You are in the process of writing units for your students. How can you determine the "needs to know"?
What is the purpose of homework?
When is homework necessary? What strategy will you employ when a student chooses not to do it?
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Effective Feedback
Based on chapter 5 in Jackson's book, why is effective feedback one of the most powerful tools to improve student achievement?
What are two examples of"red flags" that can happen, and what strategies can you use to get students quickly back on track?
Please also be prepared to discuss Prensky's writings on the difference between real and relevant.
Lastly, watch this video and think of what you can do for the next 30 days. In the classroom, at home, in you life. Be well, I will tell you what I did.
http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_cutts_try_something_new_for_30_days.html
Have a great weekend.
What are two examples of"red flags" that can happen, and what strategies can you use to get students quickly back on track?
Please also be prepared to discuss Prensky's writings on the difference between real and relevant.
Lastly, watch this video and think of what you can do for the next 30 days. In the classroom, at home, in you life. Be well, I will tell you what I did.
http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_cutts_try_something_new_for_30_days.html
Have a great weekend.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
The Stockdale Principal
Hope everyone is enjoying this weekend. Summer again!
Chapter three in Jackson's book has some honest discussion about the students we face and OUR expectations. It is easy to look at the problems and be overwhelmed. HOW can I teach these students is an honest thought most teachers have. The Try This example on page 88 is a good place to start.
The Stockdale Principle is the idea that in order to make it, "you must maintain unwavering faith that you can and will prevail in the end,regardless of the difficulties,". And at the same time have the discipline to "confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."
Thoughts?
Chapter three in Prensky's book, Think people and passions rather than classes and content, also gives rise to our planning and questioning practices. Several techniques were given to use including giving out specific roles to students. Once again planning rises to the top of the list. What can you take from this chapter to weave into your units?
Chapter three in Jackson's book has some honest discussion about the students we face and OUR expectations. It is easy to look at the problems and be overwhelmed. HOW can I teach these students is an honest thought most teachers have. The Try This example on page 88 is a good place to start.
The Stockdale Principle is the idea that in order to make it, "you must maintain unwavering faith that you can and will prevail in the end,regardless of the difficulties,". And at the same time have the discipline to "confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."
Thoughts?
Chapter three in Prensky's book, Think people and passions rather than classes and content, also gives rise to our planning and questioning practices. Several techniques were given to use including giving out specific roles to students. Once again planning rises to the top of the list. What can you take from this chapter to weave into your units?
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Interesting Article in the Times
Done Well, Differentiation Works
Updated October 2, 2011, 07:00 PM
NY Times
Carol Ann Tomlinson, the author of many books on differentiation, is the William Clay Parrish Jr. Professor and Chair at the Curry School of Education at the University of Virginia.
Differentiation is a tool for planning instruction. Like all tools, it can be applied elegantly or poorly. When used well, it benefits a very broad range of learners. When used less well, it is less effective. A key question, then, is how effective a school is in describing, monitoring and supporting quality implementation of differentiation. The question is as relevant to special services for advanced learners as it is for any other group. Is the primary goal a separate room for students with particular needs, or should our primary goal be high-quality learning experiences wherever a student is taught?
The range of students in schools indicates the need for a range of services. Since most students have always received most of their instruction in general education classrooms, it’s quite important that differentiation in that setting be robust. There are some very bright students whose academic needs are quite well addressed in some “regular” classrooms, some who require extended instruction in a specific subject, some whose need for challenge suggests specialized instruction in all content areas — perhaps even outside the student’s school. Effective differentiation would serve the student in each of those situations.
The critical variable in this debate, however, is not really differentiation vs. special classrooms for advanced learners. It’s the quality of content a nation is willing to support for all its students. In most classrooms across this country, teachers have spent the last decade — not by their own choice — trying to prepare students for an endless progression of tests that measure a student’s capacity to retain a staggering array of facts and to perform skills that have little meaning to them now or in the future.
There’s no doubt that our most advanced learners have lost ground during that time. I’d argue there’s ample evidence that most students have lost ground. The real question isn’t whether differentiation has a role in the education of highly able students. The real question is what kind of curriculum we believe as a nation will fuel the potential of all our young people.
Certainly our most advanced learners need better than the content they are now being served. An even larger issue for the nation is whether we are willing to assume that as long as we remove 3 percent or 5 percent or 15 percent of our students from low-level, factory-like classrooms, we’ve addressed the core problem that currently defines our national aspirations.
Certainly our most advanced learners need better than the content they are now being served. But is plucking them out of mainstream classrooms a solution?
The critical variable in this debate, however, is not really differentiation vs. special classrooms for advanced learners. It’s the quality of content a nation is willing to support for all its students. In most classrooms across this country, teachers have spent the last decade — not by their own choice — trying to prepare students for an endless progression of tests that measure a student’s capacity to retain a staggering array of facts and to perform skills that have little meaning to them now or in the future.
There’s no doubt that our most advanced learners have lost ground during that time. I’d argue there’s ample evidence that most students have lost ground. The real question isn’t whether differentiation has a role in the education of highly able students. The real question is what kind of curriculum we believe as a nation will fuel the potential of all our young people.
Certainly our most advanced learners need better than the content they are now being served. An even larger issue for the nation is whether we are willing to assume that as long as we remove 3 percent or 5 percent or 15 percent of our students from low-level, factory-like classrooms, we’ve addressed the core problem that currently defines our national aspirations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)