Reflection on Backchanneling

So I used back-channeling throughout a lesson! It didn't crash and burn, nor did I have mass mutiny on my hands so I count the day a success!

How I set up the lesson, instructionally:

*Got the kids thinking about the use of laptops & discussing verbally

*Had them post to the class wiki their thoughts about using laptops (focusing)

*Showed them a cool new webtool to make word clouds (get them excited about how to use laptops productively)

*Explained backchannel

*Showed the video and basically... let them go!

Thoughts & Reflections on the day

*Interestingly my first period class went the best (which is usually NOT the case!). Was it because of the kids involved or because I didn't "overthink" it?

*I had one class respond inappropriately to the first written prompt on the wiki (posting "what's up people!" and saying things toward their friends). How did that happen? To refocus I had a quick discussion about it and then had them post a response to why students were posting inappropriately and what we could do.

*The backchanneling was 100% a success. However, it was almost too much to take in. Perhaps it would be better to group the kids into "pods" that can chat and ask questions of each other, that I monitor? That way they can answer each other, and actually have reflective conversations rather than just throw comments into the mix where so few get seen and acknowledged (my last period commented 66 times in 10 minutes!)

Here is a link to a blog I want to read when I get a chance...

Backchanneling?

Today in the car I was just thinking about this, I recently said to my students, "it's wonderful that you think we all want to hear your commentary on everything you see, but it's distracting". And that got me to thinking-- no wonder they think we care what they have to say-- even I am part of the generation "like". I've been posting my inner thoughts and ramblings and vents on facebook and myspace for nearly a decade now. These kids have grown up with it. Their parents have probably been updating statuses since before they could read.

With that in mind I got to thinking about how I can channel this energy and desire to comment (on anything and everything!) in a positive educational light.

*I thought about having the students write a "status" update before class.

*Then I thought, "well maybe they could tweet throughout class". How many tweets would they do? And how can we share it? How would it relate to class discussions? Would it hinder or help class flow?

So I started going through the NYT blog as I am rife to do when I don't feel like doing anything related to cleaning... and I came across this entry: "Students speak up in class, silently, via Social Media". It discusses a teacher using laptops in the classroom to discuss poetry, and backchanneling in college math classes.

I once tried to do a backchannel at St Michaels-- there is a site called today's meet where you can make a one day chat room. I was afraid to use it for fear of bullying but used it with my best group of kids-- and it paid off! It was a fantastic way of getting feedback on topics and I definitely saw more kids involved than usual.

I am limited because I do not have access to a class set of computers to do this. I think tomorrow I am going to put the kids into triads. I will give them one laptop per group and have them comment on our todaysmeet.com chat room throughout a viewing of a video on refugees in Sudan...

I also created a question on Google Moderator for students to answer tomorrow with their triad. Perhaps I could have them go onto the blog to respond, for closure, to the day's lesson.

Great Things Kids Say

Today I stopped by a colleague's room during my planning and a student said one of the best things to me I've ever heard. The teacher has a bunch of fish tanks and he said, "Mrs. Hopper you should get fish for our classroom".

What struck me was that he said OUR classroom! In another teacher's room, no less, he referred to my room as "our" classroom. I loved that!

Teaching kids everyday is the best part of my job!!!

Getting Boys to Like Reading

"Boys Don't Read, Except When they Do"

I don't have time to write a whole bunch, but here are a few quotes from the article that really strike my attention...

"The 2010 Kid and Family Reading Report, sponsored by Scholastic, found that regardless of race, geography or socioeconomic status, boys were lagging far behind girls in reading outside of school assignments. Only 39 percent of boys rated reading outside of class as important, while 62 percent of girls said it was "extremely or very important." A 2005 NEA study by Mark Bauerlein and Sandra Stotsky found that between 1980 and 2004, the gender gap in reading between boys and girls had grown so wide that the authors determined it had become a "marker of gender identity." Again: Boys don't read...

Turning boys into readers isn't just a worry for publishing executives trying to find the next blockbuster series. There are massive policy implications. Girls are outperforming boys in reading in all 50 states, and boys are more than twice as likely to be to be placed in special education classes than girls...

Literacy expert Pam Allyn, founder of LitWorld and the Books 4 Boys program at Children's Village and author of the newly released, Pam Allyn's Best Books For Boys, observes that "illiteracy rates correlate with the risk of a jail sentence later in adolescence, making it twice as likely for nonreaders to be incarcerated." And indeed, 93 percent of the prison population in the United States is male...

The fact is that boys are reading. Just like girls, boys are hungry for stories that speak to them, that excite their imaginations and reflect their experiences. They are hungry for information to help them make sense of the world, or achieve a goal or just to geek-out on whatever is holding their attention at that moment....

A researcher at the University of Ontario recently looked into the reading lives of boys and found that almost all of the boys in her study described the reading they enjoyed, just like young Matt De La Peña and I did -- game manuals, fact books, graphic novels, sports magazines -- as "not really reading...

He argues passionately that schools need to broaden the tent of "what counts and does not count as a valid literacy activity," inviting so-called 'low culture' into the classroom alongside 'great literature' and showing that the interests, needs, and tastes of boys are valued and have a place in a reading life.

There are plenty of fart jokes in Shakespeare, and plenty of pathos in Captain Underpants.

Who are we to say which is "real" reading?"

Interactive Teaching vs. Lecturing

Interactive vs. Lecture?

That's the question this article answers. A recent study showed that students benefit from an interactive classroom where they can use "clickers" to respond to questions posed by the instructor. This is similar to the Turning Point resources we have in our buildings; I believe all Math teachers have them.

"The interactive method had almost no lecturing. It involved short, small-group discussions, in-class "clicker" quizzes, demonstrations and question-answer sessions"

How can I use this in my classroom?

1. Organize discussion by objectives. Hold quick discussion, "think alouds" with groups, then an individual clicker response

2. Use the responses to decide on next step: more demonstrations or more talking? Move on to next topic or unpack the previous topic more?

3. Have teams make up question/answers related to topics we discuss and then lead group discussion that way

How could this influence American education?

First, I am concerned by the way it starts out. By saying it doesn't matter "who" is teaching, but "how" it's taught, it backs up the recent arguments by Bill Gates-- that the level of education of teachers is inconsequential. They argue that bonuses or higher salaries for teachers with masters degrees don't pay off in student achievement, so should be phased out from salary ladders. Of course, I believe achievement is one part of the issue. As a professional community there should be incentives for teaches to further their knowledge and improve their skills. Offering higher salaries is an obvious incentive to encourage teachers to get their masters degrees-- but how can we show the link between highly educated teachers and improved student achievement? And if that link isn't there, what is it saying about the teachers-- both the masters degrees they've attained and the types of education classes being offered at graduate levels? Who is behind the times-- teachers in public schools or the higher ed institutions that are training them?

Could this study lead to further arguments that schools should be led by "grad ass't" types and not "highly qualified educators"? Is this a thinly veiled attack on teachers-- their salaries, their efficacy, and their value? Or is this wholly aimed towards the college level? Is it trying to convince higher ed. institutions to get with the times and the actions of their peers in public education? We have been using clickers for over 5 years in my county. I started my teaching using Quia.com, a site where quizzes can be made and taken online, and test items can be broken down by objective.

One thing is for sure-- the way we as humans learn IS changing. Or is it? Is it just the way we teach and tell ourselves that our teaching is working? What would Socrates think of all this???!

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

Today's equity session was led by Marlecia Autrey. We talked about Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. This video sums it up, but isn't made by the Pacific Education Group.

Interesting Article on Education Reformers

This is an older article by Michael Winerip (Apr. 17 2011) but I found it while perusing the NYT today. Among the interesting things it states, are these things:

*He lists Michelle Rhee, Bill Gates and Ted Kennedy (due to his part in the NCLB) as influential in current reform efforts yet all three went to private schools.

*"Today, the consensus is that there is little difference between President Obama and former President George W. Bush when it comes to education policy. Nor is it easy to distinguish differences between the secretary of education under Mr. Bush, Margaret Spellings, and the current secretary, Arne Duncan."

*"Does a private school background give them a much-needed distance and fresh perspective to better critique and remake traditional public schools? Does it make them distrust public schools — or even worse — poison their perception of them? Or does it make any difference?"

This article raises a really interesting thought. What qualifies a person to reform an industry? Is a businessman qualified to reform public education, when he has no experience in teaching or learning in one? Is a teacher qualified to go into a hospital and reorganize how it is run? Is a lawyer qualified to tell an engineer how he will be assessed as an employee? In general, what qualifies each of us, as participants in American society, to use our "stakeholder" status to bring about reform and improvement? I think it has to be the fact that education is publicly funded, and thus tax payers have a right to have a "say". However I find it odd that the very people pushing vouchers to get their kids out of public schools are also trying to change public schools. What benefit would they have to pushing Race to the Top, if they are not sending their own children to these schools?