Satisfied by myths

When I signed up to coach my daughter's soccer team (she was three at the time), I attended a coaches' clinic. Because I had never played or coached soccer before, I was especially keen to learn.

The clinic was run by a man from Eastern Europe. I could tell he had a real passion for soccer. I was impressed with the focus of the clinic -- have fun and be active were the two primary goals of the clinic. And we were going to do this by ensuring that the kids had as many ball-touches as possible. That is, we wanted the kids to kick the ball as many times as possible inside of the 45 minutes that we played. The idea being, kids have the most fun when they actually get to play the ball, and as far as future development goes, the kids will only ever improve at soccer if they kick the ball a lot. And it's more than just coincidence that the two go hand-in-hand.

I thought this all made a lot of sense.

As a sidebar, the man running the clinic told us a story about how his childhood soccer coaches were very old fashioned and traditional. So much so that they believed athletes shouldn't drink water while playing soccer. I think their reasoning was that water would bloat you and slow you down. His point was that we know better today and that the kids need to drink water routinely through out activity.

We all had a good laugh at the expense of those old-fashioned coaches who were silly enough to believe in such a myth.

My point here is that I hope we are not arrogant enough to believe that we are not still foolishly satisfied by a great number of myths.

I hope we are not so pompous to believe that other people years from now won't look back on some of what we do today and have a good laugh tomorrow.

The problem is that everything is obvious once you know the answer. We know today that drinking water is not something to be avoided during physical activity - rather it is something to be encouraged. It just makes sense. Common sense.

There is a danger in all this that Ellen Langer explains in her book The Power of Mindful Learning:

Not only do we as individuals get locked into singleminded views, but we also reinforce these views for each other until the culture itself suffers the same mindlessness. There is an awareness of this in science. Scientists proceed along a path gathering data that builds an accepted wisdom. At some point someone turns everyone's attention to a very different view of the previously acknowledged truth. This phenomenon happens frequently enough that scientists are generally not surprised by what is called a paradigm shift. In a recent New York Times article psychologist Dean Radin described four stages of adopting ideas: "The first is, 1.'It's impossible.' 2. 'Maybe it's possible, but it's weak and uninteresting.' 3. 'It is true and I told you so.' 4. 'I thought of it first.'" I would add a fifth stage, "We always knew that. How could it be otherwise?"

So how do we avoid this kind of auto-pilot amnesia?

I think the answer lies somewhere in that we must remain acutely aware of how what we have done in the past and what we are doing in the present relates to our ultimate goals.

While it's true that wishing tomorrow to be just like yesterday won't ever make today a better place, it's also true that pretending yesterday and today are as good as it gets will damn us all to the tyranny of the here and now.

School with a capital S

I was watching this discussion between Paulo Freire and Seymour Papert (30:00) when Papert began to talk about the defining structure of school.

He describes School with a capital S as being about prefabricated curriculum, rows of desks, hand raising, lectures, quizzes, grading...

Ultimately, School is an instrument of control.

Unfortunately, when most people close their eyes and think of their Schooling, many know no other kind of School than the one with a capital S.

Papert strikes with clarity: When it comes to School it has a bureaucracy that has its own interests and it is not open to what is in the best interest of the children.

Symptoms vs Problems

One way of making it look like you are doing something is to ignore the real underlying problems and simply address the symptoms.

In a hospital this might be like nurses handing out cold drinks and Aspirin to bring down fevers for patients with pneumonia.

In schools this might be like teachers doing scripted test preparation to raise standardized test scores for students who have little understanding for real learning.

Such strategies are likely to be at best unhelpful and at worst harmful. While it is true that individual nurses or teachers might be to responsible for their short-sighted solutions, it is more likely true that there are top-down systemic bureaucratic pressures that need to be addressed.

To blame nurses or teachers for their systems' failures would be no different than simply firing all the bank tellers for the failures of the banks.

There is a world of difference between simply looking like we are doing something and actually solving the real problems that plague us.

Grading Moratorium: Steve Moore

Steve Moore has joined the Grading Moratorium.Want to join? Here's how.

Steve Moore
High School
Reading and Writing
Kansas City, USA
www.moreonthepage.com
@stevejmoore








by Steve Moore

I’ve been trying to write this post for a long time. I started this draft nearly a year ago. Perhaps the most intriguing–and divisive–topic in education is grading. Why we do it, how we go about it, and when we report it are all issues of contention among educators, parents, and students. Figuring outassessment and its role in your school is a vital struggle for being able to do effective work in the system where you teach.

If you’ve ever set foot into a college Education classroom, you’ve probably heard of Alife Kohn. Maybe you’ve even read excerpts from Punished by Rewards or No Grades + No Homework = Better Learning. To a traditionalist, these concepts are heresy. The more “rigor” the better. Students should be under the weight of more content, deeper assignments, and even steeper bell curves if they are going to be able to compete in our economy.

Sounds familiar right? It’s been the standard message of “work-harder-endure-the-torture” education 
reformers status quo proponents for over a century. Kohn stands in opposition to those ideals, but he’s only a theorist and easy to write off. I love theory, but in my own journey through exploring learning, I sought out a more real-world teacher example.

That’s when I came across Joe Bower, a teacher from Canada on a mission to abolish grading, rating, and ranking in his classroom, have the tough conversations with parents, students, and administrators, and really explore what Kohn only writes about.

As a new teacher, rocking the boat is usually the last thing you want to do. Whether it’s standing up to blatant censorship or defending your own fledgling beliefs, it’s hard to not think of your mounting student loans, rent, and bills. You’d like to keep your job, ethics be damned.

That’s why, until now, I’ve stayed away from writing about this idea. I didn’t necessarily think I’d be let go, but I wasn’t sure I was ready to have the ensuing conversations with those above me. Joe has a list of people on his website who are participating in a Moratorium on Grading; they’ve each written about their decision and position in the process. I sent Joe a message on Twitter and explained that I was taking my time to write a thoughtful and intentional response before going public.

What spurred me to finally sit down and write about this last Summer was the AMC show Mad Men. I’m not the first person to write about education and this show. Education advocate and writer Sam Chaltain has written two pieces about democracy, capitalism, and education in the show, one for Huffington Post and the other on his blog. His pieces explore the important role that choice and desire play in our lives.

My ah-ha moment came about when Don, the bold protagonist and ad man, goes against his entire agency–and profession–to stand up to Big Tobacco. His firm Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce had Lucky Strike as a client for three decades and they represented half of their business cash flow. When they left unexpectedly, the company was thrown into turmoil. After work that day, Don sits at his typewriter writing into the wee hours of the morning. His character is an objective capitalist, but also deeply philosophical and pondering. The product of his scheming is this earth-shaking ad he places in the New York Times:

Seeing the effects of this on Draper and his firm was eye-opening; a true foil for my own profession’s struggles as Kohn, Bower, and others see them. His ad forced a sea change, something “rich and strange” as Ariel sings inThe Tempest.

Full fathom five thy father lies;
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes;
Nothing of him that doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
Sea-nymphs hourly ring his knell:
Ding-dong.
Hark! now I hear them — Ding-dong, bell.

I knew I had to write my own letter to the world, to my profession. I felt ready to plunge into the cold black sea, no matter how unforgiving it may seem. Writing his letter led Don’s firm into an ad campaign with the American Cancer Society in direct opposition to Big Tobacco. Maybe mine will help me start some real conversations about learning rather than grading. Maybe people will start to think beyond the false choice of carrots or sticks and start thinking about true assessment, which really means “to sit beside.”

Rick Orman vs Doug Horner on Testing

On August 10, Doug Horner announced at the Alberta Teachers Association's Summer Conference Progressive Conservative leadership Q and A that he if elected as Premier of Alberta that he would eliminate grade 3 Provincial Achievement Tests.

Horner rightfully received a room full of applause. After all, this is simply the logical conclusion to what Motion 503 started in spring 2009 when it called for the government to do away with grade 3 provincial achievement tests in favour of an alternative assessment for learning.

There are lots of reasons to oppose standardized testing, but that's not what I want to do first.

Instead, I want to challenge how one of the other candidates, Rick Orman, has chosen to oppose Doug Horner's move to abolish Grade 3 Provincial Achievement Tests. Here's how Orman's website responded to Horner:

"The education system works best when there is clear communication and understanding between teachers, parents, school administrators, and government," said Orman. "Trying to win the support of one group with a ploy like this only polarizes groups and entrenches respective positions. 

"I'm sure the teachers in our province wouldn't appreciate dealing with thousands of angry parents who believe their children are falling behind, after a measure like this is invoked."

First of all, you would be hard pressed to find many teachers in Alberta who would support grade 3 Provincial Achievement Testing.

Secondly, because test anxiety has become it's own subfield of educational psychology,  I doubt you could find many parents who would defend subjecting their 8 and 9 year olds through hours of standardized testing.

Thirdly, the results of these tests are not returned to parents or teachers until the children are already done grade three and moved on to grade four. This is one of many reasons why these tests can not be used as a diagnostic tool to actually help teachers help children learn better. 

To use parents and teachers as a reason to not remove the grade 3 Provincial Achievement Tests makes Orman either uninformed or deceitful. 

However, Orman leaves himself an out:

"If there is clear evidence that testing is not in the best interest of students, then it should be eliminated - but only if resources are allocated to address parents' legitimate concerns that their children are not keeping up to the curriculum."

My first question to Rick Orman and others who drag their feet when it comes to moving away from standardized testing: Have you looked to see what the research says about the costly effects standardized testing has on teaching and learning?

If not, may I suggest a few links for your reading pleasure:

The Limits of Standardized Tests for Diagnosing and Assisting Student Learning

Basing decisions on about teachers and schools on test results damages education

Standardized Testing: Seperating Wheat Children from Chaff Children

Standardized Testing and Its Victims

The Myth of Standardized Testing: Why they don't tell you what you think they tell you

The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools