet. So then why, when I discussed Shakespearean classes with others was I informed that, not only was I not alone in reading the text’s aloud in class but that the film versions, lessons and performances shown were often dated and largely irrelevant to a 21st century classroom? Now this does not mean to suggest that 10 Things I Hate About You or She’s the Man should be taught in lieu of an actual Shakespearean performance, instead, this blog aims to explore a few of the new and different ways in which the internet is making Shakespeare more accessible for teachers and students alike.

Now, I feel I also have to admit that while this has been a passion of mine for a long while now, it has been inspired by some recent things I’ve noticed, and that I hope to build upon as a part of my Genius Hour project. Firstly, I want to explore the dedication to helping children understand the language of the plays, particularly well undertaken by No Fear Shakespeare. Secondly, another new digital advancement is the digitization and broadcast of pivotal productions of Shakespearean plays, particularly from companies like National Theatre Live, the Royal Shakespeare Company and Shakespeare’s Globe, all based in the UK, as well as the Stratford Festival on this side of the pond featuring top Shakespearean performers in leading productions. Finally the documentary Muse of Fire serves to illustrate the popularity of Shakespeare using even the most seasoned actors to assure students that it’s not something that comes naturally to even the leading players.

I want to start first by talking about No Fear Shakespeare.  When we were in high school it was discouraged to use the simplified versions to enhance your learning, but why? Personally, if it’s helping students (and they are still using the original text on the right side of the books/web versions) then why not use it? Not only can they be purchased in print form but they can also be accessed online for free in order to highlight specific scenes or passages that are complicated or confusing students. Indeed, if the whole goal of No Fear Shakespeare is to make it more accessible, then why are teachers seemingly so afraid to use it? It will not take away anything from the lessons besides the student’s confusion and therefore it should be utilized more freely.

To further appeal to the 21st century learner, there are now, as mentioned, a number of services which allow for recent Shakespearean productions to be seen and downloaded for a fee, including many of the classics staged in a wide variety of ways. To be able to see Shakespearean performance, performed in ways both classical and modern is one of the way s in which a digital environment can only enlighten the classroom. In the case of the “Original Principals” stagings at the Shakespeare’s Globe theatre, now available through their service Globe Player can help teachers integrate historical context into the curriculum, as they abide by many of the rules of staging from the contemporary period. Furthermore, this service also streams interviews from the documentary Muse of Fire which helps students in particular realize that there are a variety of accessible paths to Shakespeare, whether it is through specific actors or discussions on the way in which the text functions, the two men who host the documentary aimed to make Shakespeare more accessible. Attached are two videos of the same scene from two different versions of Twelfth Night which could be selected based on a specific class/the way in which the play is being taught, one a 1996 film clip and the other a 2011 Stratford Festival production, highlighting the potential for different portrayals.

Overall, perhaps as a result from the way in which I myself notice the launch of these services, I believe that there is a number of under utilized resources available to teachers to help enhance the general understanding of Shakespearean texts, so that, if they must still be taught they can be taught in a way which allows for better student comprehension and more confidence in student understanding of the texts. In general, these new digital resources, in any subject, much less a specific sub genre of English like Shakespearean texts, seem rather under-utilized. Thus these should be shared with teachers directly through workshops etc. to guarantee both teacher and student alike can benefit from new technology.

The Man Behind the Curtain ...

Walking out of class last week, I had what might be my biggest educational epiphany to date. Having handled curriculum documents in class, looking at each aspect of the curriculum and looking forward, where we will be working with the documents themselves, I realized that it was the first time I’ve ever held a curriculum document or even looked at one.

How is it possible to get through 12 years of public school education and multiple years of university education without ever having the perspective of the teacher on what the government insists upon student’s learning? We’re constantly instructed that the reason why we are learning x is because of y on the curriculum. Never once however, was I invited after one of these discussions in school, to look at the curriculum itself. In many ways it became a buzzword, the man behind the curtain, a regulating figure which worked without regulating anything at all, all that you needed was to hear the reason was curriculum related and you were expected to accept it as an element of grand importance. As I dwelt on this after class I couldn’t help but wonder. Maybe it was different for other schools? Maybe my schooling was the odd situation here, maybe everyone else was completely in the loop with regard to how the curriculum dictated the form their education took. Even how the curriculum itself looked!

But here’s the thing. I don’t think I’m the odd one out.

Take for instance, the Ontario Ministry of Education site. Now yes, it’s a formal government site and the last thing I was expecting to find on it were cartoons or visual aids to entice children to learn about education curriculum as I am not so far removed to not understand that kids probably aren’t interested in the curriculum. Although all of the government documentation is posted on the Ministry of Education website, these will read like dry political treatises to the majority of students. But does this mean they should not be informed of the curriculum at all? 

While the Ministry site was not the most student friendly experience, I was awestruck by how many of the instructions appeared geared entirely towards an adult audience. Take for example, this screenshot of the “Frequently Asked Questions” section which is placed after all the PDFs for the curriculums.

There’s nothing out of the ordinary about it, I admit, a rather average FAQ helping individuals understand and navigate the material offered by the website. However, upon a closer look, it can be seen that this site is not really intended for the student at all, for instance, examine the questions, all of which integral to an understanding of the curriculum.

Notice the language? Notice the way in which the questions even care more about the parent’s opinion than the students? These are not questions which would ever help a child understand the way in which classroom learning adheres to this seemingly fantastical but influential document. So why the complication? Why do we keep this documentation strictly among the adults? It is the student who must abide by the curriculum so why is there not a section for explaining it at the beginning of each year?

So that poses the question, what would the good in curriculum transparency for children be?

Not every child needs it. Not by a long shot. But for those inquiring minds, would it not be better to actually teach them the reasons why learning is structured a certain way instead of just dismissing it behind that word curriculum? Why, when the very job is to teach is this the one sector where further requests for information were generally refuted in my experience? I believe that the curriculum is, to a certain extent seen as the power in the student-teacher relationship, however, a more respectful relationship would be sure to result if children were actually involved in understanding what it is they’re learning and why, and would be less likely to resist cries of “Because it’s in the curriculum” if they too understood these documents, at least in broader strokes.

If a student like me who has wanted to be a teacher for many years even found themselves questioning the teacher over why the curriculum was structured in such a specific way, I can’t be the only one. So why aren’t we dealing with this? Instead of transparency, we breed loyalty to a document that appears to us clear as day but that must appear to the student like the man behind the curtain. Maybe it’s time he was seen by both sides. Students may not need to read a curriculum document from back to front but perhaps more detail is needed than grades and rubrics with regard to expectations. If we stripped away the grades what would we want them to learn? Why aren’t they being made aware of this? There is no reason not to humour inquiries on curriculum documentation and I see no reason why this mystery must continue in the long run. The curriculum needs to be accessible from a student perspective. After all, it’s ultimately their curriculum and their education.

A. Gallacher

Conflicts in Curriculum

In education, we so often focus on the promotion of learning that the actual way in which the curriculum operates to encourage knowledge is overlooked. While there are many different ways to encourage learning, some of which were explored in my last blog, the curriculum ultimately drives the way in which students have their learning delivered to them, as well as the incorporation of various learning styles. Rather than seeing the way in which these items are broken down for educators, students are only ever exposed to the manner in which the teacher chooses to incorporate their personal beliefs on learning styles into the classroom. In my opinion, this needs to change. Transparency allows for a better mutual understanding of how knowledge is presented in the classroom and how learning styles are incorporated into the student’s daily lives. This would allow students to realize they’re the product of a unique system and that their learning is both individualized as well as personalized, with the teacher and student both interacting with and exerting control over the way in which individuals learn.

In many ways, Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment: Engaging the 21st-Century Learner breaks down the way in which students learn, step by step demonstrating the way in which the curriculum is built and exactly what is included in its creation. From the use of “big ideas” and “enduring understandings”, to the way different learning styles and types of knowledge are considered, this book makes it very clear that the curriculum is created to serve the students, combining both what they need to learn with the various ways in which they learn. However, it becomes clear that, while all of the needs are satisfied in the curriculum, rarely are all of them applied by teaching staff.

Although the hierarchy of knowledge is fascinating and the overarching idea of a unifying framework would ideally suggest that all of these elements work in tandem, I have never seen a classroom that unites all of the aspects of the hierarchy of knowledge and how it “connects to the do” with the “Do” being partially represented in Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy of Thinking Skills. Often in high school, a teacher would focus on only remembering and analyzing, the steps attached to facts and big ideas/concepts respectively. While the other factors (creating/evaluating and understanding, respectively connected to enduring understandings and topics) were occasionally touched on, none were as important as fact recall or analysis. Most tests were based upon multiple choice, short answer and occasional essay questions, all of which relied predominantly on a combination of fact recall and analytical questions. While this calls into account the problematic nature of tests and the way they limit the ability of teachers to incorporate various learning styles it also becomes clear that tests do not allow for items like triarchic intelligence to be properly considered, as they do not cater to analytical, practical AND creative students on a regular basis. This is superbly limiting to students, with learning becoming the result of a blanket curriculum rather than the individual elements that create the curriculum.

The curriculum was clearly created with the knowledge that these intelligences exist as well as the way in which they are perceived to function as a unifying framework. So why then is it so hard in practice to combine all of these factors? This indicates, at least to me, that perhaps we are more unwilling to move on from the old story model of teaching than we first appeared. In an idyllic, new story teaching approach, tests would be shaped to the hierarchy of knowledge and the learning styles but also offer the sort of integrative thinking as discussed in Chapter One of Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment: Engaging the 21st-Century Learner  in order to create the best overarching framework to propel new story teaching. Instead, we are presented with old story tests and class structures, suggesting that a new teaching method must be applied to tests. Perhaps different tests could be given out throughout the year to benefit each type of learner, or more choices could be incorporated into the tests such as the different assignment options as discussed last week. If we are going to truly commit to new story teaching, we have to work harder to integrate it throughout the classroom, not just the curriculum.

I leave you with this graphic about Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy and the verbs that can be used in association with each step. Think about how many times you’re seen at least one verb from each section on a high school test and feel free to discuss in the comments whether inclusion of multiple categories on tests is a thing of the future or an ideal of the past for you!

Source: http://www.pinterest.com/pin/81909286947483033/

Until next time,

A. Gallacher

Navigating the Blogging Abyss

(Credit to http://www.pinterest.com/pin/73324300155312471/)

An admission: I don’t know much about blogging. I never felt a need to record my personal life or my experiences in an online forum before, but I’m very excited to get to share my outlooks and opinions on Education with whoever might be reading this. In many ways, blogging might very well have been designed by people like me, people who enjoy debates and sharing their perspectives. However, the goal of this specific blog is to review and consider the items presented both in the lecture section and the textbook readings of EDUC 4P19, a university Education course. I am also bringing my experiences as  fourth year University student with a background in history and literature, interests which very much effect the way in which I view the world and particularly, how I view the evolution of education that we discussed in lecture this week. 

As presented by our professor, there is currently a clear shift from what is considered “old story” teaching, to “new story teaching”. Although there is a clear push currently towards “new story” teaching, using integrated and multidisciplinary studies. This aims to create a learning environment to include a wider assortment of learners than the traditional lecture style of the classroom, which required a certain amount of apathy for the student, transforming it to an engaging global classroom, where students are encouraged to interact with their surroundings in a variety of ways.

Having personally witnessed the transition to something closely resembling “new story” teaching in various classes during my high school career, it was fascinating to see which teachers, usually those who were younger, bringing in group work aspects, a global sense of learning (classes which began examining different cultures on a weekly basis were one such example). The use of new and emerging technologies in the classroom was also advocated by our librarian, who constantly worked to innovate and elevate presentations from plain Microsoft Powerpoint to Prezi presentations, allowing students to present information in a way that suited them and was not so traditional. The video below illustrates the mind mapping possible within Prezi which works to create a more engaging presentation format than the traditional, in many ways a solid comparison to the difference between “new story” and “old story” teaching.

The “new story” also began seeping into various aspects of the curriculum, but not in the way that one might think. Many teachers still used the standard lecture format and the idea of a singular knowledge, but it became less ubiquitous. Although classes were still predominantly traditionalist, there was the way in which assignments began changing, allowing students to express a wide variety of creative expression. Within this changing landscape, classes began offering multiple forms for assignment submission, building soundtracks for old gangster movies in Film classes OR writing newspaper reviews of a film, with these being but a couple of the possibilities for a single assignment. Personally, I worked on a soundtrack, working to connect the songs to the film and, although write-ups were still a required part of the assignment, I focused on a more creative way to present them, creating a booklet for the front of the CD’s jewel case with descriptions for suggested scene placement and the logic behind my song selections. As a result of the unique form of the assignment, it became one of the most memorable and enjoyable I completed throughout high school and, as the “new story” methods rose in popularity, it will be far from the only assignment to bred high levels of enthusiasm in students.

It is through the ability of the evolution of education to contain both elements of the “old story” teaching along with that of the “new story” that further struck me while studying the first chapter of Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment: Engaging the 21st-Century Learner as it became clear that these are not mutually exclusive ideologies. As a student of history, I’m used to hanging onto bits and pieces of the past, allowing them to remain active to a certain extent, examining their influences, while building upon them, improving myself and my global outlook by considering the mistakes, as well as the accomplishments of the past. The realization that, at various points in my schooling, I have been exposed to the theories of personalization, differentiation and individualization discussed in the chapter, drives home the point that this is a changing world which is focused on altering the “old story” teaching to be more inclusive. 

The end of this first chapter also suggests that the teacher is a “change agent” and nothing could be more true to me. It was this ability of teachers to create change that inspired me to work towards becoming one, and I am excited to combine this with the new theories that are emerging from the “new story” learning, as the curriculum works to become empathetic towards the specific needs of students and catering to them in a wide variety of ways.

Until next time,
A Gallacher