Going back to Time, (See Square Peg, Round Hole)
Wesley Fryer’s ‘Moving at the speed of creativity’, refers to the Time cover story, How to Bring Our Schools Out of the 20th Century, in his post, 21st Century Education reform.
In reference to this quote in the Time article:
In a comment I posted on Wesley’s blog, I pay this compliment, “A great summary that SYNTHESIZES and ADDS MEANING.” Then I suggest, “I would add those two to your sentence: “It’s not just about SEARCHING, it’s about FINDING and VALIDATING.”
…and that is exactly what Wesley has done with his post, he synthesizes what the article says, but he goes further… he draws from other sources, and new meaning is added. For example, Wesley disagrees (as do I) with the article’s suggestion of greater rigor and standardized testing. He links us to his podcast #79 titled, ‘Reject Rigor: Embrace Differentiation, Flexibility, and High Expectations’.
But there is a dichotomy here: Our ‘educational language’ around standardization and accountability juxtaposed with differentiation and flexibility… we seem to have two mutually exclusive camps, yet there seems to be a move to embrace both. To embrace both is to accomplish neither.
As this post quickly becomes a tribute to Wesley Fryer, (the newest addition to my Netvibes feed-reader), I think I will quote him one more time. From: ‘Apprenticeship learning and critical thinking‘
“Learners are not in school so they can take tests, be tested, and be translated metaphorically into statistics that are aggregated into charts and graphs used by politicians to secure their elective offices. Learners are in school to LEARN, and the confusion which abounds regarding the proper role of assessments today is a key part of educational reforms our nation desperately needs.”
“We do NOT need more testing, more rigorous testing, and/or more end-of-course examinations in our schools. Testing has never “saved” and will never “save us” from the challenges which face us in the educational environment. Only high quality, professional, caring, passionate teachers can provide what our students deserve and in many cases desperately need: A differentiated, challenging environment of customized learning that involves regular dialog and authentic assessment…”
The challenge now is recognizing that this fundamentally changes a teacher’s practice… we are on a new road, but I don’t see a roadmap being developed. I think we lack the perspective to make the map. Current assessment strategies limit our vision. Current subject-disciplines also limit possibilities and compartmentalize assessment using a different paradigm than is needed.
We need to be adept at creating flexible, differentiated learning environments
We need to be computer literate, and also be able to teach a new kind of literacy. (Warlick)
We need to challenge students by asking questions, guiding their learning, and helping them to develop their own personal learning environments.
We need to teach students to synthesize information and add new meaning.
We must change what we do. (And we need visionary leaders to lead the way!)
– – – – –
Having said what we need to do… I am contemplating ‘What we are” (as teachers). I think my next post will be a tribute to teachers, but not the kind you would expect after a post like this…
– – – – –
I’m back, not even an hour after posting this! Several times I came across the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, first here and here on Wesley’s blog, then back on Netvibes where I picked up Cool Cat Teacher‘s del.icio.us post… which led me to an article by none other than Wesley Fryer once again!
Well, third time’s a charm. It clicked that my use of ‘Add new Meaning’ in this post was an attempt to describe the CREATION of new knowledge as seen on the revised taxonomy above. I am wondering what happened to Synthesis? Is this part of Evaluation?
In a final dedication to Wesley Fryer, I will end with this quote from the TechLearning article:
“We need visionary educational leadership that understands and effectively communicates the importance of emphasizing student CREATIVITY and the creation of original (and remixed) knowledge products.”
Thanks Wesley!
– – – – –
Sunday March 11th, 2007
This is great: Cognitive Taxonomy Circle
I found this at Jeff Utecht’s U Tech Tips, his source is this American Psychological Association blog post.
Originally posted: December 26th, 2006Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting: I’ve added the comments on my original post into the first comment below. This introduction to the *new* Blooms Taxonomy was sort of a re-awakening for me. A reminder of what really matters in teaching and learning. It was around this time that I started to take a much more constructivist approach to teaching. I was already developing this in Math, but wasn’t really aware that I was doing so. If you scroll down on the first page of my SciencAlive wiki, you can see that I based the project on students’ ability to demonstrate higher order thinking. I have very recently been thinking that the *old* Blooms Taxonomy is better, with ‘Create’ being the ‘task’ or ‘demonstration’ of learning, but keeping Synthesis and Evaluation as the ‘skills’. |
Comments from my original post:
– – – – –
1.
Hi David
I got here from Wesley’s site. You did a great job of showing how synthesis of information and critical understanding is really the core learning that should go on. I agree that this needs to go beyond searching — our students need to be critical with information and use it in a meaningful way.
I liked your mini posters, too. 🙂
Kevin H. on Monday, 15 January 2007, 12:09 CET
– – – – –
2.
Hi David, Got here from Wesley’s site. I often wonder if the high stakes type of testing has killed the desire of some teachers to move into the creative area of the taxonomy. Living in a system that has allowed me to do so many different things, to build my own assessment, to use rubrics to assist students in growing their work and to build authentic assessment. I truly have enjoyed learning to differentiate for students, to build learning and understanding units that challenge students to question, to use innovative technologies and to push students to try new things. For years, I’ve worked in this type of environment. But now, just when countries like the US and Europe are beginning to question what they are doing and beginning to move away from the cookie-cutter curricula and high-stakes assessment, we’re moving towards it. I do notice that our students do not treat the high-stakes assessments as at all important. They see meaning in the assessment of the teacher but not of the others – maybe that is whey we don’t do well on the international assessments! I like what you have done with Wesley’s ideas and references. I’ll be spending some time going through these.
Kelly
Kelly Christopherson on Monday, 22 January 2007, 02:55 CET
– – – – –
3.
Saturday 9:35pm in Buenos Aires, Argentina
Hi Dave,
I came here from the Moodle forum of OCC2007. I’d like to be able to read your blog regularly if I may. I’m amazed at the interest and devotion you all show for your work, at the extraordinary ability to communicate, synthesize and add value, i wish i had the chance to be in a regular course with you. Still for the time being the digital magic does the trick and I’m thrilled.
Thank you.
Ines Cambiasso on Sunday, 11 February 2007, 01:40 CET
– – – – –
4.
Inis,
Thank you so much for your kind words! The e-mail notice to tell me that I had a comment must have gone into my spam folder, because I didn’t get it… and just stumbled across this comment now (almost a month later). I really enjoyed the OCC conference and will participate in events like that again, so hopefully we will ‘meet’ again. Once again, thanks for such a nice comment.
Regards,
Dave.