Writing in Google Doc's

This year I have really embraced the fact that literacy is the foundation of everything we do in school.  I  am trying to inject more non-fiction reading and formal writing into my social studies class.  As students write, they need formative feedback.  Assigning a paper and waiting a week before we cover it in red ink is assigning students to failure.  Ideally, I would like to sit down with every student, everyday while they write.  With classes as large as 28 this year, I would need to budget 1.7 minutes for each student as I guide them toward better grammar, punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, vocabulary, summarizing, etc. 

Luckily, our school has Google Apps for Education.  Every student has a Google account, so when they write, they do it in Google Docs.  They share their paper with me and I have 24 hour access to their work.  I sit down face-to-face with as many students as I can during class, but I look at every paper, everyday.  For the students I don't sit down with, I insert comments into their paper.  Comments are great ways to have a discussion without marking up their paper.  Students can respond and you can easily have a conversation about their work.  I keep track of who I talk to in person and who I comment on to keep balanced and keep track of formative progress.  By the time the paper is due, I rarely need to do any "grading" and there is no need to turn anything in.   Another major benefit is the "dog" can't eat it, they can't forget it at home, and since it's saved in the cloud any online device can access it.  Revision history is another tool that allows you or students to recover their work in case of a problem.  You can also do research without leaving your doc. 

Managing all of the paper is an issue for many teachers.  If you have several hundred students it can be difficult to manage that many docs.  Its important to use collections/folders and be proactive in managing your files.  I would also recommend teaching student about email notifications.  Every time someone shares a document with you, they can send an email to notify you.  If you are expecting their work, you don't want to clear several hundred email from you inbox. 

The way I manage my student work is by having 2 Google accounts.  I have my school account and my personal account.  When I'm online, I usually operate out of my personal account and forward all my school mail to my personal account.  I have students share their work to my school account, so 90% of the documents in my school's Google Docs account and my personal account isn't cluttered up by other people's work.  I really don't know why every school doesn't take advantage of Google Apps for Education.  Docs and formative assessment is just the tip of the iceberg.  

Cognitive Dissonance

If you read this blog, you know I love technology and the possibilities it has to offer a 21st Century Education.  Over the last year, I have participated in a sustained series of professional development workshops to introduce project-based learning in my school.  We have been trained by the BUCK Institute, and I deeply believe in many (not all) of the essentials of PBL.  In addition, the name of this blog clearly proclaims my adventurous spirit in the classroom.  I have an eye for the future and usually on enjoy traditional education when it's in the rearview mirror.  I think that sets the scene.  

A few weeks ago, I attended a talk by Mike Schmoker about his book Focus.  For a more comprehensive book review you can read here.  I sat next to my superintendent, who I have the utmost respect for, who brought me to the talk, who seems to be buying into much of what Schmoker is saying.  Basically, Dr. Schmoker calls for a return to the basics.  His main contention is that education has tried too many new things before we mastered the basics of literacy--reading, writing, speaking, and critical thinking.  To say he has an ill view of technology would be an understatement.  He cites well respected education researchers such as Robert Marzano and frankly makes a solid case for turning back the clock.   


So, I walked away with some serious cognitive dissonance--probably more than I have ever suffered.  It isn't often someone makes me deeply question my core educational beliefs.  It stung a little, but after CONSTANT reflection... I feel like that is all I do, I have come to some important conclusions.   

1. I think Dr. Schmoker is right about the basics--there is value to carefully analyzing a common text with the entire class, picking it apart, taking notes, and writing more papers about what we read.  I used to do more of this, and I need to bring that back more often, but NOT all the time.  I think his favored activity will work nice of outlier standards that I can't efficiently wrap into a PBL.  
2. To promote literacy and deny technology is to promote walking as exercise and deny going to the gym.  Technology reaches and engages so many learners and differentiates (which Schmoker is also against) literacy in ways beyond a teachers ability.  
3. PBL is a fantastic method to engage students and make learning relevant, but basic literacy often stands in the way when students don't have skills to engage the content.  So, I want to use Schmoker activities to build the skill sets to make PBL more effective.  
4. Schmoker's methods are designed for the 20th Century and don't promote creativity.  We live in a different age in a different economy where test scores and text literacy are not completely sufficient.  

I could go on because I did learn a great deal from this experience.  I think its good to challenge your views, even those we hold closest to our core identity.  Last year I swung my pedagogy pendulum to far out and it needed to swing back a bit.  If we remain too locked into one mindset we ignore the natural evolution of ideas, and no one want to win the Darwin award.  

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.