A archetypical tale of (and great advice for) school transformation…if you listen closely enough!
#PedagogicalMasterPlanning
#Pedagography
Yves Morieux: As work gets more complex, 6 rules to simplify
The letter to parents quoted below came from Mount Vernon Presbyterian School‘s Lower School Division Head, Shelley Clifford. I’m so fortunate that she is my sons’ principal.
Dear Mount Vernon Families,
In the spirit of starting with questions, what do you hope for your child to learn this semester? The Lower School teachers returned on January 6 and reflected upon this question. How might we intentionally use the 94 remaining days of this school year to inspire and encourage our children to pursue their unique passions and gifts? Specifically in the month of January, Lower School will focus on the Mount Vernon Mindset, Innovator.
Innovators explore and experiment in a climate of change. They build resilience through risk-taking and setbacks. Innovators create unique ideas with value and meaning. Kindergartners will practice their empathy and innovation skills by embarking on their first Design Thinking Project. Be sure to ask your Kindergartner about the Gingerbread Challenge. Second graders have already begun exploring the essential question, “How does learning about inventors and inventions affect our outlook on the world and help us be creative thinkers and innovators?”
All students are engaging in visible thinking routines, long-term projects, and discoveries that focus on habits of an innovator. These habits include: starting with questions, engaging in observations, and thriving from collaboration with others.
Regular practice of these skills builds curiosity, so much so we would like to join you in celebrating your child’s sense of wonder as you encourage him or her to observe and experiment at home. Embrace the endless “Why?” questions, and make associations between the strange and the familiar. Finally, collaborate with your learner and encourage him or her to collaborate with other people who may have different perspectives.
If you would like to explore one of our favorite resources on this topic, check out The Innovator’s DNA; here is a link to the book.
…
Kind regards,
Shelley Clifford
Head of Lower School
[excerpt posted with permission, as guest post]
Here’s a challenge, or experiment, for us school people to try. As we teach, administrate, facilitate learning, etc., for the next week or so, keep a tally of how much we are focused on the WHY versus the HOW.
For example, in math class, as we instruct on the lessons of linear inequality or side-angle-side geometry, are we more focused on HOW to do the math or WHY we are doing such math?
In an upper-grades course or elementary-classroom topic like history, perhaps it helps to switch the HOW to WHAT, and play out the same basic experiment. Are we more focused on WHAT happened, or are we spending as much time on the SO WHAT?
During a faculty meeting, perhaps we should be spending more minutes discussing and activating implementation around such things as WHY we assess, in addition to working on HOW we assess.
In recently reviewing a syllabus of a highly respected colleague, I marveled at a section of norms and philosophies that influence how this teacher – this learning facilitator – approaches the learning and teaching moments.
Why Over How – I heard it said once the, “The people who know how will always work for the people who know why.” I hope to equip students with the tools to understand why to use a particular font, cut here in a video, or design a menu in this way. In the age of technological accessibility knowing how is important, but the pursuit of why is the greater challenge that I hope to teach.
Certainly, the thinking above has great influence on why I feel so strongly about transdisciplinary education, contextual pedagogy, design thinking, #Synergy, and other threads of the tapestry blurring lines between “school” and “real life.”
For in capital-P PBL (Project-based learning, and, for me, the overarching organizer of the approaches in the previous paragraph), the WHY drives the voyage and motivates the journey. The HOW comes as the need-to-knows reveal themselves from the intrinsic lurches compelled by the WHYs.
If you conduct such an experiment and count your moments of focus on the WHY versus the HOW, then I’d love to read feedback on your WHY:HOW ratio.
NAIS Convenes Meeting to Evaluate and Develop Research on the Economics of Independent Education
“On January 6 and 7, 2014, NAIS convened a group of prominent researchers and thinkers to help the association hone its research agenda. “Our hope for the meeting,” noted NAIS President John Chubb, “is to come away with ideas about what we need to look into more deeply. We want to ensure that the research we have planned best serves our members’ needs, so we’re asking people in the field — both inside independent schools and at education think tanks and universities – to help us brainstorm topics. What questions are most important for NAIS to ask? What data do schools need to make strategic decisions? How can we go about collecting and disseminating information in a way that most helps our schools?””
Smash Your Echo Chamber – Explore Create Repeat – by 4ormat
“It’s not uncommon for creatives to get stuck in an “echo chamber” or a feedback loop, where you hear the same voices all the time as they diminish in their power to inspire you to change. The risk is becoming dulled to the effects of new thinking, or a reduced appetite to seek it out.”
Resilience and Grit: Resource Roundup | Edutopia
“There’s been a lot of talk lately about resilience (bouncing back from adversity) and grit (persevering through challenges), including the skills associated with these processes and their importance for student well-being and academic success. Edutopia has created this curated list of resources to help educators and parents follow the discussion and create home and school environments that provide supports and opportunities to help students thrive.”
Forget About Learning Styles. Here’s Something Better. « Annie Murphy Paul
There are so many reasons for educators to watch the TED talk below – “Guy Hoffman: Robots with Soul.” As for me, I am paradoxically inspired, mesmerized, puzzled and saddened by Hoffman’s talk.
When I watch and listen to Hoffman, I think of what he must have been like as a K-12 student. What amazing curiosity, drive, passion, and persistence this learner must have had – must continue to have. Through his work, I am inspired by what contributions robotics and roboticists will make in our lives.
And yet I am saddened by the conversations I can imagine that some (many?) schools would have regarding the content and context of such an idea-generating talk.
“What department would we place this course in? He wants to build robots as part of his learning, so it must be ‘Engineering Class,’ right?”
“We don’t have a course called ‘Engineering.’ Maybe we just put it in physics?”
“But how would we cover all the stuff we are already doing in physics? There’s no time or room to add robotics like this in my course.”
“Could it go in a math class? Hoffman mentions math in the talk, doesn’t he?”
“No, it should go in Drama class. Weren’t you listening? He said he took a drama course and method acting is what really helped him break through in the contrast between the computing mind and the adventurous mind.”
“But Drama is just a semester elective. Our kids could never get this work done in just a semester, given the basics of acting that we need to cover.”
“It should go in computer animation, when we get that class up and running.”
“What about psychology? He talks about emotions, and our ‘Human Psych’ course is the only course that has ’emotions’ in the learning outcomes.”
“Why not biology? After all, he is using human biology as a mechanism for understanding how to make the robots more ‘human.'”
“Are you kidding me? When would we have time to build robots in 10th grade biology? It’s AP, for goodness sake?”
“Look, if he wants this to be part of his schooling, he’s gonna need to find a faculty sponsor, and the faculty member will need to create a course proposal. It’s already December, so our deadline is passed. Any course proposal would need to be submitted by NEXT December, and then we might add the course the FOLLOWING year, if the academic committee approves the course. And forget about team teaching with a math, drama, physics, and biology teacher-team. That’s way too many resources to commit to an elective, non-essential course.”
WHAT IF…
OR — we could build in time during the school day for passion-driven, cross-curricular learning. So what if the 17-year-old version of Guy Hoffman’s idea doesn’t fit neatly into one of the silo-ed, department-organized, subject-area courses? Those course structures only represent part of our school day and school week. We don’t just organize by departmental subject area. We co-organize by student-interest and make space for just this kind of exploring, searching, questioning, experimenting, and integrating.
After all, we know that to nurture innovators, they must have time, room, and opportunity to practice observing, questioning, experimenting, networking, and associating.
Oh that we might make it so. If not us, then who? If not now, then when?
#iDiploma
it's about learning 