I taught them but they didn't learn

This is from David Wees. The original pic can be found here.

Science labs are messy

I was reading an article from The Palm Beach Post called "Science teachers at Loxahatchee middle school strike back against hands-on labs, but I could have sworn I was reading America's Finest (and funniest) News Source, The Onion.

Apparently science teacher Greg Loumanis is "insulted" by some of the hands-on learning activities that are suggested to science teachers.

Why is he insulted?

According to Loumanis, he is a "data-driven" teacher who finds hands-on science experiments both inefficient and messy, so his science department at Osceola Middle School in Loxahatchee opted to get rid of hands-on science labs in their classrooms.

What data has convinced these educators to abolish hands-on science labs?

Test scores.

Since Loumanis convinced a couple colleagues to throw lab activities "out the window"in 2008 in favor of watching videos and Powerpoint lectures, they've experienced significant rises in standardized test scores.

Another common problem educators face is that they are inundated with a pre-fabricated, content-bloated, top-down mandated curriculum that is a mile-wide and an inch thick, and encourages teachers to cover  everything at break-neck speeds while uncovering almost nothing. This is precisely what Howard Gardner is referring to when he says:

The greatest enemy of understanding is coverage.

I thought reading about a science teacher who abolished hands-on labs experiments was weird enough, but then I read this quote from a professor of psychology named David Klahr:

There's little evidence to support hands-on learning.

Upon reading this, I was stunned -- I had no idea how anyone with any kind of education, let alone a psychology professor, could make such a claim, but then I realized what Klahr might have meant:

There's little evidence to support hands-on learning as the most efficient way to get through a curriculum while simultaneously raising standardized test scores.

Near the end of the article, it is made clear that there are systemic pressures being placed on teachers from outside the classroom that affect their teaching, including increased emphasis on test-based accountability, pacing guides, and merit pay.

When teachers are under intense pressure to teach specific content in a specific way with their salaries married to student test scores, it should be no surprise that teachers feel like the only tool they have is a hammer and every kid looks like a nail.

While it's true that educators who have come to see hands-on learning as a messy, inefficient inconvenience have lost the plot, it's important to realize that these educators tend to be the product of an education system that has come to see student achievement as nothing more than high scores on bad tests.

In this case, the goal is as misguided as the method, and school becomes a massive exercise in missing the point.

I thought David Wees summarized this entire mess up nicely when he tweeted:

If you measure understanding of science using only tests, you don't need to use labs.

If this is true, is the logical conclusion to challenge the labs or the tests?

The Relationship Between Accountability and Creativity

My guest today is David Wees, teacher and technology guru at Stratford Hall in British Columbia. David is also an important part of my Professional Learning Community, and I am pleased that he agreed to guest blog here today. You can check out his blog here and his twitter here.

By David Wees

Imagine this graph represents the possible relationships between accountability and creativity.

Where would you put the activities you do as a school?  Here are some examples of activities some school do, and where I think they lie on the accountability vs creativity scale.

What you may notice about this graph is that, for the most part, activities which hold schools and students highly accountability are not associated generally with creativity and that activities which are highly creative can fall short of being very accountable.  It's not a perfect graph, and I think that some of the examples could be moved, but the idea I think is pretty clear: the more you increase accountability, the less flexible the activity, and hence the less ability for students to be creative while completing the activity.

Accountability in this sense means how the activity and the student's performance of that activity, is shared with the student, the teachers, the school, and the wider community.  Standardized tests are considered a "highly accountability" activity simply because everyone has access to how well pretty much any school did, and educators within those schools generally have access to their individual marks, and of course students get feedback about how well they did.

Creative activities to me are generally areas where the student has a lot of choice on how the activity will be completed, and how they will complete the activity.  These are often the types of activities that I think students will actually be able to do once they finish their education, and according to Sir Ken Robinson, our schools fail to provide opportunities to students to do them.

There are a few activities which fall with higher accountability and decent ability for students to be creative, and we often find that these activities are not ones which are done by most schools.  Anyway, I'm sure the model I have up there is imperfect, so I invite you to follow this link to this collaborative Google drawing I've started, and we can add other activities to this chart.