The development of generative AI and lesser algorithmic AI both offer opportunities to aid the instructor in one of the core strategies of teaching: break it down into manageable pieces to master the goal. 21st century learning spaces could include coaching on spelling, grammar, and even content.
Computer software opens the door to more efficient content management. Teachers curating their classroom resources online have organizational tools that exceed old fashioned binders and notebooks. Addressing the needs of students with disabilities is a key efficiency of 21st century learning spaces: presenting modified texts and assignments becomes more manageable.
Training wheels are temporary assistive devices for young people learning new things. They are a modification to the program that is usually temporary; a scaffolding that brings students upward in the zone of proximal development.
Students have the tools they need to manage their own learning experiences.
21st century learning spaces incorporate a system of badges and rewards as well as provide visualization of studentsâ progress and achievements.
Guardrails
Young people are easily distracted, especially since their main use of digital devices as been entertainment. 21st century learning spaces have guardrails to limit distractions and develop executive functioning. Examples of such features include extensive logging of online activity in the learning space, a system of scoring and accountability, a “proctor” feature that tracks student interaction with the content.
Plagiarism has never been easier than in the digital realm. Guardrail features of educational apps help prevent academic dishonesty by making it harder to go undetected.
Moderated social engagement apps reinforce learning through shared experiences, discussions, and study groups with confidence that inappropriate content is avoided.
Guardrails are there to protect us from error, safety features along the road at dangerous points to avoid a pitfall.
Debriefing Kit
In a learning community, it is helpful to study our errors to learn from them. This is especially useful in teaching writing, but it has applications to all subjects. Anonymity is very important: if we’re going to display student errors for analysis, everyone must be confident and assured that no one will be humiliated.
Learning analytics available to teacher in the 21st century learning spaces provide detailed information about student progress to inform lesson plans and follow up.
Creating debriefing lessons is time consuming. For example, when I taught social studies I would display anonymous passages from student essays to work on form or content in a whole class activity. When I taught French, I found it very useful to display selected sentences from compositions for correction or improvement.
21st century learning spaces lend themselves to debriefing: they are designed such that the anonymous presentation of teacher-selected student work is easily generated for debriefing.
Swiss Army Knife
Saved data exists in database tables in the digital world. 21st century learning spaces should leverage this flexibility to facilitate lesson planning in multiple modes. Multiple-choice questions can be short answer questions, test questions can be Jeopardy review games, notes taken on lecture can inspire questions for discussion, and so forth. All this should be easy and fast.
21st century learning spaces are a Swiss army knife. Such collections of applications serve many functions from the same core.
Locus of Data Control
When you post to FaceBook, Twitter, or any other public commercial platform, where is your data? If you use FaceBook to moderate a class discussion, what control do you, the teacher, have over your students’ contributions?
21st century learning spaces are those where the teacher rules the roost and student privacy protection is a high priority. In this paradigm, student work is licensed to the teacher’s control for a specified period, after which it is auto-deleted. Inappropriate content posted by students can be edited, hidden, retained for investigation by authorities, or deleted per the instructor’s decisions.
In the commercial domain, data is the valuable commodity used by tech companies. Our data. It is important that student work and teacher’s intellectual property are in safe digital locations and under the teacher’s control.
Marc Prensky’s 2001 article “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” sparked a lot of conversation, even debate, about the use of computers in education. Mr. Prensky proposed that students who grew up with digital devices integrated into their lives “think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors” and he posited that it’s “very likely that our students brains have physically changed” as a result of how they grew up (Prensky, 2001). Prensky characterized the older generation as populated by digital immigrants, whose more limited command of computer use was an obstacle to teaching these digital natives. His recommendations focused on what we would now call “gamification” of learning; “edutainment”.
In the two decades since the coining of the term, information and communication (ICT) technology has changed and many challenges legitimately arose to Prensky’s depiction.
I need a term for young people with extensive experience and skill with the digital world of commerce, entertainment, and social media. I would like to borrow Marc Prensky’s term “digital native”.
ICT Skills
The digital native is said to “possess sophisticated knowledge of and skills with information technologies” and to “have particular learning preferences or styles that differ from earlier generations of students”. (Bennett, et al. 2008).
Prensky, in my view, was asking teachers to bend their lessons away from sound educational practice to match the entertainment that students were used to experiencing when using computer technology. I believe this was his mistake.
The ensuing decades saw some challenge to these notions. Scholars posed legitimate challenges for the basis on limited and anecdotal evidence (Bennett, et al. 2008). Further research in the first decade after Prensky’s papers, while confirming the near ubiquitous use of digital devices by adolescents, found that “a significant proportion of students had lower level skills than might be expected of digital natives” and that “only a minority of the students (around 21%) were engaged in creating their own content and multimedia for the Web” (Kvavik, Caruso & Morgan, 2004, as cited in Bennett, et al. 2008).
I would propose that computer software, especially at this early period in the 2000’s but even still today, has been designed primarily for commerce, entertainment, and socializing. This is what Prensky and his supporters were seeing students use; skills in using this software was what students were developing. I submit that software designed to sell, entertain, and socialize has some features that are not supportive of an effective educational tool. Education needs platforms that engage students in what we know to be good learning practices. Prensky, in my view, was asking teachers to bend their lessons away from sound educational practice to match the entertainment that students were used to experiencing when using computer technology. I believe this was his mistake.
But we know that something is different. Those of us who were born before 1980 can attest to changes in adolescents that is associated with the digital age. In my view, this shift is better understood in less dramatic terms: as a cultural change of the sort that has been going on in civilization for millennia. The point is well taken that educators should adapt to this kind of cultural shift.
Thinking and Information Processing
Prensky posits that the extensive use of digital devices has changed how students think and process information. Digital natives are characterized as “accustomed to learning at high speed, making random connections, processing visual and dynamic information and learning through game- based activities” as well as multi-tasking (Bennett, et al. 2008). Not only do these assertions lack evidence, but I would argue that none of them lend themselves to right learning practice. Multi-tasking does not work for human beings (Napier, 2014), since it interferes with encoding in long-term memory and increases cognitive load.
In addition to the lack of evidence to support the assertion that digital natives thinking is significantly different from previous generations, Bennett et al note that “the claim that there might be a particular learning style or set of learning preferences characteristic of a generation of young people is highly problematic.”
While there is some overlap between engaging in digital experiences for commerce, entertainment, and social media and for education, experience has taught me that there are some fundamental differences. Digital teaching platforms should reflect sound educational practice and practical application to classrooms.
But we know that something is different. Those of us who were born before 1980 can attest to changes in adolescents that is associated with the digital age. In my view, this shift is better understood in less dramatic terms: as a cultural change of the sort that has been going on in civilization for millennia. The point is well taken that educators should adapt to this kind of cultural shift. However, where I diverge from Prensky is here: effective teaching practice does not mean that we adopt the ways of commerce, entertainment, ans social media in wholesale fashion.
What are young people doing with media? An alternative framework for understanding how adolescents use technology is one which maps out the skills adolescents possess across different digital media. “[T]ransmedia skills are understood as a series of skills related to the production, management and consumption of digital interactive media” (Scolari, 2019).
“[T]ransmedia literacy turns [the] question around and asks what young people are doing with the media. Instead of considering young people as consumers taken over by the screens (television or interactive screens, large or small), they are considered âprosumersâ able to generate and share media content of different types and levels of complexity” (Scolari, 2019).
Let us redefine the “digital native” as the typical adolescent who has an uneven skill set for media, having come from immersive digital experiences in games, commerce, and social media. Let us recognize that, while there is some overlap, the approach students need to be taught to cultivate toward digital devices as learning tools has some important and very fundamental differences from what they have done before.
“[T]he concept of âdigital nativeâ, understood as a young person who âcomes with a built-in chipâ and who moves skillfully within digital networked environments, shows more problems than advantages” (Scolari, 2019).
In terms of transmedia skills, we still have some things to teach students. Strong skill sets are not evenly distributed (Scolari, 2019). Students come to us skilled in the areas they use most, engaging in entertainment, commerce, and informal social interaction. Skills linked to production are usually strong in adolescents, but those associated with related to ideology and values are more limited.
Scolari writes: “at an individual level, a young person who demonstrates that they have advanced photographic production skills (creation of memes) or audiovisual management skills (a YouTube channel) can, at the same time, have less developed abilities in, for example, detecting stereotypes or managing privacy.”
A Revised Definition
We who have been teaching for decades know that there is a cultural shift going on that is related to information and communication technology. The term “digital native” coined by Prensky lacks a firm foundation and may well be more a reflection of the time it was conceived than anything else. In addition, it seems to me that the current generation of beginning teachers are in no way digital immigrants, having themselves grown up with extensive digital experience.
Adolescents use technology extensively and this does affect their starting point for education. We teachers can capitalize on the skills they possess already in the classroom while refining those they may lack and discouraging adolescent practices that are detrimental (like attempting to multi-task).
Let us redefine the “digital native” as the typical adolescent who has an uneven skill set for media, having come from immersive digital experiences in games, commerce, and social media. Let us recognize that, while there is some overlap, the approach students need to be taught to cultivate toward digital devices as learning tools has some important and very fundamental differences from what they have done before. The platforms we use to teach them in the digital world should reflect this. I would term these apps “21st century learning spaces“.
Striking a Balance: Leveraging Innovation Teaching Platform for Effective Pedagogy
In the ever-evolving landscape of education, the debate between teaching to the test and teaching to the standard persists, presenting educators with a perpetual challenge: how to strike a balance between preparing students for standardized assessments while also ensuring they acquire the essential knowledge and skills outlined in educational standards. Fortunately, innovative teaching platforms like Innovation Assessments offer a multifaceted approach to pedagogy that can help educators navigate this delicate balance and promote best practices in teaching and learning.
Utilizing Comprehensive Learning Management:
At the heart of the Innovation teaching platform lies a comprehensive learning management system designed to streamline content creation, assessment, and student engagement. By leveraging this robust platform, educators can seamlessly align their instruction with established educational standards while also incorporating targeted test preparation strategies.
Balancing Test Preparation and Conceptual Understanding:
Innovation Assessments provides educators with the tools to integrate test preparation within a broader framework of standards-aligned instruction. Through features such as customizable assessments, practice drills, and automated grading, educators can ensure that students receive targeted support in mastering both the content knowledge and test-taking skills necessary for success on standardized assessments.
Fostering Inquiry-Based Learning:
One hallmark of effective teaching practice is the promotion of inquiry-based learning, which encourages students to explore, question, and construct their understanding of the world around them. With its diverse array of multimedia resources, interactive activities, and collaborative tools, the Innovation platform empowers educators to create engaging learning experiences that foster curiosity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills in students.
Personalizing Instruction to Meet Diverse Needs:
Recognizing that every student is unique, the Innovation platform offers personalized learning features that allow educators to tailor instruction to meet the individual needs, interests, and learning styles of their students. From adaptive assessments that adjust to students’ proficiency levels to customizable learning pathways that provide targeted remediation and enrichment, educators can ensure that each student receives the support and challenge they need to succeed.
Empowering Educators with Data-Driven Insights:
In addition to facilitating student learning, the Innovation platform equips educators with valuable data-driven insights into student performance, engagement, and growth over time. By analyzing student data and trends, educators can identify areas of strength and weakness, inform instructional decision-making, and implement targeted interventions to support student success.
Promoting Continuous Professional Growth:
Lastly, the Innovation platform serves as a catalyst for educators’ continuous professional growth by providing access to a wealth of resources, professional development opportunities, and collaborative communities. Through ongoing training, peer collaboration, and reflective practice, educators can refine their pedagogical approaches, stay abreast of emerging best practices, and ultimately elevate the quality of instruction in their classrooms.
In conclusion, while the debate between teaching to the test and teaching to the standard may persist, innovative teaching platforms like Innovation Assessments offer a holistic solution that transcends this dichotomy. By harnessing the power of technology to integrate test preparation within a broader framework of standards-aligned instruction, foster inquiry-based learning, personalize instruction, empower educators with data-driven insights, and promote continuous professional growth, the Innovation platform emerges as a potent tool for promoting best practices in teaching and learning. As educators embrace this multifaceted approach, they can navigate the delicate balance between preparing students for standardized assessments and equipping them with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for success in the 21st century and beyond.
When I was developing an app for synchronous chat, my eighth, ninth, and tenth graders were only too happy to be my beta-testers. It was in the last month before I was to retire and so I wanted to make good use of my time remaining, especially preparing students for the conversation part of the regional world language examination in French. The chat app arose out of the desire for an effective method for students to communicate in the lesson in a paired situation, in a 21st century learning space.
Synchronous Online Discussion in a Co-located Classroom Setting
A number of advantages to blending online discussion tools in the classroom present themselves. In peer face-to-face interactions, “student differences in social status, verbal abilities and personality traits cannot guarantee equal participation rates (Chinn, Anderson, & Waggoner, 2001, as cited in Asterhan & Eisenmann). High-status, high-ability and extrovert peers may often dominate the discussion and group decision making” (Barron, 2003, Caspi et al., 2006, as cited in Asterhan & Eisenmann). Online discussion tools can reduce these factors and present a more egalitarian framework for participation.
Having students in the same room communicating with each other on a chat system may seem odd at first glance, but in addition to the benefits noted above, there are some practical benefits especially for the secondary level. The presence of an adult will ensure more on-task behavior and more appropriate behavior (no “flaming”, for example). Students may not all have equal access to home internet services such an an asynchronous model would demand. Furthermore, the synchronous model greatly ensures that the task will get done. Asynchronous assignments often fall down to procrastination, a typical foible of the adolescent. A literature review by Asterhan and Eisenmann reveal that “[c]ommunication in synchronous discussion environment is closer to spoken conversation and therefore likely to be more engaging and animating than asynchronous conferencing (McAlister, Ravenscroft, & Scanlon, 2004, as cited in Asterhan & Eisenmann). Students have also been found to be more active and produce more contributions in synchronous, than in asynchronous environments (Cress, Kimmerle, & Hesse, 2009, as cited in Asterhan & Eisenmann).”
When used during the class period, synchronous chat is a small part of a larger lesson which includes scaffolding, participation, and debriefing.
Early synchronous chat software such as reviewed in the study by Asterhan and Eisenmann had some practical limitations for class discussion. Instant messaging or threaded discussion boards both work on precedence by chronology, which makes conversations difficult to follow and so may actually defeat the purpose of the exercise. Some teachers have attempted to use FaceBook or Twitter to facilitate class discussions. These platforms were designed to satisfy a commercial interest.
A 21st century learning space paradigm provides the necessary structure (guardrails and training wheels) to maximize quality participation frequency while eliminating concerns about privacy and advertising.
How it Works
The chat app works like this: the teacher opens a chat session and displays the host control dashboard on the large screen. Next, students join the session from their devices and once everyone is onboard, the teacher explains the assignment. The teacher then clicks the control to generate random partners and then to enable the chat session. A timer can optionally be set. Students engage in a real time discussion to carry out the task for the allotted time. During this session, the teacher can display the current chats going on (anonymously, of course) and offer any coaching that would be useful. At the conclusion of the time, the host closes the chat session and can debrief by displaying the chats and offering comment. The chats are anonymous: unless students introduce themselves in live session, they do not know necessarily who their partner is. The pairs are organized by “city”, a nickname generated by the app to identify them from a list of world capitals.
Host Screen Displayed at Front
The first issue that developed was that they enjoyed it (not necessarily a problem but…). It caused a lot of “real” chatter in class as students chuckled about funny things others had said or trying to find out who their partner was. Older students who were more serious about their studies also were motivated to communicate outside the chat session to strategize in real time addressing their assignment. My tenth graders were assigned to use the chat as a writing exercise, such that they answered the prompt by collaboratively composing a paragraph. When a class is engaged in this activity, they need to be trained to maintain a mostly silent room, focused on the task and not the distractions.
A second issue that arose in the early version of the app was that students would forget the prompt or instructions. It was easy to modify the app to allow the teacher to attach “accessories”: text, video embed, and/or a PDF document with the assignment and rubric displayed. Now students could refresh their understanding of the assignment by clicking a button.
Sometimes a student would leave the chat window to another browser tab to look something up. For situations where is is not allowed, I modified to app to include a “proctor” that records right in the app when a student leaves the window and when they paste in text.
Research on this sort of application support the practice of including assessment in the activity (Gilbert and Dabbagh, 2005, as cited in Balaji & Chakrabati, 2010). Students are aware of the rubric and are graded, which has an enhancing effect on their performance as they are often more mindful of their progress. Using the timer, which displays in the front of the room from the teacher’s host screen is also helpful. If one is pressed for time, one is less likely to be off-task without knowing it.
In keeping with the paradigm of the 21st century learning space, the app lends itself well to assessment and debriefing. The assessment screen makes it easy to assess student work on a built-in rubric.
Scoring Controls
Students can see their scores and comments.
I developed this in the context of teaching French, but its application to other subjects is clear. For example, a social studies lesson could include a document or video segment for students to analyze or a short discussion on a topic from lecture.
The chat application is designed as a 21st century learning space .
Guardrails: The proctor for the chat app reports on text paste-ins and leaving the browser tab.
Training Wheels: The optional accessories can provide the scaffold support for the discussion. The optional timer supports on-task behavior.
Debriefing: In debriefing mode, anonymized student contributions to chat can be displayed for analysis and discussion.
Assessment and Feedback: In scoring mode, an efficient system of evaluation saves time and offers students significant feedback.
Swiss Army Knife: The chat can be viewed in discussion mode, where other features can be applied such as identifying logical fallacies and replying to the posts of students other than one’s assigned partner. In forum mode, the teacher can participate.
Locus of Data Control: The student chat submissions are stored on a server licensed to the teacher’s control. Commercial apps such as FaceBook and Twitter may be less dedicated to the kinds of privacy and control exigencies of education.
Synchronous chat turned out to be a hit in my French class. It provided a solid and effective tool for engaging everyone in the lesson and made me feel like my time was well spent. In the next academic year (2023-24), I will be teaching an online synchronous college level French course. Look for posts next fall where I share how the new app went over in that class.
During the pandemic, many office workers moved to remote work from home. This precipitated a rise in monitoring software that companies could use to ensure that, being at home, workers were productive. An article in Forbes Magazine from 2021 reports that “[d]emand for worker surveillance tools increased by 74% compared to March 2019.” This rush to monitor and micromanage turned out to be unnecessary, as fears of a loss or productivity proved unfounded and “94% [of companies] reported that worker productivity either stayed at the same levels or improved.”
But this is not the case with adolescents.
The traditional classroom had to be a “very supervised” place because, by virtue of the fact that they are immature, most of our charges need guidance to get back on track. It is one reason why remote learning went so badly for many youngsters: it is not in the nature of most to be focused. The executive functioning needed to ignore distraction, set goals and reasonable timelines for work, even to break a longer task up into smaller, achievable segments is rarely present in adolescence. Until this develops, the role of the instructors includes teaching this skill and guiding students to follow the right course. Teaching with digital devices at present has reduced much of this supervisory ability. 21st century learning spaces would come with an array of monitoring and accountability features.
Data […] promotes accountability, but it also puts the student potentially in the driver’s seat and that is what developing executive functioning is all about.
I recall an instance where a student of mine was completing the essay portion of an examination remotely. I was able to monitor his examination in real time using software that shared his screen with me. When I noticed that he was typing sentences that appeared beyond his ability, I was able to google those phrases and find the source he was plagiarizing from online (he had his phone with him to cheat). This monitoring software allowed me a virtual way to simulate normal classroom supervision and to take the natural step of concluding the examination and award no credit.
After the pandemic, I continued using digital tools for student work. My students all had ChromeBooks. I had a student who was clever in taking advantage of a certain doubtfulness about technology by some adults around him. Faced with an incomplete assignment, he would claim he did it and that the app must have “lost his work”. He would claim that it “did not save”. In a traditional classroom, I would have seen his paper and whether it was written on, but the digital work did not include this monitor yet. I adjusted the software for his writing assignments to report when a response was deleted, when a student left the browser page for another, when students pasted text in, and even double-check the server to ensure an answer was saved. These application features returned important accountability assurances that were initially lost when moving to digital devices.
As time went on, my colleagues and I devised further modifications to the software at Innovation. I developed the “proctor” on important apps for testing and writing.
The proctor records data about the page and the students’ interactions with the assignment. Depending on the particular assignment, it records when work has begun, when an ancillary resource like a video has successfully loaded, when a student leaves the page and for how long, when text is pasted in, and when answers are saved. The proctor is visible to students (see illustration above) so they know their work is being monitored.
My colleague in the science department uses a flipped classroom technique. He made a great suggestion for the development of an app to monitor student interaction with a video assignment. As a student watches a video assignment, proctor records events like start video, stop video, how long between pauses, when the video ended, and how long the student was there.
The tracking monitor helped maintain a system of accountability for students.
Besides the proctor, Innovation tracks student activity around the site. The auditor maintains a record of logging in, accessing a course, starting a task, saving work, getting a score, etc.
The critical work of developing executive functioning in adolescents can be enhanced by providing youngsters the kind of data that, if they attend to it, can inform their decisions about what they should do. The proctor and other reporting tools are available to all students. Although consequences for missing the mark on attention to task can and should be part of the program, it is not great practice to be all sticks and no carrots. Objective data on what a teenager is actually doing (rather than what they remember they did or want you to think they did) can be the focus of discussions about on-task behavior and how the individual can take responsibility for it. We can take a look at performance on as assignment and examine on-task behavior related to its production. Could on-task behavior have improved the final product?
Data like this promotes accountability, but it also puts the student potentially in the driver’s seat and that is what developing executive functioning is all about.
My first experience using computers to teach was in 1993 when I was teaching French at a small, rural school in the Adirondacks. When the US Air Force base in Plattsburgh, New York closed, it donated its old computers to regional schools. They were “286s” that basically only ran, well, BASIC! Fascinated, I taught myself BASIC and started writing programs to drill vocabulary and verb conjugations. I really have not stopped coding educational apps since. It turned into a very stimulating hobby and very useful for my teaching practice. (When we were doing remote learning during the pandemic, my students were already operating in a digital classroom and remote learning was easy!)
Those old “IBM Compatible” computers were designed by computer engineers for the business world. The input interface was a keyboard (for typists and secretaries who, in the old days, were the only ones in the office who needed to learn to type). The big, boxy device was designed to sit on an office desk. The software ran programs like simple word processors and spreadsheets. These are also office utilities. You begin to see where I am going here?
Computers like these were initially devised to increase the efficiency of offices. They were for business.
I saw my first computer game at my cousin’s house when I was in middle school. His family had an Atari system. That was also where I first saw coding in BASIC. I saw the early computer game, Pong, at a restaurant when I was in my early teens. And there was Space Invaders at the arcade in Old Forge… And there was an arcade at the Fairmount Fair mall … You begin to see where I am going now?
Computers like those were devised for entertainment. Whether for entertainment or for commerce, the whole paradigm was intended for purposes other than education.
I was computer coordinator in my school at the time when computers and internet first migrated into schools. I was there in the heated discussions over whether we use Mac or IBM. I helped wire our school for internet and networking. I ran cables through crawlspaces and attic spaces in the 70-year old school. Talk was about what kids will need in this computer age and mainly we felt they needed skills associated with business, so when we adopted devices that were primarily designed for offices and plunked them in classrooms we figured it was good. Computer labs were de rigueur in the late 90s and early 00’s. Each classroom in my school had four or five PCs, which we built in a basement workshop. We were running Windows, Microsoft Office, PowerPoint, and so forth. We were trying to bend a device and its software that was designed for business and entertainment to classroom use.
By 2012, smartphones had become ubiquitous among students and this led to a number of other problems. Young people mainly play games and socialize on their devices. Socializing mediated by social media platforms has made changes and caused problems we are only beginning to unravel.
People use digital devices to engage in commerce, participate in entertainment, and to socialize. These being the principle purposes of the devices, they shape the course of design not only of the physical device itself but the software and features that the devices host.
My thesis is that when we brought these devices into schools, right from the beginning, we were trying to repurpose things meant for commerce, entertainment, and socializing into an environment where none of those was our pedagogical purpose. Sometimes it fits, sometimes it does not.
What do apps look like that are devised for education?
I use the phrase “21st Century Learning Spaces” to refer to a digital device and its software that fit education well because it is designed for that purpose and not repurposed from some other setting. I don’t build digital devices, but I do write software. For the past ten years, my colleagues and my students and I have been dissatisfied with bending apps to serve an educational function and having it not quite fit. Every try to use Google Forms to give a quiz? Is that really easier than what we used to do?
I hope you will join me in the next few posts and permit me to unpack the 21st Century Learning Space concept with its implications, limitations, and applications to education. I hope teachers will try out Innovation Assessments and see whether I have managed to meet some of the criteria for educational apps in a 1:1 device classroom.
Play is an important part of growing up. Trying out roles, acting out adventures… imagination! Here are some improv activities adapted to the classroom with some rubrics.
I first saw these on a TV show in the ’90s called “Whose line Is It Anyway?” where comedians performed improv scenes. I adapted them to teaching French at the time in order to develop conversation skills and improvised speaking in a fun lesson. When I switched to social studies in ’04, I sometimes used these at the end of a unit.
Stranger in Town
This activity must have a real name among improv comedians, but I just called it this. Three volunteers come to the front of the room. One goes out into the hallway briefly, out of earshot. The two who are left quickly agree on a scene they will perform for 3 minutes. The person in the hall, the “stranger”, is invited in and the scene commences. After 3 minutes, the stranger has to guess who they are based on the scene, in which, by the way, they had to participate. Imagine walking into a room and finding out you’re Henry VIII!
Here’s a sample setup for a social studies class where students had chosen their activity in advance and I had prepared it. To save time, I would sometimes generate the scenes for stranger in town and have teams roll the dice to see which to play. The identity of the person playing “stranger” was always a surprise!
The volunteer goes to the front of the room, preferably to a lectern, and pretends to be some famous person in history. The class are reporters whom she will call upon to ask questions. Pretend you’re Hannibal and you’ve just gotten your army with your elephants over the Alps. Can you answer some questions from our reporters before you disembark?
Although I often had students prepare for these if they weren’t confident, it can be an improv exercise for the brave and bold. Let it be a surprise to the volunteer whom they will play!
Newscast
Two volunteers for newscast come to the front of the room to play reporters who are to report on a scene from history. They don’t know what they scene is until they get there! (Presumably this is at the end of a unit and the scenes are from the current topic of study). One student plays the anchor at the desk which the other is “in the field”, a reporter on the scene. A third student may participate as a bystander whom the reporter will interview.
In artifact, students create a quick construction paper cutout of some object associated with our unit. It could be an Egyptian scroll or a Greek sword or Thomas Jefferson’s quill. The student presents the artifact to the class as an archaeologist at a conference. For teaching world language, the artifact is something from our current vocabulary or reading.
I used all of these to teach French as well. For teaching world language, these scenes would not be about history, but of everyday life. Stranger in Town could be a scene in a restaurant and the stranger is a waiter serving a fussy customer. Press conference or newscast could be an event of current interest.
Improv is fun, but may not be for everyone.
Improv is fun. If you have time for it, dive in! Some kids are uncomfortable with this and I never made them play. I confess that in my later years teaching social studies, I was forced by time constraints to abandon these for my older kids. The demands of curriculum and remediation and state tests were such that the minimal content reinforcement provided by these activities, well, the juice was just not worth the squeeze.
Not all classes are right for this kind of thing. If you have a middle school class that has trouble self-regulating or is over-excitable, this may not be a good idea. It also does not work well with students who feel very uncomfortable in ambiguous situations or in performing. You will know who can benefit from this and who might not because you know your kids.
âGeneral Historyâ, A Local Diploma Secondary Social Studies Course
Originally printed January 2017
Abstract
âGeneral Historyâ is a proposal for a district-approved regular education class designed for students with an IEP seeking a local diploma via the safety net options. Students will be able to earn local credit working at a course within their proximal zone of development such that their effort can be rewarded and the data on their achievement be truthful. They will remain in the society of their peers in the regular classroom but the report card and school official transcript will identify the class distinctly as âGeneral Global Historyâ. Content will be limited to about half of that typically tested on the NYS Global History and Geography Regents exam. Reading and writing tasks will be designed and assessed at the Common Core State Standardsâ fifth grade level.
The Problem
For some students, the Regents level standard high school course is too difficult. In the small, rural school there may be circumstances which impede the creation of self-contained 15:1 special education classes or consultant teaching arrangements for students with an IEP who cannot earn passing marks in regular secondary classes. This may be especially true for content courses such as social studies and science where the qualification for passing legitimately rests on the studentâs understanding and recall of a minimum quantity of content material. There is a finite range of student ability served even by a highly differentiated classroom situation. Some students face obstacles beyond their power to ever passing these classes. Simply passing the student by fiat or simplifying the curriculum continually until she or he passes could easily be construed as an act of fraud. If the report card and transcript identify the class by its regular name, someone outside the district would never know that the evidence collected in support of the studentâs grade assignment was not the same as for the rest of the class. It reduces passing to an arbitrary and capricious political expediency.
In many cases, such students fail and then are assigned to summer school, where they participate in some sort of credit recovery course which may not be equivalent to the original class that they failed. It happens sometimes that participation alone will earn the student credit in summer school no matter the competency level actually achieved and then as a formality the student is advanced to the next course. It may be argued that this is something akin to simply assigning a student a passing mark without possessing competency with only the twist of demanding seat time for six weeks in summer. It is a compromise situation.
This post discusses a way to address this situation by creating a regular education âclass within a classâ for students with an IEP who lack the capability to meet the minimum standards of a secondary course. This class creates a different set of standards for the special education student in the regular classroom such that the district will offer local credit for passing the class at a reduced difficulty level. The training program offered to the student will prepare him or her to score in the range of 45-55 on a standardized test of the subject and graduate on one of the four safety net options currently in place in NYS regulations.
Research and Principles of Information Rationing
One of the most common misconceptions regarding learning is the effect of the amount of information on how well one learns it. Some believe that the amount has no effect on learning and that a student who applies him- or herself to any body of knowledge no matter how large or elaborated will just hopefully come away with a passing amount. A strong body of research contradicts this view. Trying to learn less results in learning more.
Frank N. Dempster was a professor in the Department of Educational Psychology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. In an article was published in Phi Delta Kappan in February 1993, and subsequently in two books on effective teaching practices, he makes the well-researched case that â… our students are exposed to too much material and that this practice is antithetical to what is known about effective learning.â Dr. Dempster points out that research shows â… exposing students to information has a potential downside: it may actively interfere with the acquisition and retention of other information.” He goes on to exhort educators to â…think about separating the wheat from the chaff, so that they can get on with the serious business of effectively teaching the essentialsâ (Dempster).
Research in the area of cognitive load supports the idea that students with more limited working memory capacities will learn significantly less unless the quantity they address is limited. Cognitive load is the term for the burden working memory has to carry âin the form of information that must be held plus information that must be processedâ (Clark & Mayer 41). â[I]f cognitive overload takes place, then learners will be more likely to make errors, not fully engage with the subject materials, and provide poor effort overall. The change in the schematic structures and pathways will not occur, simply because the learner cannot process the information being offered within the lessonâ (Pappas). There is ample evidence supporting the idea that working memory is absolutely key to academic success and that it is an âeven better predictor of academic success than I.Q.â (Alloway).
âInformation rationingâ means that the amount of information that the student is directed to learn is limited to only the most important. âImportantâ can be defined as including content which is
foundational to understanding the topic,
simple enough to connect with most studentsâ prior knowledge, and
most often asked on standardized tests of the subject.
It is based the premise that information overload will cause the student to learn less or none. It recognizes inborn differences in working memory that may not be ameliorated by any amount of drill and practice. In General Global History, information will be rationed to optimize the studentâs learning. This is the key feature of the course that will give the student a true opportunity to pass.
How the Curriculum will be Developed
The first question in a content course is how much information to teach and which information to teach. It is difficult to itemize information, since it can be broken down into innumerable elaborated components and understandings. Nonetheless, the amount of content should not be an arbitrary list and should not be without basis in any known measurable standard. The New York State Regents Examination in Global History and Geography is a valid and reliable examination that may serve as a reasonable standard for determining the quantity and selected content to teach (as opposed to the teacher simply selecting content that is pertinent in his judgement).
New York State Education Department provides technical reports on the Global History and Geography Regents examinations (http://www.p12.nysed.gov/assessment/reports/). These reports document the psychometric properties of the examination, the procedures used to analyze the results of the field test of the examination items, and are cited as evidence of test validity and reliability. There is no teacher-made assessment or textbook publisher test that would meet the rigor of an analysis of validity and reliability found in that of the Global Regents exam for this subject. Whatever oneâs personal opinion on standardized testing, it is hard to dispute the benefit of basing decisions on a standard assessment administered annually to over 200,000 students for decades. Decisions about what to teach for content in General Global History will be based on this examination. It is a valid and reliable assessment, it provides a norm against which to measure competence in the subject, and it is the same standard against which student work in the Regents level class is judged. The latter will make it possible to reasonably accurately compare studentâs performance to the regular class and for reliable and valid progress monitoring.
In high school, âGeneral Global Historyâ is a âclass within a classâ for students with an IEP who will be seeking a local diploma by any of the four safety net options. As such, the educational program will be directed at delivering enough content to score 55 on the New York State Global History and Geography Regents exam. This will be the determining factor in the selection of which content to learn. Ten years of exams (that is thirty exams, since they are given three times a year) will be analyzed to see what is normally tested in the multiple-choice portion of the test. 55% of this itemized content will be selected for learning by the student in the General Global History class. A score of 100 on a content test in General Global History will be equivalent to a score of 55 in the regular curriculum. Accurate comparative progress monitoring is now possible. This will also make it possible for the student in General Global History to be in the Regents Global History physical classroom setting, following along the same topical content as the rest of the class but in their own fashion throughout the year.
Specific Example of Method of Curriculum Design
An example of the information rationing method proposed here is in order. The following table illustrates the content called for by the curriculum objectives and what has been typically tested on that over a decade of examinations for topic 9.1.
NYS Social Studies Frameworks ObjectivesTopic 9.1
What is actually asked on the Global Regents, topic 9.1
Students will analyze the political, social, and economic differences in human lives before and after the Neolithic Revolution, including the shift in roles of men and women. Students will explore how the Mesopotamian, Shang, and Indus River valley civilizations adapted to and modified their environments to meet their need for food, clothing, and shelter. Students will explore the Mesopotamian, Shang, and Indus River valley civilizations by examining archaeological and historical evidence to compare and contrast characteristics and note their unique contributions.
Hammurabi’s codeWhich statement most accurately describes how geography affected the growth of the ancient civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia? / One reason early civilizations developed in China, Egypt, and the Tigris-Euphrates Valley in Mesopotamia is because / Which revolution led to the development of these civilizations?Characteristics of civilizationsOne similarity found in both Egyptian and Sumerian civilizations is that each developed aWhat is the main reason the Neolithic Revolution is considered a turning point in world history?* Planting wheat and barley * Domesticating animals * Establishing permanent homes and villages — At the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution, the most direct impact of these developments was on Which name identifies the region located between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers? The development of which early civilization was influenced most directly by the Tigris River, the Zagros Mountains, and the Syrian Desert?
The right hand column is drawn from Global Regents examination multiple-choice questions for ten years of tests. Duplicates have been deleted. These are the only questions that have been customarily asked for ten years on topic identified as 9.1 (grade nine, topic one). A cursory review will reveal that these questions do not cover all of the objectives. A reading of the technical report on the Global Regents will reveal that the designers of the assessment work hard to create tests that are statistically equivalently difficult from year to year. Given the long period of asking mainly these same things, it is reasonable to assume that these are the only things likely to be asked in future administrations of the exam.
In the information rationing scheme for General Global History, 55% of the content that is usually tested will be identified for study. The following table illustrates how that decision could be made.
Teacher Selections from what is actually asked on the Global Regents, topic 9.1
Target Learning in General Global History
Hammurabi’s codeWhich statement most accurately describes how geography affected the growth of the ancient civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia? / One reason early civilizations developed in China, Egypt, and the Tigris-Euphrates Valley in Mesopotamia is because / Which revolution led to the development of these civilizations?Characteristics of civilizationsOne similarity found in both Egyptian and Sumerian civilizations is that each developed aWhat is the main reason the Neolithic Revolution is considered a turning point in world history?* Planting wheat and barley * Domesticating animals * Establishing permanent homes and villages — At the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution, the most direct impact of these developments was on Which name identifies the region located between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers?The development of which early civilization was influenced most directly by the Tigris River, the Zagros Mountains, and the Syrian Desert?
Hammurabiâs Code – What is it? Why is it important? What were some things it said?Characteristics of CivilizationWhy did civilizations developed in China, Egypt, and Mesopotamia?What is the Neolithic Revolution? Why is the Neolithic Revolution is a turning point in history?
Student learning in topic 9.1 General Global History would be focused only on these four items with only limited necessary elaborations. Students who could answer these to a level of satisfactory completeness would earn a 100 in General Global History. Knowing only these things on topic 9.1 would be worth a score of 55 on the Regents and in the regular class. Since knowing only about 65% of this list of four is all thatâs required to âpassâ General Global History, passing should be within reach of a large number of students.
It would seem important to illustrate why student achievement in General Global History cannot be construed as passing a high school level class as defined by the New York State Social Studies Frameworks. The following table illustrates how far General History is from the standard curriculum.
NYS Social Studies Frameworks ObjectivesTopic 9.1
Target Learning in General Global History
Students will analyze the political, social, and economic differences in human lives before and after the Neolithic Revolution, including the shift in roles of men and women. Students will explore how the Mesopotamian, Shang, and Indus River valley civilizations adapted to and modified their environments to meet their need for food, clothing, and shelter. Students will explore the Mesopotamian, Shang, and Indus River valley civilizations by examining archaeological and historical evidence to compare and contrast characteristics and note their unique contributions.
Hammurabiâs Code – What is it? Why is it important? What were some things it said?Characteristics of CivilizationWhy did civilizations developed in China, Egypt, and Mesopotamia?What is the Neolithic Revolution? Why is the Neolithic Revolution is a turning point in history?
Answering the four General History questions in the right hand column could not be construed as meeting the curriculum standards at even a minimum level. On average around 62% of students statewide (67% in rural schools like ours) can pass a test of the content in that right hand column (King). It is clear to any reader that the general history goals do not even really represent half of what is implied by the standard curriculum. This same process will be applied to the creation of each topic of the General Global History curriculum in the selection of content targeted for students to learn. Being in the regular class will at least give students in General Global History exposure to the full expression of the curriculum even if they are not responsible for learning it, with the caveat that over attention to too much information may be an impediment.
Reading materials will be provided at a fifth grade level.Â
With regard to writing assignments, a variation on the same writing rubrics used for the class will be devised based on the Common Core State Standards for writing in social studies for the developmental level in which the student is functional at a passable level. Most high schoolers who fit the profile of student for this program, for example, will be functioning at a fifth grade level in their writing. By way of example, here are the CCSS for writing arguments (persuasive pieces) for different grade levels. The grading rubric for the rest of the ninth or tenth grade class class assesses the elements listed in column A. Students in General Global History that function at a 6th-8th grade writing level will be graded on column B on the very same task assigned to the whole class. Students functioning at a 5th grade writing level will be assessed according to column C on the same task.
Precedents
Since 2000, a variety of similar strategies at my school had been applied to the problem posed by a class that is too difficult for a student and there being no alternative placement. Student Xâs grades were simply artificially inflated to passing. Student Y was enrolled in a class-within-a-class for mathematics similar to the notion proposed here. Students Z and Q were enrolled in special segregated âintensiveâ classes. This writerâs classes are still differentiated by two tiers: âbasic proficiencyâ and âstandard inquiryâ, basic being delivering just enough information to score 65% on a content test.
There is precedent for class-within-a-class for regular education students. Often times over the years, there have been classes in science, social studies, or English in which a portion of the class was earning community college credit while the other earned regular high school credit. In such cases, students working for college credit were graded differently and had more elaborate assignments. The example of the one room schoolhouse of days past goes without saying.
Conformity to Regulatory and Legal Mandates
Although initially envisioned as a special education class within a regular education class, âGeneral Global Historyâ cannot be claimed as such. The term âspecial classâ now has a specific definition in New York State: âan instructional group consisting of students with disabilities who have been grouped together in a self-contained settingâ (Continuum of Special Education Services, §52). When a special class exists within a regular education class, it must be configured as âintegrated co-teaching servicesâ where one of the co-teachers is a certified special education teacher. âGeneral Global Historyâ, proposed here, is a district approved regular education class designed for students with an IEP seeking only a local diploma. It is not a special education class.
Access to successful completion of General Global History is created by removing four main obstacles for students who fit the profile of those for whom this course is intended: time to complete tasks, amount and complexity of content, expectations for reading, and expectations for writing. Part 200 regulations express the expectation that â…specially designed instruction and supplementary services may be provided in the regular class, including, as appropriate, providing related services, resource room programs and special class programs within the general education classroomâ (Regulations of the Commissioner of Education – Parts 200 and 201, §206(a)(1)). âGeneral Global Historyâ falls under the category of a special class program within the general education classroom. It is a locally-established regular education offering in which
the amount of information for which the student is held accountable is rationed to an amount around half of that of regular education students,
reading and writing expectations are set to the zone of proximal development, and
there are fewer tasks assigned to afford longer working times for unit of study completion.
Regulatory support for the course is drawn from current graduation requirements. Students enrolled in General Global History are not seeking a Regents diploma and so will not be prepared to qualify for one. âGeneral Global Historyâ is designed to help students earn a local diploma and it will âapply only to students with disabilities who are entitled to attend school pursuant to Education Law section 3202 or 4402(5)â (Part 100 Regulations, §105(b)(7)(vi)(b)). It is designed to prepare students to graduate on the basis of any one of four âsafety net optionsâ for graduation:
Low Pass Rate Safety Net Option (Five required Regents exams with a score of 55 â 64).
Low Pass Rate Safety Net Option with Appeal (Students who score up to three points below a score of 55 on a Regents exam are eligible to receive the local diploma via appeal if all of the conditions of appeal are met.)
Compensatory Safety Net Option
Graduation by superintendentâs determination
Students with disabilities entitled to attend school pursuant to Education Law section 3202 or 4402(5) have met the passing qualification on a Regents examination if they score 55-64. âGeneral Global Historyâ holds students accountable for the amount of content to earn 55 on a Global History Regents exam. In comparing score on a General Global History Interim to score on a NYS Global History and Geography Regents examination, a 100 on a General Global History exam is worth 55 on the Regents.
Some students cannot attain that level. NYS local diploma regulations also provide that â… a student’s score of 45-54 on a Regents examination required for graduation, other than the English and mathematics examinations, may, for purposes of earning a local diploma, be compensated by a score of 65 or higher on one of the other required Regents examinationsâ (Part 100 Regulations, §105(b)(7)(vi)(c)). A student who can learn 80% of the content offered in General Global History can quite likely score 45. Passing on this plan requires that students earns a grade in the course that âmeets or exceeds the required passing grade by the schoolâ (Part 100 Regulations, §105(b)(7)(vi)(c)(2)) and has satisfactory attendance (Part 100 Regulations, §105(b)(7)(vi)(c)(3)). Given the drastically reduced content knowledge and that the reading and writing expectations are set for the grade level in which the student functions passably, it would seem highly likely that a student would pass the course so designed.
There is also the option of a local diploma with superintendentâs determination. In a press release in June 2016, the NYS Education Department explained that âSchool superintendents are now required to determine, at the local level, if a student with a disability is eligible for graduation. […] Specifically, the superintendent must review, document and provide a written certification that there is evidence that the student has otherwise met the standards for graduation with a Local Diplomaâ. âGeneral Global Historyâ could provide the superintendent with the âevidence that demonstrates that the student passed courses culminating in the exam required for graduationâ (Regents Expand Diploma Opportunities).
Implications
The first implication of General Global History for the student enrolled is that there is no going back. The course cannot be listed on a report card or transcript as a Regents high school course and the training provided by the course will only lead to graduation under the safety net. General Global History is not a high school level course by any reasonable construction of the Common Core State Standards nor of the New York State Frameworks for Social Studies. It is a local high school course meeting the requirements for a local diploma for students with an IEP who have no reasonable expectation of meeting the state standards at the minimum level of competency.
The second important implication of the student enrolled in General Global History is that s/he will be doing noticeably easier work and less of it than the other students in the class. This cannot reasonably be kept a secret any more than eyeglasses or a wheelchair. Some students may need counseling to help them process the difference in expectations for them. Classes will need to be well managed by the teacher such that it is a community that welcomes differences with respect, empathy, and equanimity.
As a practical matter, regular classroom teachers deal with protocols for groups of students. This is a necessity because their âcaseloadâ numbers 50 to 100 students. Highly individualized instruction is impossible. General Global History creates a separate standard protocol for a group of students representing probably between 5%-10% of the roster and it is not intended to be a highly individualized curriculum that will be tailor made for each student enrolled. Typically the student who would be recommended for enrollment in General Global History would score in the mid-30s on a content test where the rest of the class average score is in the low 70s and who reads and writes mostly at a fifth or sixth grade level.
How is this Different from âBasic Proficiencyâ?
âBasic Proficiencyâ refers to a package of differentiated lessons unique to this writerâs social studies classes. It is defined as âjust that knowledge required to pass the NYS regents Examâ. It is open to any student at will and has these modified features: one less assignment than the standard curriculum, the amount of content reduced to âjust enough to passâ, a single persuasive writing piece (instead of two), a summary (instead of a composition quiz), and a vocabulary quiz. It was created with the struggling student in mind. In terms of content quantity, insofar as that may be quantified, it represents 65% of the Regents high school Global History and Geography curriculum. Students on this plan usually have GPAs in the mid-70s.
Put in other terms, Basic Proficiency is the least difficult possibility for configuring the class while still earning Regents high school credit. General Global History is different from Basic Proficiency in that it represents a level of difficulty below Regents high school credit. The difficulty level of General Global History is below the minimum high school level competency.
General Global History differs from Basic Proficiency in another important way. Whereas in the Basic Proficiency plan, a score of 65 is 65, in General Global History a score of 100 has the actual relative value of 55 but it appears in the studentâs grade as a 100. This is one of the main reasons why it must appear as a separate course in the transcript and report card.
It will be interesting to see what this program would do to Basic Proficiency. Perhaps that package would disappear. It happens at present that some students, capable of passing the standard curriculum with a little effort, choose the basic plan for lack of willingness to try. It will also be interesting to see whether, as a teacher, I can maintain three tiers of instruction.
Middle School Level General History
It may be desirable sometimes to create such a class as this for students in grades seven and eight. Students whose academic limitations would make passing the class at the regular difficulty impossible and who would certainly be destined for summer school could be eligible for âGeneral United States History I and IIâ.
In middle school, the general history concept presented here would meet the definition of a âreduced unit of studyâ (Part 100 Regulations, §100.4(c)(5)(i)) and the definition of an âalternate performance levelâ (Part 100 Regulations §100.1(t)(2)(iv)).
New York State Commissioner of Educationâs regulations, part 100.4, support the general history concept. Students are eligible for a reduced unit of study in middle school if they are eligible for academic intervention services (Part 100 Regulations, §100.4(c)(5)(i)). Regulations state that âA principal shall consider a student’s abilities, skills and interests in determining the subjects for which the unit of study requirements may be reducedâ and that âa student’s parent or guardian shall be notified in writing, by the principal, of a school’s intention to [enroll the student in a reduced unit of study].â
General history is not necessary for all special education students. General history is for those whose disabilities related to this subject met the level of âsevere disabilitiesâ pursuant to §100.1(t)(2)(iv) such that alternative performance levels are needed.
With respect to the recipe of assignments in the middle school course, this would conceivably be the same as for high school. Reading materials may be provided at a third or fourth grade reading level. The IEP may inform decisions about course materials, with the caveat that the general history concept is a standard protocol approach, not and individualized plan.
Authorâs Commentary
The difficulty level of a secondary high school class is not a completely arbitrary configuration set to the whim of textbook companies or the teacher. A measurable set of standards exists, in this case the New York State Social Studies Framework and the Common Core State Standards, which even allowing for variation in more subjective measures still provides obvious definition of what constitutes a high school history class.
Many will recall a time several decades ago when schools offered at least two difficulty levels of each class: Regents and non-Regents. The effort to remove the non-Regents local diploma in the late 1990s was an effort at social engineering the State Education Department thought would bring students all to the academic level. In 2000, NYSED mandated âacademic intervention servicesâ for students who struggled with the new higher standards. By the mid-2000âs, NYSED was forced to backpedal as the number of students meeting the traditional academic standards did not much change. Diploma requirements are now a very convoluted set of regulations allowing people a diploma who cannot reach the standards. Those of us in the profession for twenty-five years can see the change in the difficulty of the examinations to admit more passing, such as the change in the Regents examination in Global History and Geography scheduled for 2018-19. A review by NYSED of around 200,000 students taking this exam over 2006-2010 showed that on average only 62% of students across the state could pass it each year (P-12 Education Committee College and Career Readiness Working Group 3). The number of students failing this exam are those who would not have sat for it in the days of non-Regents, local world history classes.
A variety of examples of rationalized âcompassionate fraudâ are evident in the system which does not seem to be willing to admit to the cognitive limitations of a segment of the population with regard to traditional academic style work. One strategy involves having parents or special education teachers do work with the student to such an extent that the work is no longer the studentâs own. They pass because someone else did a large portion of the work for them. Other strategies include modifying content for the individual to such a degree that the student is no longer taking the same class but gets credit for it as if s/he did. The summer school example has already been presented. Starting in June 2016, superintendents may grant local diplomas by âsuperintendentâs determinationâ to students with an IEP who did not pass the necessary assessments but who have good attendance and who completed the assignments with right effort.
These and other examples are âcompassionately fraudulentâ. It is dishonest to say that people meet a qualification that they do not. It is dishonest to refuse to see the fact before our eyes that some people are not born with the ability to succeed at a high level in this particular academic work. This dishonesty is an act of compassion, since we see and sympathize with the students placed in the unenviable and frustrating position of never seeing success. It is better to accept this dishonesty than to watch our students suffer the impact of policies we know to be wrong. Districts should only ever place students in classes they have a chance to pass. This compassionate fraud, however, does more harm than good. Firstly, it causes us to place students in impractical courses way above their ability instead of in useful education like completing job applications or managing a bank account. Secondly, such self-deceptions often distract us from addressing a studentâs real needs. Thirdly, this deception affects the schoolâs credibility after graduation. Those acquainted with educators at the community college level will attest to the fact that they cannot rely on much data from public schools about student performance because of the kinds of complex political forces that distort this data. Fourthly and not insignificantly, many teachers like myself find the cognitive dissonance of the situation professionally and ethically unsupportable despite that we side with the student and regret the unreasonable demands of state policy.
The class-within-a-class proposed here is an attempt to be honest. In a way, it turns back the clock to a time when schools offered non-Regents courses. Students will be able to earn local credit working at a course within their proximal zone of development such that their effort can be rewarded and the data on their achievement be truthful. This is, after all, what everyone wants. These students will remain rightfully in the society of their peers in the regular classroom instead of being segregated and I can collect evidence and report on student performance with a clear conscience.
Clark, Ruth C and Richard E. Mayer. “E-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning”. 3rd ed. Pfeiffer, 2011. Kindle ebook file.
Gives Access to a Task in Mr. Jones’ Virtual Classroom
You can give your students the passcode to use at InnovationAssessments.com/TestDrive. This lets them complete the task without logging in or the teacher having to register.
To record the score or other results of the task, have the student take a screenshot, save the page, or let you see.
Import the Task into your own Innovation Virtual Classroom
Teachers can use the passcode to import the task into their own classroom. The advantage of this is that the questions are added to your categorized test question bank. Now you can re-use the questions to generate a number of different tests and activities. You can edit the questions and reorganize them.
Being a subscriber also lets you save student work and run analysis tools on it such as the grade-curving app. It lets you generate “Live Sessions” where you project questions on the board and students respond on their own devices.
So, yes, we are trying to encourage you to become an Innovation subscriber! We think you’ll love using this site as much as we do. I taught my courses exclusively out of this site for almost ten years.
I first encountered Cornell format note taking in a college education class for teaching reading. I used it with my advanced French classes somewhat, but it became one of the cornerstone activities of my social studies classes beginning around 2006.
Cornell notes is a process that encourages developing reading skills, especially for informational text. It provides a study guide for later, although in truth few of my students used that. In my own experience, this method stimulates long-term memory. I believe this is because to complete the task one returns to the information at different levels of abstraction from text to outline to questions and finally to abstract of the whole. The repetition and organized structure of the information promotes that encoding into memory. In addition, it makes a good class activity: upon completion, students can ask each other their questions in a round-robin or pairs format.
The two informal studies below I conducted in 2013 and 2014 to examine the effects of this method on my students’ progress in social studies. Cornell notes became one of two options students had for processing their reading assignments for each unit. The other was summarizing, an equally effective skill. Consistently, about half my students preferred this method.
âInterim examinationâ refers to a regularly occurring examination measuring all course content since the start of the course. They are given at regular intervals as a progress monitoring method. They should be highly reliable indicators of achievement in the course (such as being highly predictive of performance on a standardized test) and teachers ought to be able to use the data to make decisions about instruction. A point worth emphasizing about the interim examination is that it is a test that spirals: each successive examination tests the content knowledge of the preceding tests and what had been taught since.
Forty-five students in grade seven through nine social studies at Schroon Lake Central School took the second interim examination in January 2013. Results for some classes were disappointing. An instructional plan was devised to improve student performance by the April interim examination. The most important aspect of this plan was a reading & note taking task. Secondarily, there was some increased exposure to domain-specific vocabulary.
The effort appears to have been successful. 17% more students passed the third interim examination from the second. The mean score went up 6%. The probability that the improvement was not due to random chance or other variables is 83%.
The Note Taking Task
The note taking task that was intended to boost student performance had two components: notes from textbook and notes from lecture. Notes had to be taken in Cornell Note Taking format. Cornell format training has been regularly included in the courses, including training at the start of quarter 3 on using Bloomâs Taxonomy to create higher level questions on the notes. The note taking task is graded as a âhigh order taskâ (high order tasks account for 65% of a studentâs GPA in the course). Cornell Note Taking is a note taking technique well supported in research1. Students have two full class periods to begin the text note taking and then additional working periods when they may opt to do that. They have twelve days to complete the task as this is the time a topic usually runs.
Notes from textbook could come from any of three sources, designated as âbelowâ, âatâ, or âaboveâ grade level. Grade level difficulty level was determined using Lexile and gauged by the Common Core State Standards grade level reading expectations. Students self-select for difficulty level in consultation with me. The amount of reading ranged from 8-12 pages.
Students doing the standard curriculum normally have 1-2 persuasive composition quizzes and 2 expository composition quizzes in each topic. The lecture included some information and media presentations intended as background or to reinforce key ideas as well as the direct answer to the composition quizzes. Notes required from lecture were limited to those aspects of the teacher presentation series that answered specific quiz questions. A modified lecture notes task is optional for students who are not sufficiently able to take notes. They get a copy of the presentation materials and add notes and create questions as for Cornell notes. The maximum score on this is 76 owing to the reduced workload.
Student Performance on the Note Taking Tasks
There were two notes tasks in the third quarter. The average score on the notes task was 70, the median 85. Around a quarter failed the notes task each time. Around half of the people who failed the average of the notes tasks failed interim three. The average score on the notes task was bore a moderately high correlation to year-to-date GPA in the course (0.70).
Twenty-seven students responded to a survey in which they were asked how well they like the addition of reading-note taking to their classroom tasks. 75% responded favorably. Prior to this change, assigned reading tasks were few. Save for grade nine, who had one short reading task per week as homework, students could get the information they needed to pass the quizzes elsewhere other than text â including studying the quizzes of students who took the quiz before them. The amount of regular reading in class had become far too limited. My focus on performance on content knowledge quizzes and on writing took me too far afield of reading for a while.
February, 2014
TOPICAL READING ASSIGNMENT USING CORNELL NOTE TAKING
For each topic of study over the year from February to February 2013-2014, students in social studies grades seven through nine at a small, rural school (N=~50) were assigned to use Cornell note taking for their assigned textbook chapter readings. The practice was initiated as a response to weak performance of some groups on the 2013 midterm examination.
Students are assigned ten pages of traditional textbook reading associated with the current topic of study. They may choose from three levels of text: a fourth-grade text, a grade-level text, and an advanced level text set at two grade levels higher. Providing reading material close to studentsâ independent reading levels gives them meaningful access to the information and support for continued reading growth (Allington, 2009). Students have two 45-minute class periods to work on the assignment and are expected to complete at least five pages per class period (this is more than double the time it takes the teacher to do the task). This assignment occurs before teacher lecture and is intended to support student learning by providing the basic groundwork information of the topic.
Students are trained in the Cornell note taking format (Paulk, 2014). Using a form provided by the teacher, students create an informal or formal outline of the most important top two layers of detail from the source text in their own words (Marzano, 2001). Next, students create questions to go with the information they recorded. Students are trained in a basic version of Bloomâs Taxonomy for the development of questions and are encouraged to devise questions and the analysis and evaluation levels in support of long-term memory of the information. Finally, students are to construct an abstract of each page of notes at the bottom, summarizing the main idea of the whole page in one or two sentences. Students are graded on the quality of their notes (Figure 2).The task is due at the end of the topic, usually around two calendar weeks later. Students have additional âworking daysâ after the teacher lecture series, some of which they may dedicate to completing whatever was not yet done of the reading task.
Students are assigned the Cornell note taking method because of the strong supporting research (Figure 1). Research indicates answering questions on text to be least effective for supporting reading comprehension (Graham, 2010). Cornell note taking supports higher level thinking such as application, synthesis, and analysis (Jacobs, 2008). Note taking is one of the âmost powerful skills students can cultivateâ by providing âstudents with tools for identifying and understanding the most important aspects of what they are learning.â (Marzano, 2001). It supports encoding the information for long term recall more effectively than guided notes and questionnaires (Jacobs, 2008). Note taking is known to be an effective strategy âif it entails attention focusing and processing in a way compatible with the demands of the criterion task.â (Armbruster, 1984) In effective note taking, research suggests, happens when âstudents failed to take notes in a manner that elicited sufficiently deep or thorough processing.â (Armbruster, 1984)
Informal feedback from students shows the task is generally disliked. The two periods are not maintained strictly as silent working periods, though distraction is generally minimal. Weaker students are observed to be often off task. Examination of work accomplished throughout the period indicates some weaker students complete only a page during the whole time. The completion rate for this task only averages 80% in each topic September-January 2013-2014 grades seven through nine (N=54). Increasingly, this task is coming in late and poorly done with the mean score at only 72. The lack of sustained attention to task during the class periods allotted for this task likely decreases the effectiveness of the task, especially memory of the information (Armbruster, 1984).
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES PERFORMANCE ON THE READING TASK MAKE?
Five students in the sample who had a passing average for the reading tasks assigned in the 2013-2014 school year to date failed an interim examination1.
Eighteen of fifty-four students in the sample (33%) have a failing (below 65) average for the reading tasks. This includes scores of zero assigned for incomplete tasks. Half of the students who have a failing average for the reading tasks failed an interim exam. Five (9%) failed both interim examinations and four (7%) failed one of two interim examinations.
Only nine of eighteen students with a failing average on the reading task were able to pass both interim exams.
âInterim examinationsâ are ten-week tests of knowledge of course content going back to the start of the school year.
âInterim examinationsâ are ten-week tests of knowledge of course content going back to the start of the school year.
The reading task score measures how well students extracted the âstudy-worthyâ ideas from the source text and prepared this content for learning. In this sample it was a weak predictor of performance on both the topic final test (correlation is 0.419) and the interim examination (correlation is 0.334). This stands to reason, since the measurements are for different things. Final tests and interim examinations are measures of knowledge of content.
For the 16th topic of study in grade eight, the task was set up as a âtestâ. Students were given 30 minutes to complete 5 pages. Students who needed more time received it, though a timer was left obvious and the room remained silent. Students commented that they felt they got a lot done in the more disciplined atmosphere. I am now assured that the class has completed the requisite reading assignment to understand the upcoming lessons and that the task was carried out in the most meaningful way possible.