Article: Orchestrating Multiple Intelligences

Article 1: What do we know about how kids learn – with or without technology?

Moran, S., M. Kornhaber, & Gardner, H. (2006, September). Orchestrating multiple intelligences. Educational Leadership, 64(1), 23 – 27.

This article was an interesting take on Gardiner’s Multiple Intelligences. It does provide some information for teachers attempting to teach to students who differ across the 9 intelligences. Instead of trying to plan 9 lessons with 9 sets of objectives, Moran et al suggest that teachers create collaborative, content-rich, authentic learning activities. In this way, students are constantly working to use their intelligences for the completion of the assignment. They compensate for each others weaknesses and stretch their own mental muscle. Moran, Kornhaber, and Gardner offer teachers a way to tap into the 9 intelligences without bringing a near-impossible task upon themselves.

A few interesting facts:

1. Using MI theory helps students to “perceive themselves as potentially smart in a number of ways”. I like this idea – especially these days when our heavily tested kids often label themselves “smart” or “dumb” based on standardize scores that only provide information on a limited number of intelligences.

2. The laser and searchlight profiles are an interesting way to look at students’ abilities. Laser profile individuals have one or two really strong intelligences while the other intelligences are less-developed. The searchlight profiles are students who have similar skills in many of the different intelligences. It would be great know which students are in which group – and which profile I fall into!

3. I love the metaphor of a class working together being an “orchestra”. It really points out the benefits each member can reap when each student capitalizes on their strengths for the educational good of the entire class.

This was a nice review of MI Theory (with a new twist, to boot!). In the days of tests, tests, and tests – we are sometimes taken away from sound educational theory – like Multiple Intelligences. It was nice to have this little refresher.

Article: Ensuring No Child with a Disability is Left Behind

Article 2: “What is Accessible Technology?”

eSchool News Special Report. (2007). Accessible Technologies: Ensuring that No Child with a Disability is Left Behind. Retrieved September 14, 2007, from http://www.eschoolnews.com/resources/reports/accessibletech/index.cfm

Ok, first of all, this article actually commends No Child Left Behind! Don’t see that very often in education (usually, with good reason!). However, in this case, it does say that NCLB has lead the charge in ensuring that all students (including those who are mentally and physically disabled) are held to high standards-meeting expectations. This is a good thing. it also says that the NCLB has had implications outside of k-12 education – promoting more accessibility in the college setting (online and live) and has also encouraged technology vendors to smarten up.

I like what is said about moving away from “separate but equal education” into a “scenario where technologies and approaches designed to benefit special-needs children are ingrained in the fabric of traditional learning environments”. I like the idea that the needs of all students will be the technology plan for districts.

I also agree with the authors that everyone in a district should be aware and educated about the available assistive technologies that students can access. I think educating staff (especially by allowing staff to demo the technology) would be very important in ensuring that all tech options are considered for kids who need them (or would benefit from the intervention).

Of course, all of this will take money – and a priority shift. But, I believe this shift is inevitable – it’s just a matter of working faster to make these changes so they can benefit more kids, rather than sitting back and letting a decade’s worth of kids miss the boat.

Cynthia – Just a quick question, should I be using APA guidelines on this blog? I’ve been sneakily copying your bibliography info, but should I be using APA when I use quotations, etc. I’m not sure of the blog-etiquette. Thanks!

Article: IT in Education Accessibility Checklist

Article 3: “What is Accessible Technology?”

AccessIT. (2004). Information Technology in Education Accessibility Checklist. Retrieved September 17, 2007, from http://www.washington.edu/accessit/it-checklist/

Cool checklist. I guess I sometimes forget to think about the physical environment of our school building (and my classroom). It’s funny, you get used to things a certain way, and they blend into the “woodwork” (speaking figuratively, we have no real woodwork in our classrooms – mostly plaster). What I like about this website is that it compels you to think about your space and your technology in a new (and better, more inclusive) way. It reminds the user of all the things that should be considered and allows one to conduct an evaluation and reflection on the accessibility of the educational environment.

Just something the website reminded me of…Web-content accessibility is a pet peeve of mine. I understand that we need to have a filter on our web access at a public school. However, it’s so hard to find really meaningful, useful sites. I do a good amount of my planning at home. When I get to school and find an awesome site has been blocked – I’m so disappointed. Our district has a means by which to petition for a site to be “unblocked”, but it’s a lengthy process, and usually by the time the site is available, the teachable moment is long gone. I’m not sure what the remedy is for this – except for teachers having the administrative password (I don’t see this happening anytime soon!). Any suggestions?

Anyways, great site… and a helping of food for thought!

Article: My Web, My Way

Article 1: “What is Accessible Technology”

My Web My Way http://www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/

Just a couple thoughts about this cool site…It’s really very neat how you can change your computer to serve your whims, needs, or desires. I thought it was very interesting that you could magnify the screen. This will come in handy when I am projecting my computer onto the tv in my classroom. It’s often difficult for the kids to see what I am doing especially with the distortion from going from computer to tv. I also love the idea of enlarging the mouse pointer so that you can really use it as an instructional tool (well, at least a larger pointer!). Although I will not try it myself, I can see the utility of changing your keyboard commands and how your keyboard responds to typing – neat & useful features. Overall, a great resource. I think I will show this to my students, too!

Article: Classroom of the Future

Article 2: “Education, Technology, and Society”

YouTube: Classroom of the Future: What’s New in Educational Tech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcXEznPXj8k

The classroom of the future reminds me a lot of the the classroom we use for our coursework or most other college classrooms.  It would be great to have those resources to use in our high, middle, and elementary school rooms.

I really like the projection screens and Smart boards in the room. I also like the nice wall-mounted flat-screen tvs. (Side note: I would like one of these at home, too!)

I fully support the idea of having a flexible classroom layout and furniture that can easily be rearranged would be well-suited for group work tables, full class instruction sections, and independent work spaces.  I also like the notion of large classrooms with good acoustics and HVAC (controlled from each individual room).

The IP connected computer work stations of the future would really work well for monitoring students progress and Internet searches. I also like the videoconferencing capability and the I-Pod-type plugins.

I hope that we are quickly moving toward this type of classroom – it seems very conducive to teaching and learning.

Article: YouTube: Did You Know?

Article 1: “Education, Technology, and Society”

YouTube: Did You Know? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7J_ereCiTo
Shift Happens wiki: http://shifthappens.wikispaces.com/

I just finished viewing the Shift Happens video on YouTube. I have seen this before – or a version of it – but each time I see it, I am just blown away by the stats and facts presented. Some things I found most interesting:

1. 57% of teens are Internet creators – I would love to see a breakdown of what they are creating (myspace, webpages, music, etc.).

2. 8:10 people don’t know what a blog is… (I’m in the 20% who know now!)

3. 9:10 people don’t know what a wiki is… (me either, really)

4. There are more text messages in a day than there are people on Earth! I can believe this after traveling in Europe – over 5 years ago – and watching many Europeans text message everywhere they go.

5. The idea of ” mosquito ringtones” that adults cannot hear is a little frightening.

6. The idea that teachers are educating a workforce for jobs that don’t exist yet is a bit daunting. It’s so true, though. When I talk to my kids about what they plan to do, I am always quick to add that with the current rate of change in our society, they may be doing a job so unlike those of the jobs of their parents’ generation.

7. Nintendo spends more on technological research than the USA – scary thought!

8. I am sure that our kids are not being prepared for global communication and commerce. I think the adults that teach our kids (myself included, at times) are often so afraid of change, and so late to embrace it, that we are doing our kids a massive educational disservice. How to change this mentality, I’m not sure… but I think the change will happen whether we prepare for it, or not.

Overall, an interesting video – I think I will show it to my kids tomorrow and see what their reactions are. I’m curious to gather their opinions on the issue.

Reflection for 10/18

Week 3:

Our conversation during class last week’s class got me thinking about the relationship between the new “Response to Intervention” legislation and Understanding by Design theory. Then, I began to contemplate the relationship the same new legislation has with Universal Design.

First, Understanding by Design: At our district, we have been implementing UbD for about three years now. In that time, we have also increased the number of Connected Math units we teach, adopted a reading anthology for teaching LA, bought new social studies textbooks, and continued the use of the Foss science program and the Write Traits writing program. It has been somewhat of a challenge to plan UbD units while still meeting all the district benchmarks and teaching the programs we are asked to use in our classrooms.

RTI calls for the use of programs that have been tested and are supported by research. My best guess is that this means we will be using more programs that are created by textbook companies that have the staff and resources to conduct product testing. I am beginning to wonder what effect this will have on our abilities to create UbD units that are designed to meet benchmarks and the individual needs and interests of our population. How much can we alter a standardized program before its results are no longer research-based?

I hope I’m seeing this as a “glass half empty” scenario and that the actual legislation will be more flexible and allow us to continue to tweak our lesson plans to suit the needs of our learners and employ UbD. In the last few years, we have found ways to use the tested-programs and still make changes to further promote student understanding.

I hope the people behind RTI have the best of intentions. I am concerned about programs that bring about massive changes for all kids – and all teachers. One-size-fits all fixes seldom bring about positive and lasting change. I would like to do some more research on RTI to see if this policy was tested for effectiveness in a school district or two or whether it was looked at from a more budget-minded angle.

On the other hand, I do think this RTI legislation may be a better match with Universal Design. Because we will be looking at ways to help kids with specific learning issues, we will most likely look to assistive technologies and other programs to help provide timely interventions for kids who need them. I think UD can become a useful tool to help kids and teachers reach desired learning outcomes. But, again, here, I worry about UD technology being seen as a fix in and of itself – without proper staffing to help students learn the technology and modify student programs. If we can do this,  I think we can meet desired learning outcomes.

I am looking for more information on RTI. I hope I can find a way to better match UbD with UD and the changes we will see because of RTI.

Any suggestions?

Reflection for 10/11

I think I am going to keep this one short as I have rambled on for long enough about each of this week’s articles.

I do think that I have a better idea about what UD is and how it works to help all kids access an education that is appropriate for their strengths and needs. I am totally on board with what is suggested by the article authors. I do see a lot of potential roadblocks on our way to making this happen for our kids – but I think it’s a matter of when not if we will overcome these obstacles (sooner would be much better!).

As I was reading this week and sitting in class last Thursday, I kept thinking about my language arts curriculum. For background: I have been teaching at GNG for 6 years. I’ve always taught SS, but have switched between teaching math and teaching LA. Last year, I taught math, this year LA. I think switching my focus from time-to-time gives me an interesting vantage point. When teaching math, we use the Connected Math Program. It is very straightforward. All the math teachers at our grade level use the program and we deliver a pretty consistent math experience at our grade level.

In LA, we do have a reading program (HOLT), a spelling program, and a set of learning objectives for writing and grammar. Unlike in math where the outcomes are clear, in LA, I feel like I am planning specific lessons for my students that do not always tie into what we did yesterday – or what we are going to do tomorrow. I have standards and goals to teach by and a cohort of colleagues who plan with me, but I still feel disjointed and “overly goaled” (which leads to me feeling focus-less). I am hoping that in this course we can plan a unit with reasonable learning outcomes, purpose, scaffolding, and an obvious course of lessons. In this way, I hope my students will be able to see where we are going and where we have come from. I think using UD will allow me to tailor each learning experience to each student – providing them with choices, individualized learning, and academic progress.

On a lighter note, I love the NoteTaker software. I’ve asked our curriculum coordinator to see if we can purchase it for 6th grade teacher laptops. I think our hand-me-down student laptops would be too expensive to outfit, especially since they are technologically on-their-way-out. Karen said she will look into it – and we are very optimistic.

I am also loving the text reader on this laptop. I have been using it to help me proofread my entries for the blog. This is great because I have a real difficulty picking up typos on the screen.

Overall, interesting week. I am looking forward to starting out unit on Thursday in class.

(Cynthia – Please let me know if I am not “meeting standards” on these reflections. I want to make sure that I am on track.)

Article: Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age

Article 1: How do I incorporate universal design in my learning objectives?

Rose, D. & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. Chapter 5: Using UDL to set clear goals. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved September 14, 2007, from http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes/chapter5.cfm

This chapter discusses the relationship between standards and student diversity in goal setting. Rose and Meyer suggest that the best standards are those that teach students how to learn instead of focusing on specific skills or knowledge. I agree with them completely on this front. I often feel our MLRs are too specific and limit teachers. I have noticed that the revised MLRs (I’ve looked mostly at social studies) are a little more broad and a little less fact-oriented. Hopefully, these changes will help teachers and students focus on the process of learning instead of specific information-driven goals.

I was very interested to read about the idea of brain networks. I studied psychology in college and was very interested in cognition. I am sure we looked at the idea of networks – but its been awhile and new findings have come out to support and flesh-out the network model. Teaching to one or more of the three networks (recognition, affective, and strategic) offers teachers the chance to tap into different realms of understanding with each unit and lesson. I see that determining which standard hooks up with each network may be a challenge. Crafting learning experiences to fit these networks may also be hard to do at first. The technology (E-Trekker) in this article would certainly be a helpful tool to get teachers started teaching to the networks and writing appropriate goals to meet the needs of all learners.

I think I am guilty of writing what Rose and Meyer call “fuzzy goals”. In fact, in conferences this week, I will probably be tempted to write some of these. It is a real challenge to write practical, research-based goals for 44 kids that we will be able to address and meet in a mere 8 or 9 months. Our district picked up the NWEA assessment program last year. This does help in goal setting as it identifies areas of strength and weakness for each student. That gets us started (keeping in mind that this is only one measure). However, the next steps of selecting a goal’s purpose and planning learning engagements is hard to do when every kid’s goals are so varied. A program like E-Trekker would be very helpful to organize this information and keep teachers and students on track for goal attainment.

In the end, I love what this article proposes for teaching and learning. I do see some areas that would need reform in order to do what Rose and Meyer propose…

1. We need more time. For planning. For training. With our students.

2. We need more technology to make this a manageable protocol.

3. We need school administration, teachers, parents, and students to buy in.

4. We need standards based on teaching kids to understand – not just be able to learn specific facts and/or skills.

I think we can do this. I think we will be doing this in the future. I hope our curriculum unit will be able to work toward these ends. We need to start writing goals that motivate kids – rather than sit unattended in a portfolio.

Article: Universal Design Principles

Article 4: “What is Universal Design?”

Bob Topping of Sheridan College on Universal Design Principles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbZXGz_tiVU

Mr. Topping says that UD is really a way of thinking. It is considering the different disabilities in the population and taking those disabilities into account when designing spaces and experiences. He also says there are 7 principles and a set of guidelines for each that is used. He also mentions that UD is just not for architecture, but rather is for designing anything – to make things more “usable” (including curriculum design). It is really interesting that a movement that seems to have started with physical space planning has had such far-reaching implications in our world (both the larger one and the educational realm).

Just a side note – It has been really interesting to try and figure a way to run the Youtube videos at home. My Mac will not support the Quicktime to run the videos (either it won’t or I can’t figure out how to make it do so) – and my blog service is not supported by Youtube to embed the movies into the entries. Anyways, because of all this, I am sitting in front of my PC and my laptop trying to view the info on one, and type in the other. I keep attempting to use my PC mouse for my Mac. I guess I could use some UD here to make this experience a little more user-friendly.