Engaged Learning

As I started this school year, I was very excited about trying new things. I'd spent the summer learning and perfecting some technology tools such as podcasting, blogging, google docs, etc. My US History classes were shifting to an online textbook and we were told that each department would have a classroom set of laptops on a cart for us to use. I've always considered myself cutting edge in technology and didn't want to be that teacher that just lectured or showed videos all the time. I wanted to present the information in a creative way that sparked students to go out and learn more on their own. As a newer teacher, I wanted to learn a lot of the information with them, as if I know anything as a teacher, it is that I don't know much!

As someone who is interested in engaged learning, I really wanted to be the "tour guide" of the past. I was so excited to do things in a new and interesting way that I started tweaking my lesson plans back in June. I embedded powerpoints with videos, I started working on audio podcasts to help students review or get a different look at primary sources. I felt like I could bring history alive in the class room and just maybe kids wouldn't find it so "boring".

Researching engaged learning has reinforced the type of teacher I want to be. The idea that the students explore and guide the class through the information and the teacher is just there to keep everyone on track when they get stuck is what appeals to me. I personally feel technology gives us the opportunity to spice up our lessons and present them in a way that kids are used to being entertained. However, technology has failed me so far. Our laptops aren't ready, kids complained about having to read their textbook on a computer screen and I'm worried it will lead to a wider gap between the haves and have nots in our school. I'm currently lecturing on the expansion west and at times I'm sick of hearing my own voice! My goal is this year is to try 4 new things in the classroom that all help to shift me toward teaching engaged learners.

When Do Kids Stop Being Curious?

This weekend my wife and I had a group of friends stay with us at our cabin. One of our visitors was 2 1/2 yr old Charlotte. Charlotte spent the weekend questioning everything. Why do fish swim? What is that? Why is the boat loud? All these questions made me wonder...why don't the kids I teach in 9th and 10th grade ask this many questions? Do they think they know everything already? Do they not care anymore because all the answers are at the tip of their fingers on the internet? Wow...I sound like Charlotte with all my questions!

University of Virgina scientest Daniel Willingham set out to answer questions like these in his new book Why don't kids like school? USA Today interviewed Daniel to try to promote his new book and answer a few questions most teachers and parents have. I was surprised by some of his answers. Willingham explained that it is difficult for teachers to make school challenging for students because they want a mental challenge that is not too easy but is not too difficult. Who are they goldilocks? He also went on to explain why we remember certain things and not others. Using dissection as an example, he explained that often times kids are thinking of how gross it is and not what they are doing. Maybe they should try the virtual dissection online?

Willingham explained that good teachers get students to think about the main point or central theme unavoidably. Using Pearl Harbour as an example, he described how from the Japanese point of view rather than the American, this was much easier to do. The biggest surprise for me came when Willingham explained there is no such thing as visual learners, auditory learners and kinesthetic learners. He explained how people differ in their abilities and interests but that there is no such thing as different learning styles. Willingham vaguely cited over 50 years of research to support his claim.

I remember being a kid and being excited to go to school. Coming home and telling my mom what I'd learned that day or showing her some new skill I'd developed was the highlight for me. At some point things changed, and school was a chore or something I had to do and no longer fun. Maybe, it is because the same methods for delivering information are repeated from K-12 and then into college. Maybe it was too easy and I wasn't challenged enough. No matter what, I think this class has proven that we need to find creative ways to engage and challenge our students. Gone are the days of teachers standing in front of the class lecturing then we hand out a worksheet and repeat 200 days out of the year. Hello blogs, podcasts, wikis, discussion threads, online simulations, etc. If we don't adapt to how students learn or how they want to learn, we can expect our students will be bored and lifeless in class. This is not the classroom I want nor the teacher I want to be.

Students Transferring To More Affordable Colleges

Does the name of your school guarantee you will get a better education? How about the price tag? In today's current economic times, more and more kids are transferring from their expensive private schools to cheaper public school alternatives. In fact, the article talks about one girl whose family started a college fund for her and was nearly wiped out after year one. She had attended Tufts University in Massachusetts paying nearly $50,000 a year. After one year, she decided to transfer closer to home and is now paying $15,000 a year.

Public colleges are reporting a spike in transfer applications citing many reasons but most notably money as the main reason students are transferring. Students are unwilling to pay the high price for private undergrad education when many have aspirations to attend graduate school and know a higher price tag is lurking in the future. It also seems that this attitude is filtering down to high school seniors who are now more aware of what they are spending on their education.

My personal opinion is education is what you put into it, not what the name of your school or how much the school cost. I attended Minnesota State University, Moorhead and so did my wife. We both feel we received a great education at a low cost. Through hard work in the summer and some help from our parents, we were able to escape college with no debt. To me, this is the most important part. Who wants to start a new career with the average college student debt of $21,000 hanging over their head?

At some point, private colleges will have to adjust what they charge or the amount of financial aid students receive if they want to keep their clientele. I don't feel that you receive a better education at these places but the networking possibilities you receive from attending a prestigious school does exist. Often times, graduate of these schools have enough connections to land better paying jobs right out of college. In the current economic turmoil, with job competition being at one of its highest levels, maybe this is worth the amount of debt you graduate with.

What I try to stress to students that ask for my opinion is education is about hard work and putting in effort. If you do these two things you can not go wrong. At the end of your undergraduate education, you should feel like you were challenged and you should feel well prepared for the real world. After that, it is all about presenting yourself to your future employer and impressing them with your skills, not about the name of the school on your diploma.

Does Banning Sugar Help Students Learn?

I remember my first year teaching 7th graders. I had a class that met at 12pm, directly after lunch. The kids were bouncing off the walls ALL THE TIME! It became so bad, my favorite phrase that hour was "did they serve straight sugar at lunch today?" Of course, the kids would always answer yes. Walking through the lunchroom has given me a new perspective on the diets of our students. Pizza, cookies, muffins and sugary drinks dominate the plates. I find it sad, we actually have a chef at our school and I've broadened my horizons by sampling most of his new dishes.

Browns Mill Elementary School in Lithonia, Georgia has been sugar free for ten years. There are no desserts, no soft drinks and kids are actually requesting brocolli! Students spend the first hour of school eating healthy omelets and doing jumping jacks, exercising and dancing. Lunches include low-fat milk, tuna on wheat and peaches for dessert. In the first 6 months discipline incidents decreased by 23%, counseling referrals decreased by 30% and in the first year of reading scores increased by 15%. The sugar ban seems to correlate with better behavior, more focus and officials also saw a reduction in the BMI of some students.

Last week I blogged on the reduction of Physical Education time in schools and feel this issue piggy backs that topic. Students in the article actually responded that they felt the school was engraining healthy eating habits in them. Often times, in some of the poorer communities, school lunch is the best meal a student receives for the day. If it is filled with fried foods and pastries, this not only leads to obesity but can often times leave students feeling lethargic and sleepy leading to them paying less attention in school.

One of my favorite TV programs a few years ago was Shaq's Big Challenge. On the program, Shaq was helping a group of overweight kids to get healthy and eat better. The best part of the show, was when chef Tyler Florence came to the school and showed the kitchen staff how they could prepare a healthy meal for the children for just a couple bucks a day.

I feel it is important kids learn healthy habits from a young age. I feel this is why it is important we give them healthy options for meals and drinks and they be exposed to fitness based activities. I'd like to challenge all you teachers to try to incorporate more movement in your class, even if it is just a few minutes of stretching or jumping jacks and then see if you notice a difference in student behavior and attention.

Do Schools Need More Time For Physical Education?

A recent article in the USA Today really hit home for me. The article wonders whether or not kids are getting enough exercise or should they spend more time in PE class? Should there be a national or state PE curriculum that every school follows to ensure kids are getting the proper amount of exercise time? Would a shift to a more fitness based curriculum be more beneficial vs a traditional curriculum of games/sports? These are questions I'm currently facing in my own teaching this summer as I try to revamp the PE curriculum at my school.

In Illinois, a state that first adopted PE standards in 1915, roughly 21% of students in the age group 10-17 are categorized as obese. Our nation as a whole currently has 1/3 of their children in the age group 2-19 categorized as overweight. We have become a nation of fast food, video games and sedentary lifestyles that have lead to this problem. So...what can we do about it?

My school has a PE program that meets twice a week and only runs through a student's sophomore year. After this, PE is no longer an option for our students. Many times, the 60 minutes of exercise they receive in class is all these students get for the week, especially if they are not in a sport/activity. The other problem we face is the struggle to balance our curriculum between traditional games and a more fitness based curriculum. Personally, I feel fitness based is the wave of the future. When these students reach their 30's and 40's and receive the news they have high blood pressure, type II diabetes, etc., none of them are going to look back on their high school days and say "I remember playing volleyball in PE, maybe I'll join a volleyball league". I feel it is our job to expose them to weight training, yoga, pilates, aerobics, hiking and things they can continue to do as they grow older. The problem, like other programs in education, is funding. Often times schools don't have the appropriate equipment or space to make this happen.

This coming school year, I plan to shift back and forth between traditional games and more fitness related activities. I also plan to incorporate heart rate training for a few different reasons. First ,students are able to see what the act of movement can do to their body. Second, it also gives me some concrete information to grade my students participation in class. People want to push the use of technology in schools and we need this new piece of equipment and that piece but at some point we need to validate the proper care of our best piece of equipment, the human body. If we are not healthy, how can we expect future generations to know how to care for themselves?

California Seeks Shift Toward Digital Textbooks

As a state that is among leaders in education reform, California seems to be trendsetters for the rest of the country. Recently, as a way to battle a $24 billion state budget deficit, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has asked the states 6 million public schools to look into whether or not they could use more digital resources that are free. Potentially, this could save the state millions of dollars that could then be used to hire more teachers and reduce class size.

The Education Commission of the State views the plan as one of the most ambitious in the nation. As an outsider, the plan seems to be solid but a few flaws are worth noting. First of all, the plan does not replace textbooks in the classroom, it supplements the textbooks they are buying and continuing to buy. Another problem stems from the fact that California public schools received a D- for its use of technology and is only able to provide on average one computer for every four students. How do four students share one computer to look at online resources? For those of us that have used computers in the classroom, I think we'd agree that sometimes it is hard for two students to share. Another problem that could arise is computer access at home. If a student does not have internet access or a computer at home, how do we expect them to use these resources for learning outside of school?

This coming school year, my school will be using online textbooks for our US History course. We are ordering two classroom sets to cover the rooms that the subject will be taught in and that is it. We are doing this because in a year or two we will become a school in which each student has their own lap top. The move to online textbooks will save us money and will also save on wear and tear of the textbooks we buy, hopefully resulting in a longer shelf life for the books. If a student does not need the book, it is stored on the shelves in the teachers room rather than abused in a locker, car or wherever else kids store their textbooks.

In conclusion, I think a shift to online textbooks is a great thing but schools must be prepared. I'm not 100% convinced California schools are ready for this. Currently, the state ranks 49th out of 50 in technology in their schools. It appears that the poor computer to student ratio could lead to problems in the classroom. If they are already buying textbooks, will they really be saving any money? Could the need to update technology end up costing schools more in the long run?