Friday, January 25, 2013

Chapter 2: Educational Technology for School Leaders


Kelly, F. S., McCain, T. & Jukes, I. (2011). No more cookie-cutter high schools. In Schrum, L. (Ed.), The best of Corwin: Educational technology for school leaders (25-40). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Summary
            Kelly, McCain, and Jukes make it abundantly clear that change is here and it is not going away.  High schools are not sufficiently meeting the needs of students and all involved in the design and vision of high schools need to make some fundamental shifts.  The authors advocate a business model of education that is able to keep up with changing communities and technologies.  This type of plan requires planning, patience, and perseverance.  All parties involved with education need to be part of the process and negative reactions to change should be expected.  However, by designing flexibility into the educational system – structurally and pedagogically – schools will be more ready to prepare students for an unimaginable future.
Reflection
            I have never been comfortable with the students-as-customers idea.  In higher education, there is always chatter about entitled students who believe that trying hard merits an “A.”  However, I am willing to ask a difficult question: would students act less entitled if we were meeting their academic needs?
            As a writing consultant, I often have students who want to hand me their paper for me to fix.  One of my biggest struggles is finding ways to help them learn strategies to revise and edit their own work.  It is very easy to slip into a didactic mode of consulting, rather than a partnership.  My goal in Geology and Geophysics is to create a myriad of opportunities for students to improve their writing, which I think is in the spirit of Kelly et al.’s exhortations.  For instance, I am in the process of creating a D2L resource page for graduate students and faculty, establishing a graduate student writing group for long-term, mutual support, and am open for students to work with me personally during office hours.  

4 comments:

  1. I also am deeply uncomfortable with the idea of school's contorting themselves for a student who is still in the process of learning important skills yet undeveloped. The classroom exists, at some extent, to train rigor and should not, at its basest level, be designed for convenience.

    It is refreshing to see similar concerns voiced and I think you balanced them well with the example of partnered learning that follows.

    I asked this question of myself while reading this chapter and thought I might ask you; "Can students be subjected to classroom requirements and still see themselves as the primary contributor to their own learning?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is an excellent question Russ.

      One of the schools I observed last semester stood by the practice of "multiple tries." If student learning is the goal, then students should have the opportunity to work on material until they understand it without being penalized for the need to practice. For instance, if it takes 3 times for you to pass a driving test, you still have full use of your license once you've successfully passed the test.

      In my mind, this kind of system places more responsibility on the student for their own learning. Each has the chance to continue practicing, asking questions, etc until they understand the material enough to pass the test.

      However, many college professors detest this practice. Those students who are accustomed to retaking tests and replacing their grades are perhaps not well served by such a system.

      I think what I am trying to say is this: we are going to need to rethink our assessment strategies if partnering is going to become the norm. There will also likely need to be a cultural shift regarding our current system of rankings.

      On the other hand, the teachers I observed noted that they still see a normal grade distribution, despite the opportunities students have to improve their grades through practice.

      Delete
  2. I think I can understand why you feel uncomfortable about the situation of student as costumer. Every time when I go to the writing center to ask someone to help me with my paper, mostly they just took my paper and started to fix it, they would just tell you change this and change that, so I was like a costumer, waiting to see the result. I think as a teacher, we often trying to help the way to help our students, but sometime we just fall into the hole where we do all the work and students get nothing from it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree Tommy - it can be hard to watch our students struggle with material. Sometimes it seems easier to do things for them.

      With partnering, I think teachers might be more encouraged to point their students to appropriate resources that will help them learn to solve problems on their own.

      It takes time though, for a teacher to be able to "let go" of that kind of control. There is a lot of pressure to produce good results. We also often assume we know what our students want or need from us; it takes practice to learn how to ask questions and listen so that we can help our students with those fundamental things they are struggling with.

      My experience as a writing consultant has helped me to understand that. I used to feel very responsible for the papers students brought me. If I didn't fix them, a bad grade would be my fault. After a long time, I have learned how to ask questions and show students resources that might help them recognize patterns in their writing that they can begin to fix on their own.

      Delete