February 4, 2013 Leave a Comment

Essential Skepticism

I’ve always considered myself a skeptic, but have been a little fuzzy on how to explain to people what that means. Certainly I have a set of beliefs and convictions but always try to stay open to new information that may cause me to revise them. And I’ve certainly changed my mind about things over the years.

In a new joint project between the Huntington Post and the TED organization1, the editor of Skeptic Magazine2 addresses that question of what skepticism is and what being a skeptic means to him.

Skepticism is not “seek and ye shall find,” but “seek and keep an open mind.” But what does it mean to have an open mind? It is to find the essential balance between orthodoxy and heresy, between a total commitment to the status quo and the blind pursuit of new ideas, between being open-minded enough to accept radical new ideas and so open-minded that your brains fall out. Skepticism is about finding that balance. Here is a definition of skepticism:

Skepticism is the rigorous application of science and reason to test the validity of any and all claims.

He continues on to talk about having a “Baloney Detection Kit”, inspired by Carl Sagan, “which consists of a list of questions to ask when encountering any claim”. It’s a good list but certainly not a new idea.

I first encountered the concept of “crap detecting” in Neil Postman’s wonderful 1969 book Teaching as a Subversive Activity3. And he borrowed the idea from Ernest Hemingway who told an interviewer that “to be a great writer a person must have a built-in, shockproof crap detector.”

Here in the internet age, Howard Rhiengold carries forward the concept and preaches that the skills of crap detecting are even more important as we rely on the web for information.  

However, whether you call it “crap detecting” (my preference), “baloney detecting”, or simply skepticism, I agree with Postman’s view that this is an “essential survival strategy and the essential function of the schools in today’s world”.

At least it should be. The centerpiece of every curriculum should be to help kids understand how to question the world around them, not in a cynical way or simply to be contrary, but to clarify for themselves what is worth their time and what is crap.

1 This association may give the Post a little more credibility but I’m not sure it enhances the reputation of TED.

2 One more publication I didn’t know existed.

3 The book is still in print but you can download the full text from here (pdf).

Tags: , , ,
February 16, 2012 1 Comment

Good Idea

This sign in an elementary art room is supposed to tell kids how to use a paper towel to clean up their messes.

Good Idea

I thought it sounds like a good philosophy for teachers at all levels to help their students learn.

Tags: , ,
January 23, 2012 Leave a Comment

Redesigning Teach

Studio 360 is a fun, interesting public radio program produced at WNYC in New York and focusing on the arts and popular culture.

Occasionally they hire graphic design firms to re-imagine the imagery for a part of that culture. This time around they decided to redesign teaching, or at least the graphic representation of teaching, and the results are bright, interesting, modern and, at least for me, extremely compelling.

293 1326817412

Although you can quibble with the use of school-bus yellow (and some did in the program’s comment section), this work is still many steps up from any illustration using the nth variation on an Apple. Take a look at all the results and, especially if you’re interested in the creative process of design, listen to the discussion with the designers.

I couldn’t find any indication that they are releasing this work under a Creative Commons license but I certainly hope so.

Tags: , , ,
November 5, 2011 Leave a Comment

Whacking at Math

In a recent post, Seth Godin asks Are you doing math or arithmetic?

I have enormous respect for mathematicians. They’re doing work on the edge, a cross between art and science and music.

Arithmeticians, not so much. They are merely whacking at a calculator, doing repetitive work better done by a computer or someone cheaper.

That last sentence accurately describes much of our K12 “math” curriculum, including Algebra.

Except that most of the time, we have the kids whacking away without calculators.

Tags: , ,
August 29, 2011 1 Comment

No Evidence for Learning Styles

Over the past couple of decades that I’ve been involved in educational professional development, one of the key concepts pushed has related to learning styles. This is the idea that some kids are verbal learners while others are visual types and still others kinesthetic and that we need to adjust our instruction specifically to reach each of those groups.

However, on a short segment from NPR’s Morning Edition today, several psychologists have looked at the research behind the theory of learning styles and found no basis for saying that teachers should tailor their instruction to different kinds of learners.

When he reviewed studies of learning styles, he found no scientific evidence backing up the idea. “We have not found evidence from a randomized control trial supporting any of these,” he says, “and until such evidence exists, we don’t recommend that they be used.”

While the research may or may not be valid (always read any research, especially involving humans, with a large dose of skepticism), I still believe that both kids and adults have styles of learning they prefer and are most comfortable with. It doesn’t mean they can’t learn any other way, just that they would rather not, given the option.

However, that doesn’t mean we should specifically adapt instruction for each group of learners. Instead we should be teaching our students how to adapt their learning abilities to the different situations that they’re likely to encounter throughout their lives. Certainly how to read a book, but also how to consume and understand other types of media, as well as how to create them.

Late in the piece, one speaker notes that, while there’s no research to back up the concept of learning styles, there is plenty of evidence showing that using a variety of approaches and regularly changing instructional styles, does benefit all students.

Which only makes sense since I learned early in my career that teaching the same way all the time is boring, both for the kids and for me.

Tags: , , ,
August 21, 2011 Leave a Comment

Does Teaching Make You Smarter?

Maybe not (whatever “smarter” means), but the practice of teaching certainly helps a person understand their subject much better.

Which is essentially the conclusion of a new study summarized on a recent episode of the 60-Second Science podcast.

Now a study finds that grad students who also teach show significant improvement in written research proposals, compared with grad students with no teaching requirement.

Differences in overall written quality among the students could not account for the results, because only specific skills among those analyzed showed improvement as a function of the teaching experience. So teaching may make STEM grad students better scientists. Not to mention better teachers.

I wonder if asking kids in grades below graduate school (like high school) to do more teaching and less being taught at, might make them smarter.

Or at least give them a better understanding of the math and science we want them to learn.

Tags: , , ,
August 8, 2011 3 Comments

No Question: Time to Kill the Lab!

There are many reasons why I’m looking forward to the bring-your-own-device project we will be trying in some of our schools this fall. One of the biggest is that maybe – just maybe – it will lead to us finally killing the computer lab.

I’ve ranted about this before, and the conversation usually stirs up a lot of strong feelings, but the more I see how they are used in schools, the more convinced I am that we will never get to the point where computing devices are, in the words of someone wiser than me, “like oxygen – ubiquitous, necessary, and invisible” unless the labs disappear and are replaced with devices that are available to students anytime, anywhere.

Those feelings were reinforced in the past few weeks in discussions with some of our trainers as they plan for the new schools year. Especially concerning one elementary school where the teachers are lobbying the administration to use the lab as a drop off point for their students in order to increase their planning time. In the same way music, art, PE, the library and other “pull out” programs are used (also incorrectly).

Now I certainly believe the teachers in our elementary schools need more time to plan their lessons. All teachers need regular, meaningful opportunities to plan, collaborate with their peers, and to reflect on their practice.

However, using technology in this way (and it’s not at all uncommon in other schools around here as well) only reinforces the idea that computer use is for special occasions, a nice-to-have extra, and not especially necessary. Computers are something we do, not a tool to improve learning. A once-in-a-while treat, not oxygen.

If we get to the point where a large number of students are bringing their own devices, labs full of identically configured equipment becomes unnecessary and even impossible to justify.

And, with any luck, are removed from the school experience forever.

Tags: , , , ,
«Older Posts