3 decades of confusion and distortion

Does anyone have a copy of this paper?

Or an easy way to get one?

Abstract

The justification advanced by teachers and curriculum developers for investing so much time, energy and resources in laboratory work in school science courses almost invariably includes the claim that it provides students with insight into, and experience and practice of, the methods of science. This paper traces the changing nature of laboratory work from the 1960s to the present, from discovery learning to process-led science to contemporary constructivist approaches, and argues that each of these styles of laboratory work has seriously misrepresented and distorted the nature of scientific inquiry. Some suggestions are made for the re-orientation of laboratory work to ensure that it projects an image of science that more faithfully reflects actual scientific practice.

Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion
Derek Hodson
Journal of Curriculum Studies,
Volume 28, Issue 2 March 1996
pages 115 - 135

...from discovery learning to process-led science to contemporary constructivist approaches...

Those babies belong in the Museum of Educational Fads.

being there

Barry left this passage from Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark's Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work:

Despite this clear distinction between learning a discipline and practicing a discipline, many curriculum developers, educational technologists, and educators seem to confuse the teaching of a discipline as inquiry (i.e., a curricular emphasis on the research processes within a science) with the teaching of the discipline by inquiry (i.e., using the research process of the discipline as a pedagogy or for learning). The basis of this confusion may lie in what Hurd (1969) called the rationale of the scientist, which holds that a course of instruction in science should be a mirror image of a science discipline, with regard to both its conceptual structure and its patterns of inquiry. The theories and methods of modern science should be reflected in the classroom. In teaching a science, classroom operations should be in harmony with its investigatory processes and supportive of the conceptual, the intuitive, and the theoretical structure of its knowledge. (p. 16) This rationale assumes "that the attainment of certain attitudes, the fostering of interest in science, the acquisition of laboratory skills, the learning of scientific knowledge, and the understanding of the nature of science were all to be approached through the methodology of science, which was, in general, seen in inductive terms." (Hodson, 1988, p. 22) The major fallacy of this rationale is that it makes no distinction between the behaviors and methods of a researcher who is an expert practicing a profession and those students who are new to the discipline and who are, thus, essentially novices.

From Kirshner, Sweller and Clark: "Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not
Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and
Inquiry-Based Teaching" (pdf file) in Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86; 2006.

group home 3.24.2009

first night

Faking it

In An Experiment with a Project Curriculum (1923) Ellsworth Collings reports on an experiment he directed as county superintendent from 1917 to 1921 at a rural school in McDonald County, Missouri, where the children themselves - not the teacher or the curriculum - determined the projects and topics they would study. Collings claims that the findings of his dissertation strengthened the case for the 'project method' as popularized by his doctoral adviser, William H. Kilpatrick, since the students at the 'experimental school' attained higher scores on standardized tests in writing, reading and arithmetic as well as in social skills, habits and attitudes than the students at the two 'control schools'. Collings's book is a classic of progressive education, and his story of how 10 students were successful in combating an outbreak of typhoid fever in their community is well known among historians and educators even today. A re-examination of the dissertation - in particular of the so-called 'typhoid project' - reveals, however, that the experiment never took place as described and that Collings reconstructed his data substantially in order to conform to Kilpatrick's frame of reference and to present convincing data on the possibility and superiority of child-centred education.

Faking a dissertation: Ellsworth Collings, William H. Kilpatrick, and the 'project curriculum'Michael Knoll
Journal of Curriculum Studies, Volume 28, Issue 2 March 1996, pages 193 - 222

These people really are reprobates.

constructivism doesn't work, part 1: little scientists

New study out from the University of Virginia re: science education, which David Klein once told me is in even worse shape than math education. Gauging by the first sentence in Tai & Sadler's report, David is right:

Inquiry-based instructional practises are a mainstay of the National Science Education Standards (National Research Council, 1996) and Benchmarks of Science Literacy (AAAS, 1993) in the USA.

Same Science for All? Interactive association of structure in learning activities and academic attainment background on college science performance in the USA
Robert H. Tai; Philip M. Sadler
International Journal of Science Education
Vol. 31, No. 5, 15 March 2009, pp. 675–696

Here's a nice summary of where things stand, drawn from O'Neill & Polman:

In recent years, a number of curriculum reform projects have championed the notion of having students do science in ways that move beyond hands-on work with authentic materials and methods, or developing a conceptual grasp of current theories. These reformers have argued that students should come to an understanding of science through doing the discipline and taking a high degree of agency over investigations from start to finish. This stance has occasionally been mocked by its critics as an attempt to create ‘‘little scientists’’—a mission, it is implied, that is either romantic or without purpose. Here, we make the strong case for a practice-based scientific literacy, arguing through three related empirical studies that taking the notion of ‘‘little scientists’’ seriously might be more productive in achieving current standards for scientific literacy than continuing to refine ideas and techniques based on the coverage of conceptual content.

Why Educate ‘‘Little Scientists?’’ Examining the Potential of Practice-Based Scientific Literacy
D. Kevin O’Neill, Joseph L. Polman
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING
VOL. 41, NO. 3, PP. 234–266 (2004)

I have not read O'Neill & Polman's study as yet.^* However, a mere glance at the final section turns up the phrase "student-designed research projects," accompanied by a vote for Deborah Meir, "the principal who has led school reforms in New York and Boston [and recommended] that educators foster 'the capacity to hazard an opinion on matters of science that may pertain to political and moral priorities, and a healthy and knowing skepticism toward the misuse of scientific authority'^** (Meier, 1995)."

Rubbish.

"Student-designed research projects" and "the capacity to hazard an opinion on matters of science that may pertain to political and moral priorities" have nothing to do with each other.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that the typical student-designed research project is likely to render a teen-aged student less able to hazard an opinion on a matter of science that may pertain to political and moral priorities than a solid, book-based, content-rich science course would do, while at the same time causing him to consider himself more able. Not knowing what he or she doesn't know: that's your little scientist.

In any event, Robert Tai and Philip Sadler's analysis of survey data from more than 8000 high school students produced the following conclusion, which will come as a surprise only to ed-school trained educators:

Self-led, self-structured inquiry may be the best method to train scientists at the college level and beyond, but it's not the ideal way for all high school students to prepare for college science.

This is the kind of thing parents and taxpayers do not need a peer-reviewed study to figure out, mostly because parents and taxpayers have a clue.

Data show that "autonomy doesn't seem to hurt students who are strong in math and may, in fact, have a positive influence on their attitude toward science" Tai said. However, "Students with a weak math background who engaged in self-structured learning practices in high school may do as much as a full letter grade poorer in college science," he said.

[snip]

According to Tai, many secondary science classes are turning to a self-structured method of learning with the notion that students will discover science on their own. "Advocates should be sobered by this study's findings," Tai said.

Sobered, hell.

Advocates should be overcome by guilt and remorse; advocates should get down on their hands and knees and beg forgiveness of parents and taxpayers for the countless thousands of young people lost to scientific and science-related careers because they arrived at college having spent 13 years pretending to be little scientists instead of acquiring the content knowledge they needed to study science in college.

But I don't see that happening.

^* If you'd like me to send you the study, email me: cijohn @ verizon.net
^** I guess pure research is out.

He's Back

I just happened across the Connecticut Academy for Education and a reference to the Algebra I Curriculum Project. You know, just doing my five minutes of Google research and such. Channeling the eternal optimist, I wanted to believe that perhaps there was hope and that CT might finally be on the path to joining the ranks of those states with world-class algebra standards-- or any algebra standards at all for that matter.*

One click led to another and I ended up learning that in December 2008, the CT DOE opened up the bidding process for a curriculum grant for the Connecticut Algebra I Model. They don’t appear to have had an overwhelming response given that of 25 available spaces at the bidder’s conference, only 4 were taken. Four.

Not yet ready to abandon all hope, I trudged on to the winning proposal submitted by the Connecticut Academy for Education folks. I was stopped dead in my tracks when I hit page 8, regarding personnel:

“The Steering Committee includes a diverse group of individuals, respected within the state, nationally, and internationally, who will provide vision and guidance for the work. The committee members are Steve Leinwand…”

Leinwand.

This would be the same Steven Leinwand who in February 1994 said, It’s Time to Abandon Computational Algorithms.

"It's time to recognize that, for many students, real mathematical power, on the one hand, and facility with multidigit, pencil-and-paper computational algorithms, on the other, are mutually exclusive. In fact, it's time to acknowledge that continuing to teach these skills to our students is not only unnecessary, but counterproductive and downright dangerous."

The same Steven Leinwand who in September 1998 sealed our doom with CT Math PIRK. The very man who can take all the credit for our failing math standards -- earning an “F” as well as a place on the list of “states to shun”. His hand in our state standards is glaringly obvious and the result of his handiwork makes it no surprise that 40% of incoming freshman at Central, Eastern, Southern and Western Connecticut state universities are ending up in remedial math. (Courant)

The same Steven Leinwand who made decisions on which math programs recommended by the Department of Education to the tune of billions of edu-dollars, would be rated “exemplary” or “promising” despite having “personal connections with ‘exemplary’ curricula.” (Math Problems) The very programs which have prompted districts such as my own to sink boatloads of taxpayer money into well-hyped and expertly marketed snake-oil.

Yep. He’s back.

He’s crept back into the Connecticut math standards game and that’s a very, very bad thing.

In fact, I'd say it's counterproductive and downright dangerous.


*Not surprisingly, not only does Connecticut not have world class math standards, it seemingly has no standards for Algebra I and II courses at all. (National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report: Report of the Task Group on Conceptual Knowledge and Skills- Figure 2)

Behind the Wheel

Interesting thing (must get lefty to weigh in on this).

Normally, Jimmy chants all the time.

He's chanting right now, in fact. Did you pour? Did you pour? You're not playing with the hose. You're not playing with the hose. Want that. Want that. You started cry. You started cry. You're not playing with the hose. You're not playing with the hose. Later. Later.

You're not playing with the hose is an Andrew thing. Andrew likes to play with the hose, which he calls water rope on his Neo; when it's 20 degrees outside Ed likes Andrew not to play with the hose. Hence: you're not playing with the hose.

Point is: the chanting is constant.

Driving home from White Plains this afternoon, though, listening to Behind the Wheel's native speakers banging on about I would like to get a job with more vacations but I can't now and I am sitting down on the floor in front of my television set, I realized Jimmy had fallen silent. When I looked over at him I saw that he'd closed his eyes & seemed to be listening, a small smile on his face.

Now I'm thinking of getting a Pimsleur CD (a secret of the FBI and the CIA for years!) to send along to the new home, maybe.

And I'm trying to think whether he chants when he's watching TV.

is this a sign?

I find most of the sentences on Behind the Wheel Spanish Level 2 challenging to repeat after the native speaker.

All except for "I don't want to know what happened."

That one's a cinch.

where parents get their information

I've left this comment in response to Sean Cavanagh's post on Palo Alto:

Cavanagh:

"This is a difficult choice," one parent said in written comments about the math curricula, which the board asked for. "Well-meaning parents should not be able to vote based on five minutes of Google research."

Which raises another question, in all of these skirmishes: Where are parents getting their information about the various math curricula? Is there any emerging consensus on the math curriculum at early grades? What do debates like the one in Palo Alto say about where these debates are going?

Catherine:

Here is a source of parent information:

K-12 MATH EDUCATION FORUM
April 24, 2008, 5:30pm - 7:30pm, Port Discovery
Dr. James Milgram
Dr. William Schmidt
Dr. Stephen Wilson

I think it would be worthwhile asking where administrators and teachers are getting their information about the various math curricula.

In my own district, "information" about math curricula comes from ed schools and textbook publishers.

Mathematicians and those employed in math-related professions are not consulted, and when such individuals attempt to offer their expertise regardless, they are ignored.

+++++

Concerned Parent put me onto Leading Minds/Baltimore Curriculum Project.

ignoring parents in Palo Alto
welcome to the Grand Canyon
a teacher-mom on Everyday Math
the plot thickens
enlightenment
Steven H on Everyday Math in Palo Alto
where parents get their information
"reality" in Palo Alto

Parents frustrated over math texts
Teacher committee recommends new math text
Ed Week on the ed wars

interview with my cousin re: her experience with EM

Steve H on Everyday Math in Palo Alto

responding to Sean Cavanagh on Re-examining a Math Skirmish:

Cavanagh: 'Focal Points' reflects a growing consensus that A) the current math curriculum is overcrowded and confusing for teachers and students; and B) creating a more focused curriculum and encouraging students to master certain key topics lay the groundwork for their foray into more difficult math later.

Steve H: Everyday Math does not meet either condition A) or B). But then again, "encouraging" mastery is just so wishy-washy it could mean anything. The Focal Points are just used to get others to go away so that schools can continue to decide on all of the details.

Cavanagh: Which raises another question, in all of these skirmishes: Where are parents getting their information about the various math curricula?

Steve H: You can't pick and choose your arguing points. You know quite well that there are many serious, well-founded objections to these math curricula. By not focusing on real problems, like ensuring mastery rather than "encouraging" mastery, you either don't understand what's going on or you're trying to change the subject.

The Focal Points is an educational turf manifesto. It's designed to make others go away. It won't work. Details matter. It's time to move beyond the simple argument that parents just want what they had when they were growing up. Let's talk about why parents have to care about this in the first place. Because schools aren't getting the job done.

March 18, 2009

The notion that Well-meaning parents should not be able to vote based on five minutes of Google research is going to be hard to sustain given the fact that Google now supplies a very large portion of the "curriculum" to which American children are exposed.

In my district, which has adopted every known "initiative" promoted by ed schools and their ancillary consultants and vendors,^* "research" means Google and teachers routinely pull "projects," assignments, and tests from the internet.

e.g.: recent Advanced Placement writing assignment given to high school students: Google 10 pieces of nonfiction writing on the web -- any kind of nonfiction writing written by anyone at all -- and summarize each.

If Google is good enough for AP Comp teachers, it's good enough for parents.

What's Google for the goose is Google for the gander.


^* differentiated instruction, 21st century skills, media literacy, balanced literacy, reading workshop, writing workshop, Assured Writing Experiences (AWEs), middle school model, exploratories, interdisciplinary teaming, cross-curricular everything under the sun, character education, and so much more!

ignoring parents in Palo Alto
welcome to the Grand Canyon
a teacher-mom on Everyday Math
the plot thickens
enlightenment
Steven H on Everyday Math in Palo Alto
where parents get their information
"reality" in Palo Alto

Parents frustrated over math texts
Teacher committee recommends new math text
Ed Week on the ed wars

interview with my cousin re: her experience with EM

Jimmy

windows to the soul

photo by álfheiður erla

Bootstrapping their way to mediocrity

The National Science Foundation offered grants to school districts starting in 1995 (and whose funding ended in 2002) called Local Systemic Change (LSC). These grants provided professional development to science and math teachers. To be brief, the NSF funded PD programs were party-line instruction in "standards-based" teaching; i.e., how to teach the crap programs that NSF's Education and Human Resource Division funded (like Everyday Math, Investigations, IMP, CMP, Core Plus, etc).

There is a report that came out in 2006 that I just discovered. It evaluates the effectiveness of the LSC program. (It was written by Horizon, Inc., under a grant from NSF). I wish I had found it earlier. It can be found here.

This excerpt taken from page 43 of the report is quite telling:

"Other evaluators cited changes in teachers’ beliefs about who can learn science and mathematics. For example, prevailing attitudes among some teachers before LSC workshops included low expectations and the need for ability grouping. LSC professional development helped change these beliefs. Said these teachers about the impact of LSC professional development:

"Before IMP, I felt that there were mathematically unreachable students. I felt that students could not go on to more challenging ideas like algebra, statistics, probability, or trig without basic skills. Fortunately, with my IMP training, I have a different feeling about students. I strongly believe in access to mathematics for all. (Teacher, 6–12 mathematics LSC)"

The above quote from a teacher (in italics) is amazing. Before this teacher started using IMP, he/she felt that basic skills were necessary in order to proceed in mathematics. After IMP, which essentially avoids content whenever possible, he/she saw the light. Yes, wonderful things happen when you pretend that content doesn't matter, and that higher order thinking skills occur just by giving students "authentic" problems without the bother of all those and boring drills and instruction. They are able to reach for the stars. Unfortunately they do so by standing on a two legged stool. But NSF has done its duty and the people who wrote this report have confirmed what NSF always knew: Their reform math programs are an unparalleled success.

The only thing this report lacks is a chorus line kick and the ritual singing of Kumbayaa.

Educating Teachers: Science or Belief?

This is from Children of the Code (I've added some paragraphing)-- the whole interview is called "How Reading Works and What It Does for the Mind".

David Boulton: In particular, what I'm referring to is the way that we educate teachers. We don't take them into a first-person, grounded understanding of this challenge from which to become scientist-learners in their own right, in their practice of it, and they end up subscribing to belief mechanisms.

Dr. Keith Stanovich: Yes.

David Boulton: And in that sense, it's like competing religions.

Dr. Keith Stanovich: Yes, very much so. They respond to the charismatic people they had in teacher education school and they're not given what I would call discipline-based knowledge.

Actually it's not just reading I have an interest in, my other research area is critical thinking. Similar things go on there.

You have teachers picking up knowledge from in-service gurus and teaching reading without a knowledge of phonology or orthography or the history of linguistic change, which I see is one of your interests, and what I would call information processing, cognitive psychology, for that matter, relevant issues and cognitive development. This is what I call the discipline-based knowledge that surrounds reading. Very little of it penetrates into reading education.

The point I make is that this is an unfortunately replicable phenomena. It happens in the area of critical thinking as well. Schools have programs they get, again, from commercial packages, in-service gurus, with no grounding in discipline-based knowledge in thinking and reasoning; and I mean discipline-based knowledge in philosophy, decision science, decision theory, cognitive science - where principles of rational thought are being studied empirically and theoretically by philosophers. None of this penetrates education. So, I think it's a recurring problem.

David Boulton: And the biggest danger that I see as I bump into what you're talking about is that teachers are trained out of being learners. There’s such a difference between belief based on somebody else's knowledge...

Dr. Keith Stanovich: Right.

David Boulton: And actually having an appetite to understand something for yourself, striving into your own learning, and then having access to the kind of resources that will support your learning and keeping it going right through your practice in school with kids.


Dr. Keith Stanovich: Well said. Every component of what you've listed is missing from the educational culture. I couldn't agree more.

Go read the whole interview.

Stanovich's home page

concerned parent on language & "memory tags"

I checked out Spanish by Association and I can see why you're liking it.

I was raised in a bi-lingual home and so, never experienced learning another language from scratch until I studied German and Italian (but mostly German because it's not Latin-based). I'm not sure if I ever took the time to consider how I organize language until more recently.

Anyway, I had a funny experience where I consciously realized that when I hear a word, particularly Eng/Span, I have an image, a sound (music, voice), or a feeling, etc. running through my mind. These references are tagged with words in the languages I speak and in the case of Spanish I can recall them just as easily as I can in English. These associations are what allow me to be fluent which I am less so in Italian, and even less than that in German. In Spanish the associations are on par with the English while the other are weaker. It only makes sense that finding an efficient way to tag or associate concepts would improve your ability to speak and understand another language, or anything for that matter.

Strangely enough, I recently picked up a couple of mnemonic books (Thirty Days Hath September, Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge) as a result of this feeling that I should be helping my children associate many of the concepts they've been learning so they can more easily retrieve the ideas when they need them.

and see: It's on the Tip of the Tongue by Charles Zanor WAPO March 11, 2008

Enlightenment

anonymous left a link to a third article on the situation in Palo Alto, a news story containing this passage:

At Monday's meeting they also discussed how to improve communication with parents, Davis said. One critique of Everyday Math claimed parents might have a difficult time helping their children with Everyday Math's less traditional methods.

"Do we need to do a better job of enlightenment, do we need to do a better job of parent education?" Davis said. "Absolutely."

Palo Alto teachers pick controversial Everyday Math curriculum

So....Palo Alto parents.
Here's a thought experiment.
You are an assistant superintendent. Your parent population hails from Stanford University and Silicon Valley, and you are employed by the school district that was Ground Zero of the Math Wars.
You have two choices.
a) adopt a world-class math curriculum
b) adopt Everyday Math and do a better job of parent education

ignoring parents in Palo Alto
welcome to the Grand Canyona teacher-mom on Everyday Math
the plot thickens
enlightenment
Steven H on Everyday Math in Palo Alto
where parents get their information
"reality" in Palo Alto
Parents frustrated over math textsTeacher committee recommends new math textEd Week on the ed wars
interview with my cousin re: her experience with EM

cranberry on advisories in private schools (& building good habits)

In my other child's private school, the advisor is a great system. It's one of your child's teachers. If you think your child is developing a social or academic problem, you raise the issue with your child's advisor. This is marvelous, because it provides a listener for the parent, who may very well have a legitimate complaint about the other teacher. Let's say, a child feels that the homework is assigned, but not collected, by a new teacher. The child's advisor can speak with the new teacher, encouraging him to collect the homework. The parent is not left in the position of having to complain either to the teacher, or to the principal, neither good options. As a parent, I don't want to make a stink about a small problem. In the public school, though, I've seen small problems balloon into huge problems, because there are no avenues for parents to provide rational feedback on their child's academic experience.

Hogwarts has "mentor group," which is similar -- although they don't seem to invite parents to talk to mentors, particularly.

C's mentor keeps track of the kids' grades and intervenes if grades start to slip. She also is a bear (that's a good thing) on the issue of kids using their planners. She checks their planners every day to see if they've written down their assignments; if they haven't, she has them do so.

She is building a habit. She isn't just haranguing the kids on the importance of being organized (which is what public schools do & what I've often done myself), she is teaching them how to be organized, and she is giving them practice each and every day until using the planner becomes automatic.

We have only recently realized our job as parents isn't just to produce a "good kid" and a good student, our job is also to build good habits. In the past couple of years, as C. has gotten older and more responsible, Ed and I have both taken to scolding him about his messy ways. We find his stuff all over the house, we get mad, we remonstrate.

That's not the way to do it.

We need to set a time each and every day when we have him do a quick clean-up of his room and his desk, and we need to keep doing this until it becomes second nature for C. to do a quick clean-up of his room and his desk.

Speaking of building habits, a commenter recommended Glenn Latham's The Power of Positive Parenting awhile back. I've only dipped into it, and don't know what he has to say on the subject of teaching kids to clean up their rooms and use their planners, but it is a fantastic book.

Wonderful.

middle school advisory

middle school advisory

Seeing as how CT has apparently mandated advisories in middle school, it's time to post this article by Daniel Deitte (pdf file):

When I was first hired as a middle school sixth grade teacher, I was thrilled. This was a position I had coveted for over four years....Soon after I started, however, I realized that one piece was missing; we did not have a strong advisory program. Yes, we had a structured advisory period for 29 minutes at the end of every day, but there was very little focus to our advisory. Something needed to be done about the lack of interest and focus during that time.

[snip]

As I spoke about this with several of my colleagues, something else became very apparent to me …none of us had a clear picture of what was supposed to happen in a true advisory program.

Good reason to institute an advisory program and pay teachers a stipend to advise!

The worst part about running the advisory I described above was that I found myself dreading the last 29 minutes of each day. Inevitably, I had students who did not want to participate in S.Q.U.I.R.T [Super Quiet Uninterrupted Reading Time], or who never had any homework to do. Additionally, somewhere, early in my first year of teaching, I had decided that my advisory time would be a quiet time with the students needing permission to speak.

"A quiet time with the students needing permission to speak" is not an advisory.

In order to achieve this, I found myself yelling and constantly getting frustrated with the students.

Definitely not an advisory.

My first plan of action in making my change was to do some heavy research over the summer. I did not have a clear understanding of what an advisor’s role was. The Internet provided me with resources that would help me move toward this goal.

Taxpayers, take note.

We are paying certified teachers to assume roles that have not been defined by their superiors or the school board and for which they have no training. No one in this woman's school knows what an advisor or an advisory is and yet they've got advisors and advisories up the ying-yang because the middle school model includes advisories.

I found this definition to be the following: “An organizational structure in which one small group of students identifies with and belongs to one educator, who nurtures, advocates for, and shepherds through school the individual in that group” (Cole, 1992, p. 5).

Bingo. That is what takes place inside an actual advisory group headed by a teacher in a private or parochial school. One educator nurtures, advocates for, and shepherds through school the individuals in that group.

Furthermore, I found that, “Advisories should help students develop meaningful interpersonal relationships” (Dale, 1995, p. 3). Lastly, “Activities should be provided … that lead to the development of positive attitudes, values, and emotional control” (Connors, 1990, p. 165).

oops

That's not an advisory.

An advisory (called a mentor group at Hogwarts) is focused on school first, relationships and attitudes second & then primarily as they relate to school. The mentor follows the kids' grades and steps in if grades start to slip. Since Hogwarts is a Catholic school, charity activities take place inside the mentor group, too, but the focus is academics and the kids' progress in their studies.

It bears repeating that the mentor advocates for the student. If the student is having a problem with another teacher, the advisor straightens things out. When we toured Rye Country Day, the student showing us around actually called the person heading advisory "your mom at school." Those were her words.

These definitions clicked immediately with me. It was that affective domain that seemed to need the most work with middle school students. It did not take me long to realize that my focus for advisory would be character education, teamwork, and community building.

Not an advisory.

Not worth the stipend taxpayers are shelling out.

As I delved deeper into my research, I found that out of 9,000 letters sent from middle school students to their U.S. Representatives, “Over 15% were concerned about their home and school environments” (Hoversten, Doda, & Lounsbury, 1991, p. 9). The question I formulated from all of my research, which would be the root of my year-long inquiry, was, “Will the development of character education, in the sixth grade advisory, create a strong sense of community, nurture teamwork, and help develop a sense of pride between each student and his/her fellow advisees?” This became my focus for the 2000-2001 school year.

The advisory is not a research project.

[M]y next task was to figure out how I would go about facilitating the implementation of character education into this advisory. I knew I did not want it to be in a lecture format. The last thing I wanted was to conduct lectures, and then to require them to take notes. My feelings were that I would quickly lose the kids if I tried this type of structure. Then I found a book written by Tom Jackson that discussed the importance of “Active Learning.”

Saw that one coming a mile away.

“Active Learning has people participate in their own learning process by involving them in some type of activity where they physically become a part of the lesson” (Jackson, 1995, p. 2). I knew I had what I wanted; I would use Active Learning to foster character, teamwork, and community building. I remember feeling the excitement building inside of me after having found a place to begin.

Character Education Provides Focus for Advisory by Danielle Deitte (pdf file)

There's plenty more where that comes from, none of it having to do with academics or responsible adults advocating for the students in their charge.

bonus points: Advocacy for Children by Siegfried Engelmann

group home, part 2

Jimmy is moving to a group home on Monday, and I am so sad.

Christian and C. keep saying, "It's like going to college."

Sort of, I say.

It's like going to college except he's 21 and it's a group home.

Not that shipping C. off to college is going to be any better. Last summer my brother's eldest was leaving for college and his parents were awfully stressed. They're both solid Midwestern types, so they weren't saying they were stressed; it was just there, hanging over us. I felt majorly stressed on their behalf, for pete's sake.

At one point I said to my brother, "Well, at least you have two more kids at home," and he said, "Oh, great. I can just keep going through wave after wave of this."

If you knew my brother, you'd understand just how horrifying an image that is: this big, solid, kind Midwestern guy -- a rock -- talking about waves upon waves.

Maybe I'll keep Andrew with me for all time.


group home

Mrs. H on using gestures to teach algebra

I've been using gestures for many years in my algebra classes, but I had no idea there was research backing them up. I only knew that gestures AND mnemonics help me learn things. I even teach a workshop every summer at our state's math conference called Crazy Antics and Gestures for Hard to Remember Math Facts

Just yesterday we were doing quadratic calisthenics where the students act out transformations of the quadratic parent function while I call out different functions.