instructivist weighs in

re: Texas Republican Party's purported opposition to 'critical thinking'

The indignation exhibited in the [NYT] comments is misplaced. In the bizarre Thoughtworld of educationists nothing is what it appears to be. Being indignant about a ban on "critical thinking" is like being indignant about a ban on "democracy" in The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea).

In the Thoughtworld of educationists there is endless prattle about "critical thinking" but this "critical thinking" is taking place in a vacuum. Educationists are notoriously hostile to knowledge. They want "critical thinking" to take place without anything to think about. These so-called higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) are the pretentious upper parts of Bloom's Taxonomy with the lower parts typically cut off.

Constructivist Education, Ridiculed by Sport

The comment stream on this post that segued into a discussion of sports coaching reminded me of the original Golf, the Whole Language Way (first seen at Instructivist) and now Balanced Golf Instruction.

I'll give you the first few paragraphs:

Well, folks, here we are at the Supremely Balanced School of Golf. What can the advocates tell us about this method of teaching beginning golfers?

"Our approach to golf development was formerly based upon the wildly successful, but now sadly and unfairly pilloried educational model known as Whole Language. It seems that the right wing fundamentalist fascists have defamed our model so successfully that publishers and speaking circuit organizers are no longer feting those of us who selflessly worked for the social good of the nation. So we've moved on, chameleon-like, and now we have distilled the essence of these in-favour approaches into our old model. We've called it Balanced Instruction because who could criticize such a name? In our publicity blurb we indicate that we have deconstructed the structures and features of golf. (Just between you and me, it was pretty easy to morph the old with the current system - the Whole Language stuff still sits in there - just like a hidden file in a Windows folder.)

We know intuitively that golf is an irreducibly holistic experience best learned by authentic experiences. We enter all our novices in the US Open because that's authentic golf. The teacher's role is that of motivator/facilitator - we empower our students to grow in golf while experiencing a sense of enchantment . We do not teach skills, of course, even though some emerging golfers may naively request help with their swing. We explain that swing is only a sub-skill of golf, and to emphasise it out of the context of authentic golf is time-wasting, or even developmentally inappropriate. Students may choose to practise their invented swing during the Open itself, of course. The principles of the conventional swing are eventually induced by the learner who is highly motivated during an Open, but probably bored to tears and disheartened by artificially timetabled swing practice on a lonely practice range. We know that the swing will evolve naturally, and that feedback is pointless - even damaging to the self-esteem that learners need if they are to take risks with their golf. Admittedly, some teachers initially struggle with this radical non-interventionist aspect.

Because golf is such a natural, holistic pursuit, there is no need to demonstrate grip, stance, or even which end of the club is best to hold. Gradually, through playing in authentic tournaments, the golf game of the novice will more and more closely approximate that of Tiger Woods. If for any reason development is slow, probably caused by earlier misguided attempts at skill instruction, we provide entry into even more golfing majors, such as Augusta, or St Andrews - additional immersion in real golf is the only answer. Golf improvement depends largely on the learner's establishment of a self-regulating and self-improving system, not on anything an instructor might provide.

It goes on. You should read the whole thing. It applies directly to discovery learning of math:

How much success on scores are we having with our balanced, golfer-centred philosophy? Unfortunately that question is very revealing of a failure to keep up with modern conceptions. You are still dominated by out-dated reductionist models of golf. One cannot validly and reliably keep scores without debasing the golfing process. Scores do not reflect all that is entailed by golf - they fail to capture more than the most minuscule element of the whole game.

news to me

instructivist looked up the top 100 teacher salaries in the state of Illinois:


Top 100 Teacher Salaries
2006 search results.

Bode Jeanne E $441,612 CARY CCSD 26

Morrison Donna M $439,803 BELLWOOD SD 88

Schackmann Deborah K $329,404 SOUTH EASTERN SP ED PROGRAM

Marszalek Christine D $174,403 LOCKPORT TWP HSD 205

Hall James W $170,172 LOCKPORT TWP HSD 205

Gonsiorowski Marvin $165,370 LEMONT TWP HSD 210

Vallicelli Richard E $164,232 LEYDEN CHSD 212

Swords Robert G $163,327 LEYDEN CHSD 212

Martinez Lino $163,184 ADLAI E STEVENSON HSD 125

Wolter James H $163,144 NORTHFIELD TWP HSD 225

Sincora Craig D $162,432 ADLAI E STEVENSON HSD 125

Weber Peter W $161,622 ADLAI E STEVENSON HSD 125

Vanderschoot Gerard $161,502 LEMONT TWP HSD 210

Dezurko Steve $160,729 LEYDEN CHSD 212

..................................

I wonder if these folks grade on a curve.

seamless (w)holes

from instructivist:

[Carolyn once said that math was "a seamless whole" inside her head,...]

I don't know if this ties in with the idea of a seamless whole, but it has occurred to me that discrete skills are needed first before one can appreciate the connectedness of math. Without these concrete skills, math is more like a seamless black hole.

This became apparent to me again when teaching a group of seventh and eighth graders brought up on EM and currently using CMP who are a tabula rasa when it comes to the simplest bits of math knowledge. They can't do any operations with fractions (e.g. change mixed numbers to improper fractions let alone addition and division), can't divide decimals, don't have knowledge of even rudimentary geometry... One wonders what they have been doing for seven and eight years.

The seventh graders are currently in the CMP stretching and shrinking stage. Their homework consisted of finding the scale factor of two rectangles the width of which goes from 1.5 cm to 3 cm. So the idea was to divide 3 by 1.5 (they can't do it because they can't divide decimals). When I tried to show an alternative way of division using fractions to demonstrate the connectedness of math (seamless whole), I ran into trouble, too. They don't have the discrete skills of seeing 1.5 as 1 1/2, then changing this mixed number to 3/2 and dividing 3 by 3/2 (they absolutely can't divide fractions and moreover don't see 3 as 3/1. It would have been spectacular to make them experience with understanding that the more complicated decimal division problem 3/1.5 virtually solves itself when you divide the respective fractions (3 divided by 3/2). Invert and multiply but they have never heard of reciprocals and how they work. The 3 cancels and 2 is left standing without much ado!

So the upshot is: they use Connected Mathematics but can't see the connectedness of math because they don't have discrete skills (skills they could have learned through drill and kill but haven't). So to them, math is a seamless black hole from which not even light can escape.

This one's going in the Greatest Hits file. (on the sidebar)


wholes, not parts
top down teaching
whole math taught wholly

help desk

I just had an email from a reader who is looking for those fantastic planets instructivist posted a while back, which I now can't find.

grrr....

She wants to print them out for a student, and of course I had Big Plans afoot to show them to Chris.

dang

Does anyone remember the general time frame instructivist posted those?

I'm thinking summer?


update 10-3-07:

Concerned has the link:

Relatively Speaking


key words: instructivistplanets

the sun, the moon, and the stars at instructivist

Incredibly cool post at Instructivist!

C. & Ed are going to love it.

While you're there, be sure to read his post on the NY Regents History exam, too. The suffragette question reminds me of Celebrity Jeopardy.

can parents be held accountable?

Instructivist has a post on "spreading the blame" in which he writes:

Home life has the greatest influence on a child's success or failure in school. It shapes the behavior of the child. It is where values and attitudes are communicated. Home life can be intellectually stimulating or impoverished. Attempts to remedy educational disparities also need to focus on this neglected aspect.

While these observations are certainly true (I always base my case against character education in this exact premise!), I'm not absolutely sure they have to be true.

We have a friend who is on the board of one of the successful charter schools in NYC (I've never been able to remember the name, unfortunately).

He told us that tiny little kids - in Kindergarten & 1st grade - come in with "attitude." They are hard and defended. Apparently they talk and sound like the're 18.

It takes a couple of months for the school to get through the shell, but get through it they do. The kids regain their sweetness, and start to focus and learn.

I don't think this school has any kind of remedy for the kids' home life. In fact, I'm sure of it, because I remember our friend expressing surprise that parents never come to school events, contact teachers, etc.

I think Siegfried Engelmann's philosophy is that you have to teach the kid you get - right?

If the kids you get have parents who aren't able to support their children's education - or are unwilling to do so - then you have to work within that reality.

For me that would mean, first and foremost: NO EXPECTATION OF HELP WITH HOMEWORK. When we talked to the new assistant superintendent she said this principle is an absolute for "turnaround schools." If you're trying to turn a low-performing school around you assume zero parental help with homework.

However, if I had a school full of kids who didn't get "easy" homework done, I'd take this a step further and stop assigning homework at all - or, rather, I would assign homework that would be completed under supervision at school, as "La Salle High School" does:

4. In their freshman year, all students are required to attend study halls during the hour or two when they are not in class. The study halls are also resource centers, which contain many of the books and references needed by freshmen in their courses. In such study centers, emphasis is placed on assisting students with their work. The teacher aide who runs the center is familiar with the assignments that freshmen receive. (This stands in contrast to study halls in other schools, which provide only custodial care during study periods.) Some freshmen who are deemed to be academically deficient are required to attend a separate study skills center adjacent to the freshman study hall. There, the intention is to provide more intense help than is available in the freshman study hall. Together, the freshman study hall and the study skills center serve to initiate freshmen into the academic culture of the school.

5. During their sophomore, junior, and senior years students who are experiencing academic or truancy problems are assigned to study halls during times when they are not in class. Again, emphasis is on providing academic assistance.

6. A few students exhibiting extraordinary behavioral problems are assigned to “supervised study.” In this room, custodial care is supplemented with a strong emphasis on interaction between the aide and the students. The room has only 12 desks, indicating that supervised study is necessary for only a tiny portion of the student population.

7. The school places a premium on student attendance in classes and has designed an effective monitoring system whereby parents are notified by the classroom teacher of class cuts on the same day that they take place.

I don't know how many teachers would be able to require students to do their homework under supervision without benefit of a well-thought out and well-staffed system like La Salle's.

Carol Gambill does, but she's working with kids who, by and large, are doing their homework successfully and are highly motivated.

I have no idea what I'd do if I were teaching in a school in which parents didn't supervise homework, the kids didn't do it, and there was no supervised homework option in the building. I'd probably try to spend as little class time as possible on instruction and as much class time as possible on homework.... ?



are there ways to hold students and parents accountable?

You could do things like fine parents whose kids don't show up for school - I think some communities have tried this, right?

I'm not sure what you can do to hold kids accountable apart from detention.

Kids should definitely have detention for not doing homework; rule should be enforced and consequences should be real.

This is another of my beefs with my own middle school. One of the teachers sends a student around to "check" to see whether the kids have done their homework. Naturally some of the kids simply write that day's date on an old homework assignment, and the student checker marks down that the homework is completed. This shouldn't be happening. The teacher shouldn't entrust homework checking to a student.



update from instructivist

Judging by most of the responses to my post, the thesis is widely misunderstood. I'm concerned with the environment parents create simply by being, i.e.having or lacking certain attributes. These attributes can be any number of things, e.g. providing a loving and nurturing environment conducive to the healthy emotional development of the child; valuing respect for others and teaching good manners; attaching value to education; providing an intellectually stimulating environment even in incidental ways. Contrast this with dysfunction and psycho- and sociopathology as is so often the case, a pathology that poses nearly insurmountable obstacles to education and perpetuates stratification. The thesis does not concern itself with minutiae like school board relations.

In this respect the thesis seems unremarkable.

True.

(So, can anyone tell I'm a little burned-out?)


here's Joanne Jacobs

My book, "Our School," is about Downtown College Prep, a San Jose charter high that targets low-achieving Mexican-American students. Many parents had an elementary education in Mexico and speak English poorly or not at all. The school assumes parents can't help with homework but asks them to check off a homework log showing that they saw their child doing something. If a student misses two or more homework assignments, a teacher-counselor calls the parents.

Students behind on homework must attend special study sessions during what otherwise would be free time and/or Saturday school. Getting kids to do the homework is a big job in ninth grade. If they do it poorly, that's not a huge problem. Once the work habits are in place, they will improve.

Ninth, tenth and 11th graders have a 75-minute study session at the end of the school day. Tutors are available on request with ninth graders getting priority.

Niki Hayes told me something interesting.

She said you have to establish homework habits in K-5, because the middle school years really are "hormonal," and that's the worst time to try to do it!

I had never thought of that, but it makes sense.

fostering students' original ideas

from the Instructivist:

I cannot imagine a teacher who doesn't try to engage students in conversation or analysis or show multiple representations and approaches.

Even at a basic level like reducing fractions a teacher might present the GCF method and cancellation of prime numbers.

I love this one: "The teacher may encourage students to express and defend personal opinions or positions and the lesson or activity may foster students' original ideas or approaches to problems."

The personal opinion that I hear most often and that needs no encouragement is: "We've done this before." It's an ingrained attitude that is satisfied with scant familiarity and militates against mastery.

The personal opinion I hear most often is, "We aren't going to do that in class. She isn't going to teach us that!!!"

new aphorism !

from the instructivist:

People will not earn a living, they'll learn a living.

I'm adding that to my collection.

I must say, Instructivist has outdone himself. This will be a classic in the Annals of the Revolution.

Should such occur.

.

boiling it down

re the Ed Week comments thread, Instructivist nails it:

What is sorely missing is critical thinking about "critical thinking."

falling into 7ths

at the instructivist

This is so brilliant I have to post the whole thing:

One morning as I was walking my kids up to school, the sidewalk ended and we fell into the Sevenths dimension and I actually believed the following:

All my child will ever need to know about sevenths is that they are a little bit bigger than eighths, and a little bit smaller than sixths.

It is not my job to teach my child.

It is my job to support my child's learning.

My child should never be bored in class.

My child isn't just wandering around his classroom chatting with classmates, he's a kinesthetic learner with high verbal intelligence.

Children don't mindlessly copy from each other in small groups; they richly create meaning in conversation with their peers.

My child will discover efficient mathematical algorithms on his own in a way that makes sense to him.

Learning by rote is bad.

If my child hasn't memorized his basic addition facts in first grade, he'll have another chance in second grade.

If my child hasn't memorized his basic addition facts in second grade, he'll have another chance in third grade.

I should drill my child on his basic addition facts at home in order to support the conceptual learning that takes place at school.

If my child hasn't memorized his multiplication facts in third grade, he'll have another chance in fourth grade.

If my child hasn't memorized his multiplication facts in fourth grade, he'll have another chance in fifth grade.

I should drill my child on his multiplication facts at home in order to support the conceptual learning that takes place at school.

I should be more active in the PTA.

I should buy more gift wrap.

I should go to a school board meeting and see real decisions being made.

I should feel guilty questioning the curriculum even if I have a college degree in the field of interest.

A 25 year-old teacher is a licensed professional who is fully qualified to teach my child.

Children should write about math a lot.

Teachers will lovingly read everything my child writes because, as teachers, they look forward to creating an authentic portfolio that assesses my child's true mathematical learnings across thematic units.

My child's teacher will be so proud of him when he graduates from high school that we should planning on buying her a ticket for the commencement ceremony so she can sit with us.

I finally woke up in a cold sweat from this nightmare and asked myself, does anyone actually believe those things? The answer is a resounding yes. Every parent of every kindergartener I have ever met, myself included.

ask the instructivist

Constructivism is to education what creationism is to science.