Robotic Grading=Robotic Writing

When I first heard that computers could grade essays as well as humans I had several reactions.  First Reaction: Sweet; this will at least give us more time to focus on progressive instruction methods rather than traditional grading.  We can assign essays without the incredible burden of countless hours of grading.  Wait, how can we give meaningful feedback?  Second Reaction: Will this be a technology that continues to push the teacher out of the classroom? The third reaction came after hearing the tagline of the study over and over and over from every blog and news outlet I follow.  "Overall, automated essay scoring was capable of producing scores similar to human scores", "overall, automated essay scoring was capable of producing scores similar to human scores".  Over and over.  Third Reaction: There is something wrong with what and how we expect students to write.

If a computer program, which is a cold-logic math problem wrapped in plastic, can evaluate writing, our writing has become too mechanic and inflexible.  Writing is an art, not a science.  Can a program really capture the complexity and authenticity of creative writing?  How can it score irony, wit, and satire?  Does it recognize subtle humor?  Can it score oil paintings? Seriously.

Maybe our rigid writing expectations are one reason many students hate to write, but love to text.  I can say personally I hate to write formal papers, but I like to write this blog.  Maybe I am way off on this.  Its funny how some people can view something like robot grading as a great advancement in education, while others see this as blasphemous and just plain wrong.

Flipping the Teacher

As educators slowly transition into a more progressive form of pedagogy and assessment our role changes  in many ways.  We become less of an instructor and more of a guide.  We become less a "teacher", and more of a student. The dynamic of how we work is also changing.  In a conversation with my consigliere, Joey Till, he pointed out exactly what we are doing--we are flipping the teacher.

In the 20th Century it was very typical for teachers to put together their lessons while they were in school--preparing materials, making copies, etc.  Of course, teachers worked at home too---usually grading papers of some kind.  What we are doing now flips our work dynamic.  I sit on my wonderfully comfortable couch and put my lessons together.  On nice days, I like to sit outside and smell the flowers and listen to the birds while I think of interesting projects and ways to breath some life into my otherwise boring content standards.

While I'm in school I spend a great deal of time "grading".  Of course, I don't mean I grading papers.  I sit down with groups or individuals and use conversations as formative assessment.  When its time to decide on a grade, we have another conversation.  I ask content questions.  We look at the requirements, I tell them my formative observations, and they decide an appropriate grade, which is almost always right where I think they should be.  Another way I am increasingly "grading" in school is using student presentations.  I blogged about the instructional value of student presentations, but obviously this is also a good time for assessment.

Some of the teachers I have worked with express concern about the additional planning time that  project-based curriculum may require.  Some of the worry could be relieved if they learn that "grading" doesn't mean sifting through stacks of papers at home every night. 

Reflections on my PBL

Yesterday, my class finished a project that followed the strict guidelines of project based learning (PBL). It was called "Can YOU Stop the Mongols?".  I used projects as my main learning activity through the entire year, but I haven't always followed some of the PBL essentials such as having an authentic audience.  Sometimes I prefer a low-key project that uses some of the essentials--I call this PBL-light.  However, I think the Mongols PBL went really well, but I have a secret to reveal.

I didn't have to work very hard.  Sorry. PBL is supposed to require a great deal of planning and work.  PBL instructors will tell you; its a great deal of work on the front end.  Now, I want to be clear...  I worked by butt every day in class, but I didn't have to do a lot of planning and preparation.  I started with a fun idea--something that the kids would be interested in and something that would challenge them.  Then I went over my standards.  I knew there were several that applied.  I tossed around the driving question for a while and settled on something simple and catchy.  I put together the document we used to layout the project.  All of that didn't take more than a few evenings.

The part that took the longest was making the entry event video.  I wanted a video that would really grab their attention and get them excited.  It took about about a week's worth of evenings, but now its made forever.  I finished the group member evaluation rubric and the final evaluation rubric after about a week of the kids working.  I made them both in one night.  I showed the kids this information after they finished their research and before they designed their plan. 

During class, I spent my time bouncing from one group to another--suggesting keyword searches for research, helping with technology, and asking them content questions to assess them.  For the actual grade, the kids made an individual project about some part of the plan to stop the Mongols.  Their grade came from my frequent questioning about Mongol basics, the group member evaluation rubric, and the completion of their project--we will have our final conversation on Monday about their grade.  I will go over my observation and ask them what grade they earned--I guarantee they will be right on.  After 180 days of self-assessment my kids are really good at it.  

As a group they had to take their individual project and integrate it into one presentation that displayed their plan.  Like threads into fabric, they brought all of their project into a PowerPoint, Prezi, mind-map,  iMovie, website, and a few other formats--their choice of course.  I was pretty impressed with their savvy presentations, though some groups struggled to pull the best from their individual work into a integrated project.  And I can't mislead--a few of the presentations were straight-up disasters.  

I learned that PBL doesn't need to be a stressful, meticulous, and difficult process.  You can put in a little work, make things as you need them, and improvise when you have to.  I think some people try to "over-structure" their PBL.  When the final project was presented, we had a whole-group discussion about the project.  The kids suggested things like making their own groups, giving them more structure, but probably the best suggestion was having a presentation before the final presentation.  Nearly every class agreed they would like a chance to edit their project after getting assessed and questioned by the panel.  1:1 computing and project based learning have made this a great year.  I'm not really looking forward to ending this year so much as I'm looking forward to starting all over again in August.  

The Future of Test Obsession

When I first read this story, I was sure it was a hoax.  I search the Internet and all I have found so far are legit news reports, even statements issued from the Xiaogan City High School in China.  There have been reports circulating through China recently, but in the past week the pictures below have gone viral.  Chinese students are studying for college entrance exams.  Normal.  Only these kids are using an IV drip of amino acids to "enhance their physical fitness and replenish their energy," according to one school official.  Teachers are even assisting them.

From: Worldcrunch

I had to research the effects of amino acid injection on humans and I found they can cause organ failure, fever, chills, blood abnormalities, depression, and heart palpitations.  

Is this the future for the test-obsessed American education system?  Some may read this and think... 'no way, we would never go that far'.  Think of our athletes, then rethink.  Think of the over-prescribed ADHD medicines, then rethink. Besides, this didn't happen overnight.  This was probably a slow progression.

This is wrong.  So wrong. The is definitely not learning.  This is akin to the industrialized food system that pumps growth hormones and antibiotics into animals to produce faster food ignoring the lives of the animal and health of the consumer.  Is this how we want to treat our children?  Industrial objects at the junction of education and economics?  Sad.  These are kids.    Cows don't even deserve this.  Nothing can possible justify this practice, which is the direct product of high-stakes testing.

Content Delivery is Not Learning

I saw a tweet this week from Katrina Stevens that was sort of a 'ah ha' moment for me.  Now that I have had time reflect, I can't believe I never reached the same conclusion.  Many people assume content delivery equals learning.  We make this assumption about learning when we assign 2 chapters of reading for homework, but we think its different when we turn the reading into a video.

The recent influx of technology has spurred a whirlwind of content delivery ideas and teaching methods.  Prezi, the Khan Academy and the Flipped Class are a few popular examples.  The 1:1 movement has movivated teachers and adminstrators to make assumptions about learning:

'If our worksheets are on the computer, kids will like them and learn more'.
'If my lecture is recorded on video students can re-watch it and they will learn more.'
'Delivering content with technology makes students learn more.'
'If students watch a snappy video they will learn the content.' 

Some of these imaginary quotes are obviously hyperbole, but I've said or assumed maybe a few of those.  Have you at one time?  Obviously content needs to reach students in some fashion, but I think that is the pedagogical problem many teachers are facing.  They are trying to reach the kids with content.  What we need to do is motivate our kids to want to reach for the content themselves.  Learning is authentic, its chaotic, and it happens to each student in a unique way.

Some people defend content delivery by saying they have done this for years and it works--they have the test scores to prove it.  I think they may have found a clever way to encourage or enforce memorization, but I don't equate that to real learning.  I think it would do more for our culture and community to have a room full of curious kids who have more questions than answers.

Trends in Educational Technology

Recently a college professor published the infographic below about how his fellow teachers use their LMS (learning management system)--Blackboard in this case.  I think this infographic exposes a few worrisome trends in educational technology.

1.  An apparent majority of teachers are using educational technology simply to digitize their old pedagogy.  In this case, the main uses of Blackboard is passing out assignments, making announcements, and entering grades. The infographic may be misleading in this case, but the trend is clear that many teachers are simply turning paper assignments into PDF files and giving multiple choice quizzes online.  This is old wine in new bottles.  What is the point of using technology?  Saving paper?

2. Universities and secondary schools seem to favor a one-size-fits-all LMS.  I can understand a common grade-entry software, but this standardization of learning platforms seems to go against the spirit of innovation and creativity that educational technology has to offer.  Standardization in general is a 20th Century trend.  Standardized tests, national content standards, standardized textbooks, uniforms, standard calendars... it all needs to go.  Students aren't standardized objects.  Why do we try to put them in a standard educational box?  Educational technology should do the complete opposite.  Would we standardize art?

3. Schools continue to pay big money for LMS software, when the services they actually use within the LMS are free on hundreds of other sites?  As the graph shows, the main use of Blackboard was simply posting assignments.  Any free website can do that (Google Sites, Weebly, etc.).  The second use is for announcements.  Again, this could easily be delivered free in dozens of ways for free.  I would venture to guess cheaper "grade" software exists too.

I hope this is simply the early transitional stage of technology integration.  Certainly this infographic isn't the best we can do for kids.  I read an article recently in Forbes Magazine that stated,

"Today knowledge is free. It’s like air, it’s like water. It’s become a commodity… There’s no competitive advantage today in knowing more than the person next to you. The world doesn’t care what you know. What the world cares about is what you can do with what you know".    

 How long will it be until our education system responds?

Hunting for Teacher Education

I finished my masters of education last year.  I needed to renew my license, so I figured I would just go all the way.  I was ready to learn.  Unfortunately, it was a huge disappointment.  My Technology in Education class talked about cutting edge software like using Microsoft Word to "process" an essay!  Or make a lecture exciting with a presentation made on PowerPoint!  The textbook was on its 10th edition and clearly hadn't been updated since the early 90's.

The other classes had lots of "rigor" [busy work].  Long papers, journal entries, a cumbersome portfolio, blah, blah, blah.  Unfortunately, I learned very little from the entire program.  I even did my homework and read all the books.  Granted, I went to a private university that is not known for its school of education.  It was online, which met the needs of my lifestyle as a full time teacher, father, and husband.  The program lasted about 2 years.  During the program I didn't check my Google Reader; blogs went unread, and I had no time for Twitter---I was bogged down with the "rigor" of my masters courses.  I was too busy to learn.

Since I graduated, I have learned far more from following blogs on Google Reader and watching the Twitter stream of great, new ideas.  I have grown more as a teacher in the last 6 months of learning on my own than I did during my entire masters program.

This reminded me of the scene in Good Will Hunting, when Matt Damon tells the pretentious Harvard student he wasted $150,000 on an education he could have gotten for a $1.50 in late fees from the public library.

Clearly a self-directed PD program will create more "buy in" from teachers AND be far less expensive, but how do we translate this into license renewal and pay scale?  Does the badge system offer any answers?

Teaching with Presentations

Last week, my students presented their China Book project (students made a picture book in iPhoto about the Qin or Han Dynasty).  The presentations where very informal; students clicked through their book and explained the text and pictures.  The books turned out great and most students were able to produce professional-looking books.  I wanted the students to present for a number of reasons:

From: Todd Berman

1.     To show off their work

2.     To receive feedback from me and their peers

3.     To talk about design in general and how it applies to everything we do.

4.     To grade their work

I didn’t really intend for the presentations to be a teaching activity.  I wanted to talk about design, but I didn’t really think students would absorb content.  On the second day, we had a discussion about the effectiveness of the activity, so I could get some feedback from the kids about how I could improve and how much they learned.  I was surprised when students in different classes claimed they learned more from watching the presentations than from creating the book!?!

This form of peer-to-peer direct instruction was very effective, and something I plan on doing in the future.  I think it was effective because I involved the students in the evaluation of each book.  After each presentation, students would raise their hand and evaluate how well the book met the requirements. Then we identified strengths, and weaknesses.   I had to prompt a few students, but most students participated in the evaluation.  At one time I thought of student presentations as something that took up too much time and yield few benefits, but its all about design.  Two thumbs up on this experiment.