EdTechTrek

A recent report by the Education Sector and the FDR Group “surveyed 1,010 K–12 public school teachers about their views on the teaching profession, teachers unions, and a host of reforms aimed at improving teacher quality.”

Here is one finding that I think merits serious thought:

Only 26 percent of teachers say that their most recent formal evaluation was useful and effective in helping them to improve their teaching. Seventy-nine percent support strengthening the formal evaluation of probationary teachers. And nearly a third of teachers (32 percent) say that tenured teachers should be evaluated on an annual basis.

I can remember some of my “formal” evaluations. They were typically done by an overburdened administrator who had the monumental task of evaluating every teacher in the building at least twice a year in addition to all of their other responsibilities. Often, those evaluation visits where rescheduled due to unexpected events that arose. And, all of those evaluations where scheduled ahead of time. The result - teachers (myself included) would plan a smashing “song and dance” lesson that included those key elements that we all knew the principal liked and was looking for. Once the evaluation was over, it was back to business as usual. In the evaluation de-briefing (which also had to be scheduled with every teacher), unless there was anything glaringly abhorrent, most constructive criticisms were insignificant at best.

So, it is no surprise to see the low statistic of only 26 percent of teachers reporting that they found their most recent formal evaluation useful and effective. Along the same lines, 32 percent of tenured teachers feel that they should be evaluated on an annual basis. That makes total sense if almost the same percentage feel that those evaluations are not all that beneficial.

So, what to do? Are K-12 administrators perhaps not the best candidates to do faculty evaluations? Are they too busy to really give useful constructive criticism? Is their own teaching craft stale and their own idea pool dry? Can we expect building administrators to really be excellent teachers as well? Perhaps you consider yourself lucky to have an administrator who is still an active practitioner and who is keeping up with teaching innovation. But, my guess is that if you did a PowerPoint, projected a web page, sang a cool song, or did a nifty craft, you would get kudos - assuming your students were well-behaved (notice I didn’t use the term “meaningfully engaged”).

Who said education reform was simple? Are new models of teacher growth and evaluation needed?

“Once the technology is sunk deep enough into the culture, the social effects that get built on it simultaneously require the technology and aren’t about the technology.”

~Clay Shirkey

So true.

Yet we must continually examine those “social effects” rather than get too giddy about the required technologies. Too many discussions are focused on these required technologies (and a google alternatives) rather than looking hard at the social effects that result from new technological “enablers”. Taking the view of Neil Postman and others, technology is not always enabling “good” things. Seamless, transparent technology is certainly the goal in the classroom so that it is the learning that is the focus, not the technology. Otherwise, learning outcomes become secondary to the exciting new technologies and users become blinded by the “technology delusion”. This reminded my of an article worth reading and thinking about, written by Todd Oppenheimer in 1997, titled, The Computer Delusion. Things have evolved since he wrote it, but it is still worth reading. I love this last quotation:

“The purpose of the schools [is] to, as one teacher argues, ‘Teach carpentry, not hammer,’” he testified. “We need to teach the whys and ways of the world. Tools come and tools go. Teaching our children tools limits their knowledge to these tools and hence limits their futures.”

A good reminder…

“…creativity is not universally valued. Many cultures and communities prefer training students to accept existing structures rather than training them to form new ones; they prefer memorization and copying to research and creative writing. These conflicts are likely to remain controversial.” (B. Schneiderman: Leonardo’s Laptop)

So which students are really most “at risk”? We must be educating ALL students to ask questions, who are curious, who challenge “authority” (ie. Joe Blo’s webpage, Wikipedia, conventional wisdom, bias, …), and who create new ideas and express knowledge and evidenced learning in new ways… ways that are personal, relevant, meaningful, powerful… creative.

Or, we can continue to educate students for a world that no longer exists.

Are these ideas controversial in your world?

Creativity is important, but neglected in schools, the headline reads.

Tell us something that we don’t know. Imagine, a general conclusion was that it is best to foster creativity among students at school, “not only to produce a competitive workforce, but also to help all students succeed in life”. This report is yet one more example of not doing what we know is best - about obstacles that get in the way of best practices, solid learning theory, and curriculum. What will it take to bring about real change… and I emphasize “real” - no window dressing or politically charged policies.

During candidate interviews of employers seeking creative employees, characteristics were ranked as follows, from highest to lowest:

1. candidate’s ability to look spontaneously beyond the specifics of a question (78%)

2. responses to hypothetical scenarios (70 %)

3. elaboration on extracurricular activities or volunteer work (40 %)

4. appearance (27 %).

Also, employers noted that “problem identification or articulation” was of paramount importance in creative employees. Even with problem-based learning, teachers can’t resist defining the problems for their students and guiding them to solve pre-established problems with pre-determined solutions - Neither what employers see as all that valuable… nor realistic in real-world problem-solving contexts. Perhaps the solution is to test creativity (can you see the sarcasm dripping here?).
So, where do these types of reports leave educators. Where to they leave policy makers?

Where do they leave you?

“25 years after the seminal report, A Nation at Risk, American education remains in a state of crisis.” (source)

Information on this issue is not new in the news (here (2008), here (2006) and here (2003) but the recent report released by Strong American Schools (a nonpartisan awareness campaign aiming to bring education to the forefront of presidential campaign discussion and supported by the broadfoundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation) titled, A Stagnant Nation: Why American Students are Still at Risk (Gerald Bracy in Huffington Post … and again here… warns to interpret with caution) about the current state of education in the US and some information that revisits the federal report “A Nation at Risk” (1983) released some 25 years ago has led ABC news to do a short spot on our underachievements. Here are some of the statistics presented in the news report (embedded below):

• 40% of high school seniors do not understand 8th grade math
• 23% of seniors cannot identify Adolf Hitler
• 57% of seniors cannot place the Civil War in the right century
• 33% of seniors do not know the Bill of Rights guarantees free speech

This all brings new meaning to the old addage, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” They also fail to get to the heart of the issues that have long plagued education and democracy in this country. Take a look at the news spot below and let me know what you think needs to be done after seemingly little progress over the past 25 years to stop this old addage.