Curriculum Compacting for magnetic students

Curriculum Compacting
for "magnetic" students
There have been many times in my teaching career that I wished my students were as malleable as magnets, and that I could perfectly match their polarity to what they needed and the new knowledge would "stick" right where it was meant to go. However, students are much more complex than this, and although they often exhibited a variety of "attractions" towards various topics or even each other, it was not always a simple task to connect them to the intended content of a lesson. I needed to consider both the individuals "polarity" as well as how he or she interacted with a particular group of "polar" individuals to insure that the overall alignment of the group was parallel and not perpendicular to the intended learning. However, like magnets, some individuals were stronger and easier to align with the learning than others may be. These individuals had a greater alignment of previous experience to the intended concepts much like magnets with stronger magnetic fields may have been formed under conditions that increased their strength. So, what I needed was a way to quickly match these new portions of a unit to the better prepared students while working to increase the magnetic strength of the remainder so that the new knowledge would "stick" better. However, I still had planning issues centered on this strategy. For example, after feeding these strong magnets what they needed to further comprehend this concept, then what additional challenge would I give them with the remaining time?
Curriculum compacting offers an opportunity to target specific portions of a learning unit to build upon previous knowledge that overlaps with objectives of a unit of study. It can give a learner a step over the previously learned material to get to those higher-motivational areas of the content that offer new growth opportunities. The refinements and wider variety of options for higher level learning make this strategy particularly effective for certain gifted students. However, it demands a cautionary approach.
Throughout the phases of compacting, teachers must be careful to insure not only that the learner encounters adequate challenge and motivation, but that he or she really learns the relevant content. In addition, the learner will gain some additional time that should not be wasted. The proper use of this additional learner time should reflect a synthesis of both content objectives and learner interests. Achieving this synthesis can be a complex process so individual teachers should seek additional input from gifted specialists or curriculum experts for maximizing student learning. Compacting itself can increase motivation for gifted students, but one must be careful not to alienate the mainstream peers from any highly visible enrichment activities. A careful balance and evaluation are both necessary for this strategy to function effectively for all constituents.
An important distinction should be made, however, between compacting curriculum and acceleration. The rate of delivery may vary slightly within the compacted curriculum, but compacting primarily involves eliminating repetitive content for a learner. In contrast to acceleration, compacting offers the opportunity to flexibly expand and compact curricular units throughout the school year without a student losing the social context of his or her peers. For students who have deeper readiness in particular curricular areas, this strategy is much more preferable to full grade-level acceleration. However, if a student shows particular need for compacting in most areas, then acceleration might be a better option. In any event, comprehensive pre-testing is essential to assess the proper direction for any particular student.
As our magnets gain strength and experience, they can affect a wider range of materials in the same manner that a learner has the capability to convey his or her new knowledge to a broader audience. By asking students who receive compacted curricula to consider options that extend their learning to others in some way, some of the additional time may be utilized to encourage student service. Compacting may be necessary, but should not be considered as a method for gaining the reward of "free time" for all gifted or advanced students. By carefully balancing the amount of student choice with a set of options for contributing to the field in the compacted content area, the curriculum compacting strategy will fulfill an even wider function. Our young "magnets" can help to extend their influence to others, helping to advance knowledge and even strengthening their own "polarity" in the process.
Compacting within the classroom offers flexibility to move various learners into or out of the compacted unit depending on their readiness, interest, or learner profile. It can be a very effective differentiation strategy. However, not all magnets will stick together with others unless their polarities are properly aligned. In the same light, learners must be re-evaluated for each new concept so that their need for compacted curricula can be assessed. Our "compass" for this process is a high quality pre-assessment along with formative assessments as frequent course checks throughout a unit. Compacted curriculum must still contain adequate structure for continuing assessment. Without a process for checking the compass to see how our "magnets" are aligned, we may get "off course". Students in a compacted curriculum will still need authentic feedback on their progress towards content objectives. As long as we share our compass readings with them on a frequent basis, our compacted instruction will continue to keep them on a steady course.
To compact curriculum for gifted students an educator must have a thorough knowledge of content objectives, learners, and the technical details involved in the implementation process. Pre-assessment is a critical key for determining the use of the strategy as well as appropriate formative assessment of the ongoing learning. The banked time must also be carefully planned so that it both motivates and maintains authenticity within the scope of the intended content objectives. Curriculum compacting is an "attractive" strategy, but one that requires frequent compass checks to keep our developing "magnetic students" moving parallel to our curricular goals. Keep your magnets carefully aligned and your content will not only stick, but gain strength in the process.

Giving the right gift

Which gifts to give?
SAC or Socratic Seminar
Do you remember birthday parties from your childhood? In the "old days" before gift cards, each of us would have to shop around and purchase a gift for our friends on their birthday. We would have to consider what they liked, what they wanted, and what we could afford to buy. We also would have to look around and see what was available and eventually choose a gift that would match what we wanted to give our friend. A wise choice would show that we knew the person well and that we valued him/her as an important part of our lives. A further personal touch in a gift allowed for anticipation of future growth in the friendship. (What message, then, does a gift card give?) As educators, we often have to make the same types of decisions when we plan lessons for our classes.
Choices, choices, choices...how do we make the right ones for our students? In choosing to have students work cooperatively on a controversial task, instructors have two popular choices: Structured Academic Controversy or Socratic Seminar. But which strategy is the most appropriate for a particular learning task?
In Socratic Seminar, the entire group begins with the same text and then explores interpretations and divergent areas that may lead to insight about its meaning and application. The free exchange of ideas between group members is meant to elicit higher levels of thinking in Bloom's taxonomy. Through this exchange, each member may gain the perspective of how his or her view of the text may be either more singular or pluralistic in reference to a peer group.
In SAC, on the other hand, both groups may research their own resources, but must be willing to exchange these to offer their peers an opportunity to explore the reverse position. By requiring each half of a group to argue for and against both sides of a potential controversy, they gain the experience of synthesis of an argument twice, as well as a forced perspective and point of view that may be antithetical to their own. However, it is the final step that distinguishes SAC from Socratic Seminar in that the group, albeit a small one, must come to some type of consensus at the conclusion of SAC. This is not a requirement of Socratic Seminar.
Now, with this brief background, an instructor must first decide if he or she wants or expects the learners or participants to come to a consensus about a topic or idea. If not, then Socratic Seminar may be more appropriate. However, the consensus required in SAC may be considered arbitrary or temporary until the group has additional time to research a topic in more detail, so it could also be used as a springboard for further research. Socratic Seminar, on the other hand, could be used to explore a wider diversity of perspectives that may be present in a larger group or to highlight particular aspects of a choice or decision that offer more than two choices. In these complex situations, the Socratic Seminar may not offer a consensus, but can be quite successful at providing the raw material for the various constituents of a complex concept.
The need for diverse perspectives could also determine which of these two cooperative learning strategies is most effective in a particular situation. If one of the learning goals is to explore the widest possible variety of options, then Socratic Seminar may provide this wide view. If, however, one wishes to delve much deeper into two particular perspectives, then SAC will be the better choice. In either case, the quantity of perspectives or amount of depth will depend at least in part on the learners and the scaffolding provided by the instructor, so the amount of perspective and intended depth should be carefully considered prior to implementation of either strategy.
Similar consideration should be given to the amount of interactive social skills necessary to achieve the maximum level of Bloom's taxonomic thinking. Both strategies can get learners to higher levels, but SAC will require the teams to utilize sophisticated argumentative skills based on particular types of data, while the Socratic seminar may allow for more personal testimonies during group interaction. SAC typically stresses the researched amount of support for various positions and complexities of each side of a topic, while Socratic seminar may allow for more singular interpretation of particular portions of a common text. In terms of the Six-hats strategy, the SAC leans more towards the black and white hats, while the Socratic seminar allows more red, green, and yellow. Both would offer opportunities for blue hat thinking, although SAC requires Green hat synthesis in its consensus as well as particular analysis of both positions from a third higher perspective. Socratic seminar allows blue hat thinkers to collect and interpret a wider variety of positions or ideas, but may not necessarily encourage as much green hat thinking beyond what is presented in the text.
Furthermore, a SAC typically lends itself well to a topic with two strong opposing positions, while Socratic Seminars are usually utilized as a method to explore a variety of interpretations of one particular text or idea. As an instructor, one should consider carefully the goals and objectives of a particular topic prior to placing one's students into either strategic path. In terms of today's modern world, we could consider SAC as more digital in nature with two particular polarizing positions, while Socratic Seminar is more analog with a flowing stream of fluctuating ideas. Both have a place in cooperative learning, but one must choose wisely to insure that there is a good fit for the one who is "gifted"... One must give the best gift that keeps on giving, and if it fits, then the celebration of learning will continue and grow. Now...who wants cake and ice cream?

HATS off to Technology

As former president of the Von Braun Astronomical Society, I was often asked which telescope was the "best" to buy or use. A query such as this always brought a smile to my face as I casually explained that this question could not be answered without knowing both who was using the telescope and what they wanted to see with it. The point that I made (other than the one on my head…), was that any type of technology, even one as simple as an optical system, could not be evaluated on an absolute scale. It must, in short, be judged by how well it meets the needs for which it is being used. The "best" telescope is the one that will be used the most by the observer to learn about the night sky. To do this, it must be the "right" telescope for the observer’s purposes. In the same "light", this "view" could be extended to include all types of technology, especially in the field of education. To examine technology in education, we should sit down and take off our HATS…

Now, having lived for many years in the town where NASA began, I think I can safely point out that NASA is often read as "Need Another Silly Acronym". It is true that if we can take something long and distill it down, we can get a "cute" reference to use for more "efficient" communication. So, in that light, what I propose for evaluating technology is a system of HATS, or a Heuristic Academic Technology System. By creating a model heuristic of how technologies will function effectively as a system within an academic or educational setting, we can gain greater insight into the directions to pursue with technological educational enterprises. The following are some of my six HATS for technology:

White Hat (Facts): Technology is pervasive in life and will continue to become more integral into the lives of everyone. Connectivity and the information age are here to stay and provide unparalleled potential access to information and each other across digital domains. The pace of technology integration and implementation is accelerating, requiring more training and technology-based skill sets for people to function effectively in any endeavor.

Red Hat (Emotional): The pace of technology use and integration is both exciting and frightening. The anxiety that accompanies such rapid change is unavoidable. The potential is great for both positive and negative results with students or education in general. However, one can not stand still or he/she will be left behind. An increase in fluidity of educational practice and the erosion of authoritarian knowledge centricity within an educator have provided significant sources of anxiety in the education community.

Black Hat (Analytic): The loss of control over some content and the impact on the personal relationships between teacher and student are major concerns. The benefits for using the technology in any area have not been adequately documented via research methods. How much experimentation should we undertake on our children through technology use? Every minute spent in front of a computer is one lost to develop other skills or relationships.

Yellow Hat (Positives): The ability to connect and collaborate has been significantly enhanced via technology. The drudgery inherent in some tasks can be eliminated such that students can focus on higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. The variety and diversity of technological options allows for a much wider and deeper set of expression modalities for students and teachers. The ability to publish out to a larger audience will provide a far greater audience than just the classroom community.

Green Hat (Creatives): A new synthesis of ideas can be created online that is far greater than could have been possible before. This new collective consciousness can dovetail creative and innovative ideas together in much greater and deeper methods than ever before. This technological connectivity may change us as a species to become more digitally collaborative.

Blue Hat (Evaluation): What will be the overall cost in terms of each advance of technology. Every advance means me must leave something behind. We must be cautious not to leave behind our values. Will we cultivate the wisdom necessary to know how and when to pursue technologies for human benefits today and in the future? We must not lose sight of the fundamental philosophical and theoretical principles of human society or our own existence as a human culture could be threatened.

The future: (A few ideas…) What technology would be most helpful to the educator of the future? Perhaps a learning preferences measurement tool, or an "understanding indicator" could be developed such that a person’s brain could be "scanned" to determine both how they learn best and what they really understand or not. The ability to monitor ourselves through technology as we learn will most likely continue to advance such that we may be able to design personal learning systems for every individual. Would this make a teacher obsolete? This is why we must create a good heuristic for the classroom and conduct the appropriate research to determine what human beings will need in the future. The HATS must not be ignored. So, what telescope would I choose? Why the one that gives me the clearest vision of what’s out there, of course.

Why “Complex” is good…

How many shades of gray can there be in a black and white world? We often view old movies as simple just because they were filmed in "black and white." The lack of complexity or color gives us the impression that they may not be as worthy of our attention today than in the past. Does everyone agree on this? I cite two examples to refute this simple idea: "Citizen Kane", and "Casablanca", both black and white films and two of the greatest ever made. They have amazing levels of complexity in a variety of modalities that are not always apparent to the novice (simplistic minded) film viewer. What can this then, tell us about ourselves as human beings? Do we see reflections of our own levels of "uncomplexity" within our evaluations of our external world?
The often cited, "Occam’s razor", says that all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the best. It may be a gift to be simple, and seeking some simplicity for the sake of occasional refuge or retreat can be especially healing for many people. However, constantly seeking to over-simplify our own lives tends to be counter-intuitive to the proper growth or learning process. By always wanting to view the world through "rose colored glasses", we often fail to see the greater complexities of life itself. Through growth, as in education, we naturally become more complex individuals. The type and depth of complexity, however, is ultimately up to us to determine. Do we want to be exceedingly deep and narrow or wide and shallow? (Yes, this choice does have some implications…)
This tendency of human nature to want to simplify life is somewhat hard-wired into our psyche. Unfortunately, too often it carries over into group interactions within school settings. The playgrounds, classrooms, and other areas where young people live their lives are constant battlegrounds of status and attention. It seems that nobody is immune. However, all human beings are complex individuals and all deserve respect as such. Too often these immature status-seeking youngsters do such harm in establishing their "pecking order", that it becomes necessary for educators to overcompensate in their instruction and treatment of many of the "low status" individuals. By recognizing the contributions of low status students within a group project, teachers can often attempt to validate the competence of such lower status students as well as offer an opportunity for greater learning within the context of such a project. This strategy often known as complex instruction, however, has both advantages and disadvantages.
By attempting to raise the status of an individual through designing instruction that relies on the varied competence of a variety of skills and abilities, a teacher can often successfully increase student learning and engagement. Indeed, the lower status student can be validated for his or her talents or abilities, which can bolster his or her self-esteem. As long as the learning task within a group is perceived as authentic and each group member’s contribution as essential and relevant, then this strategy may have a reasonable chance of succeeding. Through the strategy of complex group instruction, the "playing field" could be flattened to accommodate their varying abilities or talents.

However, there could be problems with complex instruction. The other group members must also function with less praise or status affirmation from the teacher. This effect may be recognized by some of the other members of the group, and thus, they may view the teacher’s actions as "favoritism" towards the lower status students, or as "sympathetic" to their cause. It is essential in this case for any teacher to be very specific in his/her praise of each student such that every person is recognized in some way. The evaluation of each group should also include a strategy for validation of a diversity of each group members’ contributed skills, such that everyone may get valid feedback for his/her contribution. Without such constructs, complex instruction, may only reinforce the stereotypes of status portrayed by the student peer groups.
A well-defined role structure and ability recognition system must be established prior to the task assignment, such that each group member will have an appreciation of his/her individual contribution and know that it is valuable and worthwhile. The task MUST require all group members to contribute to the overall project through their valued skill/ability in order for the entire project to succeed. This will not be easy to accomplish, but it is worthwhile to formulate a comprehensive plan that has a reasonable chance of success.
Evaluation criteria must include both criterion-referenced elements as well as self-referenced ones. The established group evaluation must also include the opportunity to recognize each group member’s contributed skill or ability in the evaluation process to celebrate the accomplishments of not only the overall group, but the individuals within the group as well.
Complex instruction requires significant planning and thought, but it can be extremely rewarding to all members of a group, not just the low status students. The higher status or gifted students, too, will benefit from the shifted reference frame necessary in complex instruction. This will allow them to explore a wider variety of talents and abilities both of themselves and others. Through viewing everyone’s abilities as relevant to accomplishment of school-related tasks, their perception of other students may help them establish better relationships. This will depend, however, greatly on the depth and complexity of the designed instruction.

Everyone needs to feel useful and challenged. Everyone wants to be a contributing member of a group and accomplish great things. These are basic needs that we all share as we attempt to become more complex beings. By shattering the status quo and leveling the field through carefully crafted group tasks, we can affect great positive change on the future.

Fertilizing the mind (developing concepts)

"How does one go about fine tuning a mind?"...Watson asks Sherlock Holmes. "Puzzles, problems of logic, mathematical equations...anything that makes you think in a new way..." Holmes responds. (From the movie: Young Sherlock Holmes) "For example, you are seated in a room with an all-southern view. Suddenly, a bear walks by the window. What color is the bear?"

Holmes knew that in order to grow, his mind needed stimulation and an orderly context in which to assimilate and accomodate the new knowledge. He probably never knew Hilda Taba, but he certainly practiced much of what she has given us in the field of concept development.

In visits outdoors, I have often sat and watched the behaviours of animals to gain insight into natural patterns of learning. I've often wondered how an animal like a fawn learns all it needs in order to survive. It will start out shy and uncertain, barely able to stand up, searching for its mother and her influence to point it in a certain direction. It certainly has some instinct, but it has to quickly develop such concepts as food, danger, movement, and hiding without any type of noticeable language. It has a brain that seeks a certain order, like many other mammals, and attempts to quickly adjust and accomodate for this newly gained stimuli. It is in a sense, "hard wired" to quickly develop important ideas that will most likely remain for the rest of its life, but how does it develop all of those important concepts?

I have also observed similar behaviors in humans. For example, when watching an infant trying to learn to walk, he will try and get up, teeter a bit, then fall back down. Observing and attemtping to ascertain what happened, his brain will process some of this information filing it away for future use to try again later, perhaps creating in a rudimentary way, a concept of walking that can now be built upon later. How is this process of developing the idea of "walking" developed and how might the developing human brain be able to take advantage of certain fine tuning methods that the deer brain can not?

These examples begin to expose that in a rudimentary form, concept development, is a "natural" method in which many species learn. However, it only works on the highest level when the mammalian brain can algorithmically process the steps necessary to develop such a concept. Both the fawn and baby human may develop a concept of walking, but only the human brain can take the concept beyond simple movement. Our human advantage for meta cognition within concept development allows us to realize what we need in order to develop our concepts to this higher degree. Taba's more formal implementation of concept development steps map out a framework in which we can explore the nuances of this learning capability to a much higher degree in our (hopefully) more developed brain structures.

"Its so easy...even a cave man can do it"...The Geico insurance company seems to also be exploring these concept development beginnings in a lateral method through its commercials about early man and his ability to develop certain concepts. Yet, recent research into primate behavior shows that even chimpanzees can learn basic concepts such as numbers, counting, and some letters. Many can even have a vocabulary of several hundred words, even though they can not vocalize them as humans can. The structures in a mammalian brain seem to have steered humans toward developing concepts that will allow for higher levels of cognition. Now, I don't have any specific data for this claim, but through implementation of a learning strategy that parallels natural conceptual learning such as Taba's concept development, many more humans may be able to achieve higher cognitive levels in understanding of complex concepts.

Taba's structure of logical steps that involve the proper supporting (scaffolded) stimuli (questioning) at certain junctures to tease the learner's growth incessantly toward the conceptual goal, act as a type of catalyst for the learning process. The method (as Holmes might say) of fine tuning a mind is as important as the mind itself. Through listing, grouping, labeling, subsuming, and recycling, we see many of the same types of mind methods used by the great detective. Why did we admire the character of Sherlock Holmes so much? Precisely because he had trained his mind to not only observe, but also make inferences, connections, and draw conclusions about the complex world around him in ways that others could not. However, with the proper training, Holmes himself might even say that anyone could do what he did and reach the same conclusions. His seemingly miraculous insights, were merely the product of careful fine tuning of his mind through methods such as concept development.

Through noticing patterns in the chaos, Holmes could form concepts, make predictions, and interpret various pieces of data as they were interwoven in even more complex shapes. Concept development follows this type of scientific method strategy in its behaviors of gathering information, organizing data, making inferences, generating alternatives, making conclusions, and making generalizations.

Taba has tapped into a scientific, logical way to order or "fine tune" a mind such that a greater amount of cognitive growth can occur, and thus the development of a concept can take deeper root inside the mind. However, this method is not infalliable, as even Holmes himself would admit in some cases. Not all parts of life or the world follow algorithmic patterns or can be ferreted out with the use of logic. The whole picture becomes of greater importance sometimes than the devil within the details...

This method is especially effective with gifted learners, as that many will naturally gravitate toward this type of logical thinking method in their own explorations of concept development. However, to facilitate this type of method is not easy. It requires considerable training and an essential change in style and behavior. Sherlock Holmes was admired because he was able to train himself in these types of concept development methods when others could not. Today, we have the benefits of more information and knowledge about how humans learn than Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his Victorian counterparts. Thus, we can now implement Taba's strategies and masterfully engage our gifted learners to aspire to out think even the great Mr. Holmes himself.

Perspective is increased through greater knowledge and wisdom. Hopefully, we have that today and can use our increased perspective to develop concepts for our learners to greater extents than ever before. All we have to lose is...the future. As Holmes would say: "The game is afoot."

So, what color is the bear in Holmes' puzzle? Fine tune your mind and see if you can successfully develop this concept on your own.

Peripheral vision under the hat

Can you see into the future? Are you a "peripheral visionary"? (I am.)

Comedian Stephen Wright used to profess to his audiences that he was such a "peripheral visionary". He would then go on to explain that he could really "see into the future" but only, as he enjoyed saying: "way off to the side."

The future may be "headed" in such a slanted direction, thanks in great part to the work of Edward de Bono and his "Six Thinking Hats" lateral thinking strategy for problem solving.

Peripheral vision and "lateral thinking" are much "on the mind" today as inroads to lead us into higher levels of thinking (Bloom's taxonomy), increase our effectiveness in thought processes, be more efficient in evaluating and solving problems, and ultimately (at least in business), be more productive and profitable. The idea is that by de-constructing human thought into a series of "hats" and trying them on one at a time, we can then be more capable of evaluating how well we can see alternative perspectives, propose lateral solutions, pursue creative insights, and incorporate wider fields of thought into our own. The six hats give us a common reference frame that will serve all members of the group to guide their thought processes together towards an ultimate goal.

I think everyone will recognize some aspects of their thought in each of the hats. I now find myself beginning to evaluate (blue hat) my own thinking in terms of each of the other colored hats of thought that I wear, thanks to the construct of the six-hat structure. Here, it seems, that lateral thinking literally means that "one size" does not "fit all". However, we all seem to have a "favorite" hat...the one that is shop-worn and used more often than all of the others. The beauty of this system, however, is to provide a means to move our thinking beyond one "comfortable" place and into the wider realm that may allow us to grow and learn more than we would otherwise. In this way, it can be a very helpful strategy to facilitate group interaction especially with young learners who have difficulty in either expressing or organizing their diverse thoughts. The hat construct (colored hats) is easily accessible for many young learners, and thus can serve as a perfect framework for group problem-solving, providing a ready-made common reference tool that all of the group members can use to guide their thinking.

Which hat are you wearing right now? White? Red? Black? Through understanding the references to the general nature of thought in each area, the "blue hat" person can quickly shift thinking in needed directions and avoid unnecessary and time-consuming banter and arguments that tend to drag down group discussions. This greatly improves the overall effectiveness of a group interaction and can empower the group members to avoid reductionist judgemental thoughts and instead EXPAND their minds! Thinking laterally through the use of many hats has the potential to OPEN up a large variety of options and that is what is needed for the future!

Through "swapping" hats, each group member has the potential to gain perspective. By shifting thinking into "someone elses hat", we also can gain empathy, understanding, and ultimately wisdom about how and why someone else may think in a certain way about a particular topic or idea. Creating these types of connections through a commonly held and understood construct further cements these relationships, especially for young learners, so that they can move their thinking farther up the ladder of Bloom's taxonomy.

The goal of many teachers should be to have students be not only good thinkers, but also good meta-cognition experts. Through the use of a blue hat to coordinate all of the others and offer a sense of BALANCE to the entire process, an ideal model of a healthy democratic social system is portrayed. In this way, six thinking hats works not only as a thought training system, but also in increasing the value of human interaction within a diverse multi-cultural society! A favorite quote hangs in a frame on my wall: "Great Spirit, Grant that I may not criticize my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his moccasins." Through using six-hats, the value of each group member is affirmed by NOT directly associating an individual's thoughts with a single viewpoint, but instead allowing the "hat" itself to function as only one aspect of this person's thinking. Thus, to judge an individual due to a singularly-held perspective becomes impossible! Eureka!

So, are you a peripheral visionary yet? Put on each one of these "thinking caps" and see what happens. With my yellow hat on, the future is so bright...I gotta wear shades...(Black hat: to match the hat, of course...)

Smiles...:>

Socrates Final Question

Perhaps, this will show my age, but I recall an old movie with these two guys "Bill and Ted" going on an adventure and kidnapping Socrates for their history report. When trying to communicate with him, they have to "philosophize" with him and dredge up their most philosophical of concepts stemming from an old 1977 rock song by Kansas: we are but "dust in the wind"...dude. It seemed to work for them , but I always wondered what Socrates would really have been like if brought through time to today?

I also tend to wonder how Socrates would respond to his name being attributed to the most popular of seminar discussion formats, the Socratic Seminar. What was HIS last question? Again, I think of the words from another 80's movie (Real Genius)..."I was pondering the immortal last words of Socrates...who said: 'I drank what?'".

The Socratic seminar is a very good strategy for involving all of the learners in meaningful exchanges in order to explore and define a topic or idea. It is very good at eliciting student understanding through verbal expression as well as formative evaluation of relationships and connections that students are making with their previous knowledge. It is also very useful when all students have a good common text to use that is current/relevant to their own lives or futures. (Such as a recent internet or magazine article.) By discussing in open format the meaning and interpretation of text, concepts, or ideas, students not only improve their own understanding, but also their peers as well.

However, students and teachers must be very well prepared as well as understand and abide by respectful rules of engagement during a Socratic Seminar. It is not appropriate for every kind of learning, but is especially helpful where open interpretation and exchange can lead all to a new insight about a particular "text". It may also work well with certain types of complex issues as well as some of those "moral dilemmas" that involve trying to decide upon the least destructive of several evils. (i.e. the best course of action) I think that students who have good reading and speaking skills as well as reasonable comfort level and self-efficacy can respond well to Socratic Seminar. However, those with limited use of the language, learning disabilities, verbal or reading difficulties, or those with emotional/social issues related to the topic may need to be put into a differentiated group when using this type of instructional strategy. Ultimately, the teacher has to consider very carefully how and when to use it, as well as what to do with any students who may not be entirely comfortable in this type of learning situation. The teacher also has to have a thorough knowledge of the text and a plan of questions and possible directions for the ensuing discussion. An exit card strategy for all of the students would also be essential in the planning process to insure that all students will benefit from the knowledge and input from their peers.

In science, the Socratic Seminar is especially helpful when discussing the Nature of Science and current scientific/ethical dilemmas. A good example would be human stem cell research, human cloning, interpretive microbial life (is a virus "life"?), artifical intelligence, evolutionary pathways, and various economical or resource issues such as environmental protection and species extinction. In short, there are many areas where the Socratic seminar could be used in science classes.

For younger students, I have used a short version of this along with a "talking stick" of sorts to allow each student to have a say in the "circle" and see what they think. This usually follows a short story by the teacher about what we are studying and then proceeds around the circle or group by passing the talking stick to various members. Typically, everyone will get the stick once on the first round, then it can be passed back and forth to anyone who wants to talk. I usually conduct this for five to ten minutes with 1st or 2nd graders and then move to an activity.

So, what would Socrates say about his seminar learning format being used today?

I am sure he would have more questions than answers. (and probably decline the offer of any "liquid" refreshment...)

An aside: Could a schizophrenic have his own individual socratic seminar? Who would moderate? What would he most likely conclude?

"Its all Greek to me."

Smiles,

Tim

Questions in a runic rhyme

So, what is it? We ask as we attempt to comprehend the latest artwork from our wee ones. Can't you tell? They say, "its obviously a...."

Questions...always questions...

Are we there yet? When do we eat? What's the meaning of life? What are we having for dinner? What's six times seven?

I used to say that the entire scope of interest for a sixth grade boy could be boiled down to just three questions: 1. Will it explode? (or when will it exlode?), 2. How much did it cost? (or how much will it cost if I broke it?), and 3. What would happen if I ate it? (self explanatory or what if it ate me?)

So, what role do questions play in our lives and what role should they have? Another...age old question...

As a fan of Douglas Adams...it seems natural to start by seeking to find the "ultimate question"...however, Mr. Adams himself seems never to have actually been able to define "it", so once again, this question about a question too must go unanswered. However, an examination of Douglas Adams' answer to the ultimate question: "42" may provide some insight into why questions are so integral to learning for us human types. I think that the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy might provide the ultimate "answer", but to give both the ultimate question and answer at one time would just negate the necessity of purchasing the guide, so Mr. Adams may be illustrating that it just may not possible to contain both ultimates within one universe...However, Douglas' real (quite clever) idea may in fact be to point out that asking questions and seeking or even finding answers are not really the same and should be treated separately. Even he points out in his books that many philosophers are good at asking questions, but don't really know or even expect to know the answers themselves. Indeed Socrates touted himself as one who was good at asking the right questions, but not the expert who could really answer any of them. So, do questions and answers have to go together to have a context and make the "Yin/Yang" of the inquiry process? Insert your answer here: _____? Smile

If we don't get the answers we want, do we say that we've asked the wrong question or a bad question? What, is the difference? Similarly, is a good question necessarily the "right" question or is it merely one that gives us a warm and fuzzy feeling at the time? What is my point...

Questioning, is an art.

It is a technique that requires both skill and practice as well as a certain twinkle of a spark to ignite just the right stuff in those willing to twist their minds through the maze of possibilities. By seeking to expand our knowledge, we often turn expectantly to someone or something and ask: can you make me wiser/more knowledgeable/more capable. Through our questions, we seek to be better than we are currently, to improve our condition, to continue to survive, or to become closer to something greater than ourselves. Yet, all are connected.

Questioning is an admission of our imperfections and ignorances. A continual reminder of our lowly place in the universe of knowledge, but also an expression of our desire to pull ourselves up from the genetic informationally deficient quagmire to a slightly richer one...where, perhaps we can be a bit more than we were previously. Questioning is the red carpeted highway to stardom. Our "ticket" to a better life...or is it?

Are all questions created equal? No. AND Yes. The ability to ask a relevant question assumes at least a minimal common frame of reference, yet still these "irrelevant" questions continue to pop up, float out on the air and some may even get answered...so what does this mean?

It means people are different. It means questions are different. It means the universe may only tolerate this amount of chaos known as "life" only due to the ability of our "sentient" selves to continually seek a new question to ask about the universe itself. Through the stimulation of each and every tendril of inquiry as often as possible, we may, as Stephen J. Gould once theorized, create a "full house" of options to explore. Questioning may be no different than its originator in this. Life created questions. The universe created life (well in one interpretation), so does the universe want to know more about itself? Maybe the answer really is "42"...

Do I actually expect answers to all of the questions above? No.

Do I find myself enriched due to the asking. Yes.

The point: An open-ended question allows for exploration of imaginative and at times infinite possibilities. A closed question does not, unless it leads to another question.

Wisdom comes from knowing that it is not through thinking that we may know all of the answers to our human questions, but instead by knowing that we don't even know all of the questions to ask, and are not ever likely to know all of them, ever.

What is it?

It is a good question, and thank you for asking.

I may not know, but now my world is a bit larger and better because of your question.

There's an awfully large universe out there, plenty of room for more.

Keep 'em coming.

Tim

The Will to Learn

How, do we learn best?

To instill a will to learn, nature provides us all with inherent incentives...needs for our own survival that require our particular species to process information and utilize it to continue our own existence.

Yet, this process is imperfect. We sometimes learn things that we don't really need to know to survive. We also forget important information that may be crucial to us. Some ideas and concepts seem easy to grasp, while others take enormous effort or at least monumental cognitive processing in order to master. The first step to any learning may be the realization that our own personal experience is incomplete. This realization only comes through observation of our environment and surroundings. A set of extrinsic sensual experiences triggers some type of need that leads to exploration. In other words, how can we know that we need to learn unless we have observed that it may be necessary or interesting for us to do so?

So, this external "stimulus", leads to internal processing which then leads to another need to either explore or interact with the external environment again. By doing so, we seem to either elicit a gathering of new information, an expected response, or an unexpected result. Essentially, we have seen a path that appears interesting, it has stimulated our curiousity and now we must explore it! What will we experience on this path? What might lie at the end of it? Will it be something new or interesting? Our imagination is engaged and now we heighten our senses to insure that we gather as much information as we can about this experience. It drives us on in the path. We find a need or a will of our own that presses us to overcome the obstacles or challenges necessary to accumulate these new experiences. Essentially we have an existential NEED to learn what may come next.

This need to learn is perhaps heightened by the LACK of experience. Children often seem insatiable in their questioning and need to learn more, but adults may not be such enthusiastic questioners. For, as we age and accumulate more experiences, our will to learn may even fade a bit. We grow "jaded" or "tired" of pushing ourselves only to find the same or quite similar experiences along the way. This may then explain the very common human interest in novelty. Why do we travel? Why do we shop? Why do we constantly seem to seek out that "perfect" cup of coffee? or why do we "rubberneck" the latest auto accident on the highway? Do we crave novelty so much due to our interest in learning something new or is it because it provides a basis for the generation of new questions? Once we reach the end of the path...we see a beautiful lake. Do we ask what's in the lake or do we turn around thinking its just "another lake" like all of the others we've experienced? Does open-mindedness and a willingness to ask questions color our experience so much that it may not just deny opportunities through our actions, but actually interfere with them? (Political arguments about conservatives vs. liberals excepted...) To insure our own existence, might it be necessary to continue to cultivate this "will to learn"? (the subject of another post...probably later.)

Questioning may be the key, for as we train ourselves to continuously ask questions, we provide ourselves with more opportunities to learn. This process occurs in many formats: in

groups or in solitude, listen or watching, discussing or interacting, doing or sensual perceiving. A stream of input experiences feeds the human brain in a variety of ways throughout our life. (Whether we have TOO much input is again, a subject for another post...OVERSTIMULATION...) However, we all have our individual preferences for input and questioning. Personal combinations of learning styles, interface modes, interactive processing needs, and intra-active personal reflective processing needs shape our interest, perception, and need to question. Ultimately, this means that a "good" teacher should address as many of these input strategies as possible to insure that the will to learn remains high for all.

How do we keep our will to learn? By chasing rainbows, reaching for the outer edges, pushing ourselves past the comfort zone, and ultimately, by asking questions and seeking the answers, not because they are "assigned", but because they provide some new interest or insight that will enhance and enrich each others existence.

I don't actually recall, but I think it was Ben Franklin who said to "try something new every day. "

In any event, I would not only agree, but also say to ask a probing question about it too.

Tim

"Even if the universe is infinite, we must expand our minds and attempt to fill the void."

Creative Teaching

I have been pondering the place of Creative Teaching in education. Here are a few thoughts...

Creative teaching is…

A creative teacher puts on costumes
A creative teacher tries something new as often as possible
A creative teacher connects strange things together
A creative teacher tells jokes that are sometimes funny
A creative teacher laughs at unusual things
A creative teacher knows at least one thing that nobody else does
A creative teacher does not always try to be perfect (does not always know the answer)
A creative teacher wears many hats
A creative teacher collects student's weird ideas and shares them with the class
A creative teacher juggles
A creative teacher does not always know where he/she is going
A creative teacher is a good scrounger of "stuff"
A creative teacher asks open-ended or unanswered questions
A creative teacher sometimes trips or slips
A creative teacher is slightly bent
A creative teacher is just a little crazy
A creative teacher likes square pegs
A creative teacher believes in potential

So, what is creative teaching? It is a sense of knowing that only through a wondrous variety of educational opportunities will students maximize their learning. Being creative is very important for teaching in that all learners have different needs and backgrounds. A creative teacher of gifted students is no different, other than insuring that the creative opportunities provide appropriate challenge to the variety of gifts that each student may possess.

Pushing one slightly beyond the comfort level is often tantamount to the first step in the learning process. As the little birds are nudged farther out from the nest, they realize more about the world and their place in it. However, this process must be carefully monitored or some birds may get injured or fall prey to dangerous predators. Similarly, the creative teacher can provide many paths out from the comfort zone and still help students to choose those that will serve them best. As student confidence and learning styles increase, they will be more capable of accepting creative challenges and may even demand them in greater quantity from their teachers. By offering a wider variety of challenges and opportunities, a creative teacher may often be preparing students in more effective methods for what they could face in the future. Most all teachers want students to "fly" on their own, so the diversity of small previous moves makes the flight that more comfortable and joyous in the end.

However, creativity is difficult. It requires great knowledge, time, sacrifice, and often does not work as well as intended. The risk in being creative when teaching is great, but the risk in not being creative may be even greater. Creativity requires bravery and dedication. It also asks all of those involved to contribute their best. Humans seem to be both naturally creative and naturally averse to some types of new experience. Preservation instinct and social comfort may combine to make some less interested in creative ventures, however, the truly wise can see the intrinsic value inherent in creativity for the greater good of all.

So, who is the creative teacher?…A creative teacher is a person whose vision extends beyond the extraordinary.

Smiles, Tim

1st blog

This is my blog for Gifted Instruction Class Reflections/Log on readings.

I will be posting my reflections and ideas about Gifted Strategies and Instruction here frequently.

Enjoy.

Tim