William G. Quirk applauds a welcomed step away from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) constructivist model of Math Reform. He and other mathematicians disagree with NCTM's fuzzy math K12 standards, and give kudos to NCTM's step toward return to expecting K8 students to have memorized certain math facts and to handle traditional paper - pencil math.
Important News! After 18 years promoting "math reform," the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) is now emphasing traditional K-8 math topics in arithmetic, geometry, and algebra. See the NCTM's Curriculum Focal Points. This is an important step in the right direction. See Reflections on the NCTM Focal Points for Stanley Ocken's recommendations for improvement.
Ocken says, "The NCTM's stated purpose for the 1989 Curriculum and Evaluation Standards (the "1989 Standards") was to ensure that "computational algorithms, the manipulation of expressions, and paper-and-pencil drill no longer dominate school mathematics." (bold added)
Parents will take heart knowing someone outside their family disagrees with NCTM standards.
Math teachers who have students use math software programs to complete assignments will find Quirk's points about what math students should learn useful in assessing which software to purchase and recommend to students.
Math software designers will find guidance from Quirk and math colleagues in ways to simplify math facts and processes so that all students master math basics in elementary school.
I, too, disagree with NCTM's assumption that they must dumb down to math appreciation our expectations for student math performances. I use the assumption, with appropriate instruction, almost all students can learn basic math skills directly and quickly. I'm sure teachers know how to get higher math performance, too.
Maybe at least more high school graduates employed in service businesses will count back change instead of just slapping it into customers hands and muttering, "Here's your change."
Thanks, William, for your leadership in trying to bring optimism back to K12 math instruction.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Nearsourcing of Information and Mobile Learning
I've been thinking about implications nearsourcing of information has for mobile learning, including in and out of schools. The term nearsourcing has origins in economics, in the past several decades in discussing location of manufacturing and trade of goods and services. IT developers have used the term as a reference to proximity of IT services to IT users.
The term seems useful also when considering the transmission of ideas and processes from one generation to another as through school curricula. I refer to this transmission as an information supply chain. Others set a higher standard by calling it a knowledge chain. Teachers and books have been a major part of these chains, with increasing value to users as they increasingly save learner's time in mastering ideas and process of other people.
In that context, I wonder what uses the term nearsourcing may offer teachers and students for developing mobile learning. Here are several ideas, starting with a definition.
Nearsourcing of information acknowledges using insights of an information originator without considering interpretations others assign to those insights. It distinguishes sources closest to originals from farsourcing, or from what academics commonly call secondary, tertiary and other more removed sources.
Nearsourcing occurs when information users give priority to contents in information supply chains with fewer interventions between original sources and information a user selects to make a decision. It offers simplified information transmission from originators to learners and greater efficiency of collaboration of learners with originators of a bit of information.
As mobile learning matures, learners appear likely increasingly to differentiate between original sources and information that has passed through intervening sources, whether interventions appear as people or artifacts. The fewer interventions, the nearer the source the user selects.
Hmm. Ok, I think I'll develop this further, and then post something more. I should identify where nearsourcing fits into decision making as part of learning. Does anyone see uses in education for developing the term nearsourcing?
The term seems useful also when considering the transmission of ideas and processes from one generation to another as through school curricula. I refer to this transmission as an information supply chain. Others set a higher standard by calling it a knowledge chain. Teachers and books have been a major part of these chains, with increasing value to users as they increasingly save learner's time in mastering ideas and process of other people.
In that context, I wonder what uses the term nearsourcing may offer teachers and students for developing mobile learning. Here are several ideas, starting with a definition.
Nearsourcing of information acknowledges using insights of an information originator without considering interpretations others assign to those insights. It distinguishes sources closest to originals from farsourcing, or from what academics commonly call secondary, tertiary and other more removed sources.
Nearsourcing occurs when information users give priority to contents in information supply chains with fewer interventions between original sources and information a user selects to make a decision. It offers simplified information transmission from originators to learners and greater efficiency of collaboration of learners with originators of a bit of information.
As mobile learning matures, learners appear likely increasingly to differentiate between original sources and information that has passed through intervening sources, whether interventions appear as people or artifacts. The fewer interventions, the nearer the source the user selects.
Hmm. Ok, I think I'll develop this further, and then post something more. I should identify where nearsourcing fits into decision making as part of learning. Does anyone see uses in education for developing the term nearsourcing?
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Ultra Portable Computers Go to Schools
Meris Stansbury summarizes results of the recent webcast about one to one computing in schools with Ultra Portable Computers. The Consortium for School Networking hosted by the event.
“The first thing you have to do," said Bob Tinker, chief executive officer for the Concord Consortium, "before you purchase is stop thinking about what you don’t want—and start making a list of what you do want.”
Tinker suggests buyers for one to one school teaching-learning require that UPC capabilities include: (1) Can browse the internet and run Flash. (2) Can run some unusual, creative software. (3) Can use productivity software packages. (4) Can execute Java applications (5) Can run probeware applications.
Webinar participants discussed attributes of three UPCs:
1. The XO from One Laptop Per Child initiative. They liked the XOs screen that can be viewed in direct sunlight and darkness, and noted the built-in wireless mesh networking that connects multiple laptops and to a central network. Drawbacks includ small drive size, lack of support for commercial software, and limited availability in the U.S. Tinker considers this UPC as a constructivist.
2. The Intel Classmate, which runs Windows XP or Linux and can run Microsoft Office or Open Office applications. Tinker considers this UPC as a teacher.
3. The Nova5000 by Fourier Systems runs Windows CE software and can run productivity, drawing, handwriting recognition, and probe software.
Starting the purchase process with identifying what you want a computer to do seems like a "Daa!" But, interestingly, more people than I would have imagined purchase various mobile PCs because they can do so, and forget to start with the primary question, "What do I want my mobile PC to do for me?"
“The first thing you have to do," said Bob Tinker, chief executive officer for the Concord Consortium, "before you purchase is stop thinking about what you don’t want—and start making a list of what you do want.”
Tinker suggests buyers for one to one school teaching-learning require that UPC capabilities include: (1) Can browse the internet and run Flash. (2) Can run some unusual, creative software. (3) Can use productivity software packages. (4) Can execute Java applications (5) Can run probeware applications.
Webinar participants discussed attributes of three UPCs:
1. The XO from One Laptop Per Child initiative. They liked the XOs screen that can be viewed in direct sunlight and darkness, and noted the built-in wireless mesh networking that connects multiple laptops and to a central network. Drawbacks includ small drive size, lack of support for commercial software, and limited availability in the U.S. Tinker considers this UPC as a constructivist.
2. The Intel Classmate, which runs Windows XP or Linux and can run Microsoft Office or Open Office applications. Tinker considers this UPC as a teacher.
3. The Nova5000 by Fourier Systems runs Windows CE software and can run productivity, drawing, handwriting recognition, and probe software.
Starting the purchase process with identifying what you want a computer to do seems like a "Daa!" But, interestingly, more people than I would have imagined purchase various mobile PCs because they can do so, and forget to start with the primary question, "What do I want my mobile PC to do for me?"
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Voicethread in 6th Grade Classroom
Bill Ferriter, a class act 6th grade teacher in NC, describes how he plans to use VoiceThread in a new class project.
What I like the best about Voicethread is that it allows teachers to seamlessly integrate digital collaboration into the curriculum. Because the skills necessary to use Voicethread are minimal, there is almost no tech-barrier to overcome by teachers or students---and because the tool is simple by nature, the focus of any digital effort remains on the content rather than the technology.
VoiceThread allows users to upload images about any topic, and then to engage in an audio and text conversation about each image. Watch the doodles on a potato! Shades of Ink.
Bill plans to use it in a digital partnership between students in his class and classes abroad.
He offers links to two handouts for other teachers to consider, also.
Thanks, Bill.
Tableteers and other venture educators may find Voicethread useful in and out of classrooms. Hmmm. Probably I should look into this for my work, too. :)
What I like the best about Voicethread is that it allows teachers to seamlessly integrate digital collaboration into the curriculum. Because the skills necessary to use Voicethread are minimal, there is almost no tech-barrier to overcome by teachers or students---and because the tool is simple by nature, the focus of any digital effort remains on the content rather than the technology.
VoiceThread allows users to upload images about any topic, and then to engage in an audio and text conversation about each image. Watch the doodles on a potato! Shades of Ink.
Bill plans to use it in a digital partnership between students in his class and classes abroad.
He offers links to two handouts for other teachers to consider, also.
Thanks, Bill.
Tableteers and other venture educators may find Voicethread useful in and out of classrooms. Hmmm. Probably I should look into this for my work, too. :)
Friday, November 09, 2007
Mobile PCs and Teacher Performance Pay
Barnett Berry of the Center for Teaching Quality offered another thoughtful essay about values of teacher performance pay.He explains why he thinks public policy makers should give priority to recommendations for merit pay by an aggregate of “best” U.S. teachers. (For those who do not know, that’s top drawer, informed thinking.) These teachers received their elevated recognition from various private and government organizations.
Too many performance pay plans do not offer meaningful rewards to teachers who help students learn more; develop relevant knowledge and skills; teach in a variety of high need subjects, schools, and assignments; and lead school reforms in their communities as well as across the nation (i.e., the four pillars of the TeacherSolutions performance pay framework).
Their recommendations reflect thinking and wishes among educators through most of the 20th century. Some of this thinking found earlier expression in experimental programs around the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill where Barnett’s organization resides.
In the spirit of comity, Barnett’s comments lead to several complementary observations.
1. The process of education changed in the last 6 years with the introduction of mobile PCs, almost ubiquitous wireless communications, and their expanding variety of off-springs. Now, novices can learn on-demand whatever they want 24 hours a day 7 days a week from anywhere a cell phone works.
2. Uncounted millions of learning transactions occur, probably hourly, over mobile communications. I’m guessing most of these occur without teacher guidance outside of schools. No one knows (beyond anecdotes and preliminary empirical studies) yet how these affect what happens between students and teachers in schools.
3. On-demand learners arguably constitute an emerging concurrent majority with school teachers. These learners have started expanding learning venues to fit themselves.
4. The social role of transmitting what is known from one generation to the next has expanded with limited teacher participation.
5. Profound changes appear underway for what constitutes a teacher in and out of school. Such changes complicate further the extent to which merit pay to teachers reflects teachers’ influences on student learning.
I appreciate and have benefited from incentive and performance pay in and out of schools. I look forward to others having the same options.
Yet, I would argue that school awards of such pay should be limited to academic performance, not for out of school activities. When these activities translate to increased student performance gains, teachers have done our jobs.
Or, with on-demand mobile learning available, why not pay students for their increases rather than educators? Maybe students would meet criteria and graduate earlier?
Too many performance pay plans do not offer meaningful rewards to teachers who help students learn more; develop relevant knowledge and skills; teach in a variety of high need subjects, schools, and assignments; and lead school reforms in their communities as well as across the nation (i.e., the four pillars of the TeacherSolutions performance pay framework).
Their recommendations reflect thinking and wishes among educators through most of the 20th century. Some of this thinking found earlier expression in experimental programs around the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill where Barnett’s organization resides.
In the spirit of comity, Barnett’s comments lead to several complementary observations.
1. The process of education changed in the last 6 years with the introduction of mobile PCs, almost ubiquitous wireless communications, and their expanding variety of off-springs. Now, novices can learn on-demand whatever they want 24 hours a day 7 days a week from anywhere a cell phone works.
2. Uncounted millions of learning transactions occur, probably hourly, over mobile communications. I’m guessing most of these occur without teacher guidance outside of schools. No one knows (beyond anecdotes and preliminary empirical studies) yet how these affect what happens between students and teachers in schools.
3. On-demand learners arguably constitute an emerging concurrent majority with school teachers. These learners have started expanding learning venues to fit themselves.
4. The social role of transmitting what is known from one generation to the next has expanded with limited teacher participation.
5. Profound changes appear underway for what constitutes a teacher in and out of school. Such changes complicate further the extent to which merit pay to teachers reflects teachers’ influences on student learning.
I appreciate and have benefited from incentive and performance pay in and out of schools. I look forward to others having the same options.
Yet, I would argue that school awards of such pay should be limited to academic performance, not for out of school activities. When these activities translate to increased student performance gains, teachers have done our jobs.
Or, with on-demand mobile learning available, why not pay students for their increases rather than educators? Maybe students would meet criteria and graduate earlier?
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Globalization of K12 Tutoring
STEVE LOHR reports that a wave of offshore tutoring exists, mainly through India.
Concerns about the quality of K-12 education in America and the increased emphasis on standardized tests is driving the tutoring business in general,(and its globalization).
Have you checked out TutorVista as well as other online tutoring services yet? Mobile learners may find these services useful for on-demand assistance.
Two year old Tutorvista has 10,000 U.S. subscribers and aspires to be in the budget of 1M U.S. households. They employ 760 people, including 600 tutors in India, a teaching staff it plans to double by year-end and a 52-person technical staff building the software system to schedule, monitor and connect potentially tens of thousands of tutors with students, all with a $15 investment from investors.
I wonder how long it will take for a U.S. school system to contract with one of these offshore tutoring companies to assist students in school? On the surface, such a contract appears potentially cost effective at $99 per month per student. It also appears politically sensitive, at least among teacher union members.
Kudos to those entrepreneurs who have found another need and offer a way to fill it.
Concerns about the quality of K-12 education in America and the increased emphasis on standardized tests is driving the tutoring business in general,(and its globalization).
Have you checked out TutorVista as well as other online tutoring services yet? Mobile learners may find these services useful for on-demand assistance.
Two year old Tutorvista has 10,000 U.S. subscribers and aspires to be in the budget of 1M U.S. households. They employ 760 people, including 600 tutors in India, a teaching staff it plans to double by year-end and a 52-person technical staff building the software system to schedule, monitor and connect potentially tens of thousands of tutors with students, all with a $15 investment from investors.
I wonder how long it will take for a U.S. school system to contract with one of these offshore tutoring companies to assist students in school? On the surface, such a contract appears potentially cost effective at $99 per month per student. It also appears politically sensitive, at least among teacher union members.
Kudos to those entrepreneurs who have found another need and offer a way to fill it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
