Parent Perceptions on Learning

May 29th, 2009 Leave your comment »

Take a look at our Stream Team Wiki to see the work of our K-5 students and teachers this past year.  Our project has grown to 14 classes at Klem South – that’s over 280 students participating!

Sampling in the Stream

To help us reflect on work, perceptual data on-line surveys were created for teachers, students, and parents to complete.  While we still have a few more days to collect responses,  I just had to peek at what the parents had to say.  So far 25  completed the survey and 15 added optional comments.

It’s refreshing to read comments like these.

Both of my children loved the Stream Project and it has made them more aware of their environment and how to keep it safe. Awesome experience, one that I hope continues for the students. Thank you!

I think that involving the kids at a young age will allow them to embrace new technology as they grow. My daughter has really enjoyed the program and is excited about science.

Both of my children participated in this project. They talked about their experiences at home and were so excited by their findings. What a valuable experience for the kids!!! This is something they will remember!

But then I read the following.

I think that in first grade there should be an emphasis on learning math, reading, and writing. Although it appears the field trips were fun and exciting for the kids, I am not convinced this project was needed in first grade.

Ugh.  Old school.  Old thoughts.  Science gives kids a reason to read, write, and “do math” in a meaningful context.  Should I even care about this comment?

Leave your comment »

Posted in Assessment, Project-based learning, Science

Tags:

Students as Scientists

November 18th, 2008 Leave your comment »

11 students in grades K-5 will be presenting, “Students as Scientists” on Monday, November 24th at the NYSCATE Annual Conference.  They have spent numerous hours afterschool and during their lunch time  brainstorming and organizing their ideas, writing their scripts, creating a PowerPoint, and rehearsing their presentation.  Their session will be “hands-on” with audience members learning how to collect data on water quality and identifying macroinvertebrates that the students will be collecting at three different stream locations on the morning of the presentation.  Check out their Stream Team Wiki to learn more and don’t forget to read the incredible discussions taking place on the wiki pages!  They’d love some outside voices added to the conversations taking place. 

We plan on streaming the session at http://www.ustream.tv/mstportal starting at 10:45 EST on Monday.

Leave your comment »

Posted in Problem-based learning, Project-based learning, Science, Technology

Tags:

It Doesn’t Get Any Better Than This

September 24th, 2008 3 Comments »

Doug Johnson just wrote about Joy in the Classroom and asks at the end of his post, “How do you bring joy to learning in your classroom, library or computer lab?”  Today, however, the joy was brought to me by two classes of kindergarten scientists.  I had the best day ever.  Some of these kids aren’t even 5 years old yet and they were in the stream collecting data, making observations, and asking questions.  It was awesome.  So my question to you is, “What joy did kids bring to you today?”

3 Comments »

Posted in Inquiry, Science, Technology

Tags:

Educational Malpractice

September 20th, 2008 6 Comments »

In an opening keynote for a Professional Learning Communities at Work Institute in Washington, DC, Richard DuFour presented “Hard Facts, Half-Truths, and Total Nonsense in Education.” Rick stated teachers are engaging in educational malpractice if they don’t work in a collaborative environment.

He went on to explain that in a collaborative environment, members of the team should work interdependently towards a common goal with all held mutually accountable. But the focus of the collaboration is critical. Energy and attention should focus on student learning. Professional Learning Communities look to evidence that their students are achieving the identified knowledge, skills, and dispositions and use that information to drive their instructional decisions.

So what is the best way to collect and use evidence? DuFour shared research supporting the use of formative assessments.

A focus on the use of formative assessment in support of learning, developed through teacher learning communities, promises not only the largest potential gains in student achievement, but also provides a model for teacher professional development that can be implemented effectively at scale.

Dylan Wiliam and Marnie Thompson (2007)

To the extent that teachers work together in teams to 1) analyze, understand, and deconstruct standards, 2) transform standards into high quality classroom assessments, and 3) share and interpret results together, they benefit from the union of their wisdom about how to help students continue to grow as learners.

Rick Stiggins (2005), p.82

Two strategies seem especially promising for schools. One is to expand the quality and variety of formative assessments; a second is to promote and organize collective inquiry into and discussion of student progress and achievement based on a range of assessments.

Judith Warren Little, (2006), p.9

Working in true Professional Learning Communities will help eliminate what DuFour refers to as the “educational lottery” of our children’s school experiences. If research identifies the effectiveness of teachers working in collaborative teams using formative assessments to increase student achievement and educators continue to resist, should educational malpractice be the charge?

Little, J.W. (2006). Professional Community and Professional Development in Learning-Centered School. Washington, D.C: National Education Association.

Stiggins, R. (2005). Assessment for learning: Building a culture of confident learners.  In R. DuFour, R. EAker, & R. DuFour (Eds.), On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (pp.65-83). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with learning: What will it take to make it work? in C.A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Image credit: http://flickr.com/photos/lumaxart/2137737248/in/photostream/

6 Comments »

Posted in Assessment, Collaboration

Tags:

Stream Team: Wading into Environmental Education

September 12th, 2008 Leave your comment »

What is Environmental Education? According to the Campaign for Environmental Literacy , environmental education:

  • Includes learning in the field as well as the classroom
  • Incorporates the teaching methods of outdoor education, experiential education, and place-based education
  • Is inherently interdisciplinary
  • Promotes school/community partnerships
  • Is hands-on, student-centered, inquiry driven, engages higher level thinking skills, and relevant to students everyday lives
  • Develops awareness, increases knowledge, builds skills, and creates the capacity for stewardship and good citizenship regarding the environment upon which we depend for life support.
  • Helps address the causes of “nature deficit disorder”
  • Boosts student achievement in math, science, reading, writing and social studies

Our work with students on our HP Technology for Teaching Leadership Grant directly ties their learning to real-world issues and challenges as we examine human impacts on the limits of our natural resources. With just nine days of school under our belt, 280+ students are now primed and ready to assume their roles as environmental scientist and take action. What have we accomplished as a team so far as we wade into environmental education with our kids?

  • Team name: We are now known as the Klem South Stream Team.
  • Collaborative space set up: http://streamteam.wikispaces.com.
  • Making connections: So far we have 3 other schools across the country joining our work. Keep checking the wiki to see how the kids communicate their experiences with one another while extending their learning. Our first Skype call to chat with our learning partners took place today.
  • Identifying on-site stream locations: This was tricky finding safe, accessible sites with homeowners permission to allow us access throughout the year, but we did it.
  • Starting point for learning: We developed and administered pre-assessments K-5. As part of our partnership with SJFC, pre-service teachers will be conducting data analysis of both classroom and individual student performance and sharing their findings with our team so we may target instruction appropriately.
  • Generate excitement: A core group of students held an assembly for all of the classes to introduce them to the project. Not a polished performance, but with only 30 minutes of planning time & writing their scripts, they did a good job.
  • Start exploring: All classrooms have visited the MST room to explore the Why? and How? of the project. We’ve learned how to collect water quality data using handhelds and sensors as well as conduct a visual survey of the stream and surrounding area. We’ll also be examining and documenting the macroinvertebrates in our stream samples to provide important information on stream health.
  • Get outside: Trips for 14 classes are scheduled and begin next Tuesday. Let the fun begin!

After all of our initial on-site visits have been completed, the real work by students in the classroom begins. Stay tuned for more.

Teachers at Klem South Elementary care deeply about environmental issues. If you are not familiar with the importance of environmental education for our children, please visit the Campaign for Environmental Literacy for more information. They have also been leading advocacy efforts on H.R. 3036 No Child Left Inside Act of 2008 , scheduled for a vote in the House this week. Click here to have a voice and take action on environmental education issues.

Leave your comment »

Posted in Collaboration, Inquiry, Problem-based learning, Project-based learning, Science

Tags:

NECC 08 – Planning for Systemic Change – Part 2

July 18th, 2008 2 Comments »

In my previous post I outlined our plan for an environmental science year-long project with K-5 students and our initiative for attaining pedagogical changes in instruction for our team of 15 teachers. So what do we, a group of elementary teachers, do next to make our vision a reality? After our poster session on Monday in San Antonio our team of 5 met outside on a patio to escape the cold air conditioning and tackle the obstacles waiting for us in September. Here’s a summary of our collective ideas.

Team Initiative: Shift instructional practices in our school to become constructivist in nature using inquiry-based methods and increase the use of technology to facilitate learning for both teachers and students.

  • Choose a professional development on-line course offered as part of the HP grant for the entire team’s participation that is tied to constructivism and inquiry. (possibly Constructing Learning Centered Environments offered through PBS Teachers)
  • Plan short afterschool meetings to discuss PD coursework. Rotate the role of facilitator for each session.
  • Encourage team members to inquire into the topic and ask their own questions, seek answers, and share learning with the group.
  • Communicate our plan clearly with the building principal and work to tie this initiative with our annual building goals.
  • Provide individual choice for professional development offerings (webinars, books, other on-line courses) in addition to the group’s on-line course.
  • Use the MST room to model 5E lesson plan implementation for the first quarter. Starting in the second quarter team members can write their own 5E lessons and revise together.
  • Encourage peer observations of lessons using the ISTE Classroom Observation Tool.
  • Encourage and offer opportunities for co-teaching.
  • Help to build background knowledge on constructivism and inquiry with video clips, short articles, etc.
  • Open up all afterschool meetings to the entire faculty.
  • Participate in a book study on Inquire Within by Doug Llewellyn.
  • Support, model, and require the use of technology for personal learning, group collaboration and communication (Google Docs, Google Reader, Google Calendar, Wikispaces, blogs, on-line courses, etc.). Offer small group sessions this summer to help get team members set up and comfortable in these environments.
  • Request release time throughout the year for additional meetings and planning.

Environmental Science Project with Students: Students in 13 classrooms K-5 will be exploring and collecting data on the waterways in Webster as they assume the role of environmental scientists.

  • Identify essential understandings and key concepts for K-1, 2-3, and 4-5 through examination of NYS and National Science and Math standards at our July workday (paid by district) and write pre/post and formative assessment measures for each grade.
  • Use the MST room for modeling and/or co-teaching of lessons to support identified understandings as well as to familiarize and train students/teachers on the use of various technology tools to support their learning (science sensors, wiki, Tablet PC, digital camera, iPod recorders, digital binoculars, etc.).
  • Assign new team members a mentor from Year 1.
  • Identify key students from last year’s project work to become mentors to new teachers/classes.
  • Continually reassess the role and direction of the project as students develop their own scientific inquiry investigations.
  • Use Wendy’s role to connect with other classrooms (Chicago & New Brunswick so far) also participating in environmental water studies.

Our excitement that day was contagious. A woman sitting nearby came over to group and shared that she couldn’t help but listen in on our conversation. She said that our enthusiasm and collaboration during that short time was just awesome. We all couldn’t agree more and walked back into the convention center completely energized. While our plan is still in the inital stages, we’d love any feedback or new ideas to consider.

2 Comments »

Posted in Collaboration, Inquiry

Tags:

NECC 08 – Planning for Systemic Change – Part 1

July 6th, 2008 Leave your comment »

My attendance at NECC in San Antonio was made possible through the HP Technology for Teaching Leadership grant award. Last year a team of five teachers from our school were awarded the Technology for Teaching grant and because of our success with implementing our Pond Partners project we were awarded the additional funding as part of the Leadership grant for year two. We now have 15 teachers on the project with 13 k-5 classrooms participating. Saturday and Sunday at San Antonio were spent in meetings with14 other schools awarded the Leadership grant to discuss and plan for the coming year.

Debra Reed, our district’s K-12 Science Curriculum Supervisor, and I mapped our course for next year. The biggest shift in year two of the grant is moving from project-based planning to an initiative based on systemic change for our elementary building. Here’s our draft from our initial planning sessions.

Focus of Team Initiative

Goal #1: Our most important initiative is to shift instructional practices in our school to become constructivist in nature using inquiry-based methods. Both problem and project-based experiences will be the foundation for long-term student-driven investigations centered on living environment concepts. All teachers and students should be involved in real issues that require creativity and innovation, communication and collaboration, critical thinking and problem solving to generate possible solutions and share findings and learning experiences with stakeholders.

Goal #2: Our second initiative is to increase the use of technology to facilitate learning for both teachers and students. We believe that technology (goal #2) must serve pedagogy (goal #1). We believe the infusion of technology must enable teachers and students to research, create, communicate, and collaborate. This initiative will create the transformative process we are seeking in technology infusion for our teachers and students.

Initiative Objectives

As a result of our initiative, teachers will:

  • Understand constructivist theory
  • Implement inquiry-based lessons (5E) and experiences (including PBL)
  • Integrate technology into lessons
  • Involve students in real-world issues that require creativity and innovation
  • Establish their own personal learning network
  • Design pre/post and formative/summative assessments tied to NYS/National standards
  • Use data to inform instructional practices
  • Work in collaborative teams focused on student learning

What will change?

Our current state of practice reveals many teachers using traditional, teacher-centered (didactic) direct instruction, where students are passive receptors of knowledge. The change will be the systemic impact on instructional practices and student learning.

As a result of our initiative, students will:

  • Develop and implement their own scientific inquiry investigations
  • Collect, organize, display, and analyze data from investigations to make decisions and develop solutions
  • Increase content understandings related to the living environment
  • Use digital media and environments to communicate and work collaboratively
  • Create and share multi-media presentations to reflect information learned through the project
  • Exhibit a positive attitude toward using technology

What will change?

The change will be the shift towards a student-centered environment where they take the lead and responsibility for their learning and are supported and guided by classroom teachers.

As a result of our initiative, systems of technology support, leadership and administration will:

  • Facilitate and support collaborative technology-enriched learning environments conducive to innovation for improved learning.
  • Support hardware/software/networking

Plan for Measuring Impact on Teaching and Learning

Guiding Action Research Questions

  1. What is the effect of implementing inquiry-based instruction on student learning?
  2. How does technology support learning?

Multiple Measures of Data

  1. Student Learning
    1. How do the post test measures of participating classes compare to the control classes?
  2. Perceptions
    1. How do students, parents, and teachers gauge the importance/value of learning through inquiry?
    2. How do students, parents, and teachers gauge the importance/value of using technology?
  3. Demographics
    1. How is student learning affected within various demographic groups? (special ed., gender)
  4. School Processes
    1. How does the collaborative nature of this initiative support the shift in instructional practice and school/district goals?
    2. How does this initiative support collaborative technology-enriched learning environments that are conducive to innovation for improved learning?

Student Measures

  • pre/post content assessment
  • open ended task (post)
  • journals/learning logs
  • inquiry investigations
  • graphing & analysis of data collection
  • multi-media presentations
  • surveys
  • post reflections

Teacher Measures

  • survey on student learning
  • reflections
  • pre/post HP technology survey
  • pre/post Klem South pedagogy & technology use survey
  • peer classroom observations

Leadership, Technology Support, & Administration

  • survey
  • reflections
  • classroom observations

What’s important to note about this initiative is that it is TEACHER DRIVEN with administrative support. Planning for this systemic change for our school is incredibly exciting, yet brought about some personal stress and uncertainty. Last year it was a tremendous amount of work to be the Lead Teacher on the grant with just 4 other teachers and three classrooms working on the year-long project. Now that I’ll be working with 14 other teachers and 13 classrooms, how will we not only implement the environmental science year-long project with k-5 students, but also attain the pedagogical changes in instruction? In my next blog post, I’ll share what happened when our team of teachers in San Antonio met to tackle the obstacles and create a workable plan to create cohesion, excitement, and success for all teachers on the grant.

Questions and feedback on our plan are welcomed as well as other examples of systemic changes driven from the classroom.

Leave your comment »

Posted in Assessment, Collaboration, Inquiry, Instructional Design, Problem-based learning, Project-based learning, Science, Technology

Tags:

My Year – My Tags

June 15th, 2008 3 Comments »

I discovered Wordle over at Practical Theory. Since I’m just finishing my first year in this MST position and have been using Del.icio.us for just a bit longer, I thought it would be interesting to see how my tags/interests/time are graphically represented.

Looks like Science is the glue that holds all else together for me. I wonder how my Wordle might change next year…

3 Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Save the River Update

May 19th, 2008 Leave your comment »

Students involved with the creation of the Save the River video received quite a few positive comments from viewers. (Making Connections for Kids and Students Work to Save the River)

Here’s an excerpt of an email sent to me from Bud Andress, Sr. Park Warden – Special Projects PARKS CANADA.

“Every once and awhile one will come across an initiative taken on by young students with the aid of their teacher and others that simply leaves you awe struck. Such is the case with your video about early ship navigation in ice in the St. Lawrence River. Please know, and tell your class that I think they have made a fantastic video…Young people, on both the U.S. and Canadian sides of the River, like your grade 4 class, are the future of our communities here in the 1000 Islands. It is important that a healthy river ecosystem be there for them as they become adults and raise their own children. It is ever refreshing to see such an environmentally sound message delivered so well.”

Pete Grannis, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation also sent a letter to the students.

“I wanted to let you know how delighted I was to view your video production Save the River on the web. It is one of the most impressive presentations of an important issue that I can recall from my days as a legislator and now as Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation. I commend you all for both the creativity and quality of your work along with your strong commitment to protecting New York’s environment and the great St. Lawrence River.

I strongly believe your use of new, multi-media techniques and the internet places you at the forefront of environmental advocacy. When a sincere and professional piece like yours is made available on the web, your message can reach a huge audience and have a real impact. Together, your ability to harness this technology in the early years of education suggests great possibilities for future efforts to reach out to people and build awareness of environmental issues. …”

Then the letter arrived from Collister Johnson, Jr., the Administrator of the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation. While acknowledging the students’ environmental interests, Mr. Johnson is obviously not pleased with the video. He writes,

“But I am concerned, and frankly surprised, that your teachers and school would allow you to be used and exploited by an organization to advance its own political agenda. Unfortunately, your video, which follows the script supplied by Save the River, contains allegations and assertions that are simply not accurate, nor based on science. In a word, it is propaganda. You may not be familiar with that word, but I hope your teachers will use this exchange of letters as a learning experience and explain the meaning of it to you.

…If you are ever in Washington, D.C., please let me know so that my staff and I can further explain to you the important work that is supported by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation.”

So what were the students’ reactions to the letter? First, they wondered why he had to use “such big words.” Once they discovered what word propaganda meant, they became defensive about their work and the message they were trying to convey. I asked if they wanted to continue the conversation with Mr. Johnson and they wholeheartedly said yes.

Here’s what they wrote.

Administer Collister Johnson, Jr.
Policy Headquarters – St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Suite W32-300
Washington, D.C. USA 20590

Dear Mr. Johnson,

Thank you for writing us a letter and commenting on our Save the River video. We would like you to elaborate on your thoughts about the problems with our video. Since we did quite a bit of research, we are wondering what you think is not accurate. Would you be willing to videoconference with us so we may have a discussion with you? If this is not possible, would one of your staff members be able to chat with us about our environmental concerns with winter shipping on the river?

Thank you and we look forward to hearing back from you.

Sincerely,

4th Grade Students at Klem Road South Elementary School

The letter was sent out on Monday, April 21st. So far we haven’t heard back yet. Hopefully Mr. Johnson will reply before our last day of school on June 23rd. His letter was actually a great eye-opener for the students, parents, and me. The follow up discussion I had with this group of students was fantastic and truly extended upon their work. Students learned that not everyone will agree on important environmental issues, to make sure you have reputable sources of information (like the Dept. of Environmental Services), take the good with the bad, don’t be afraid to ask clarifying questions, stick with your beliefs, and persevere. Let’s hope Mr. Johnson will agree to continue the conversation with these kids.

Leave your comment »

Posted in Problem-based learning, Project-based learning, Science

Tags:

Pond Partners Reflections on Learning

April 25th, 2008 Leave your comment »

The team of teachers involved with the HP TfT Pond Partners grant recently reflected on both student and personal learning throughout the experience as we wrote our final report.

| View | Upload your own

Data Supporting Impact on Student Learning
When examining the data it is important to note that the three participating classrooms have high populations of students receiving special services. Taking this into account, the gains made through the hands-on, technology rich classroom environments are noteworthy.

2nd graders in Eva Burns’ class and a control class were given two different assessments; a ten question multiple choice test and a scientific process design task. Results reveal that students in Eva’s class scored higher on several of the multiple choice questions, in particular the questions about seasonal changes, making observations, and identifying correct units of measure.The scientific design task revealed significant differences in the depth of student responses from Eva’s class. We feel the hands-on inquiry-based focus of this project was the factor resulting in students in her class demonstrating a deeper understanding of the scientific method.

3rd graders in Martha Erbland’s class and a control class were also given two different assessments; a 15 question multiple choice test and a scientific process design task. While the results of the test did not show significant gains, responses on the scientific design task from Martha’s students showed a much deeper understanding and application of the scientific method. Martha also stated that beyond these scores she has seen a marked improvement in her students’ questioning skills, ability to make connections across subject areas, and their understanding and interpretation of data.

4th graders in Donna Hoffend’s class and a control class were given a fifteen question objective test. Results reveal no differences in student results between the classes. It is also interesting to note that 75% of current 4th graders had the opportunity to work on a similar year-long project while in 3rd grade. After lengthy discussions of the data, the team feels as though outside factors may have affected the results. Donna has students with multiple needs including students who receive weekly psychology and talk mentoring sessions. Coupled with the extreme academic needs and special education services, we were very pleased with the test results.

Impact on Instruction
One of our main objectives was to infuse technology into project lesson plans to engage learners, promote higher-order thinking skills, and provide authentic experiences. Through our individual professional development plans and our face-to-face meetings, each member was able to redesign lessons to become more constructivist in nature. Eva stated, “In the past, I gave my students all the information they needed to know. I told them what they would be learning. This year, I am able to give them the technology tools they need in order to find out what they want to know about. We used inquiry throughout the project and students were more motivated to learn because they had an invested interest in what we were learning about.”

The level of personal confidence with technology integration has soared for all participants. Donna noted, “Many of these new technological skills allowed me to create new and interactive lessons for my students.” Just looking at the pre and post data from our technology surveys reveals an incredible amount of growth in regards to the use of technology to support learning.

Another objective was to participate in a Professional Learning Community to reflect on improving student performance throughout the project. Chris reflected, “Perhaps the most important improvement to my teaching repertoire was the collaboration I had with team members. I learned how to redirect our focus based on the questions and interests of our students and the data collected from formative assessments.” This focus has afforded us opportunities to open our practice and learn from each other in ways we have never experienced before.

What’s Next?
Now we wait to see if we will be awarded a continuation and expansion of the grant for our school next year. If awarded, ten additional teachers will join and we’ll expand our focus to “Environmental Stewardship” K-5. If not, I’m sure this team of teachers will work on other problem and project-based learning experiences with their kids next year and encourage other grade level team members to join in.

While this was the most intensive project I have worked on in years, it was by far the most rewarding working as a collaborative team and seeing the kids present their findings, reflect using VoiceThread (in progress), and seek out new learning opportunities. Isabelle wrote on the Pond Partners wiki, “Fourth grade learned about potable water and how we waste it. I think we should also take into consideration how much garbage we throw out. Do you think we could all team up to try and recycle more? Are garbage dumps are getting full of things that we can recycle? Anything that has a 1 or a 2 on the bottom you can recycle. Lets all recycle!” I see a possible PBL topic for next year!

I’d love to learn more from other classroom teachers who are collecting and analyzing data to identify the impact of technology and/or PBL on learning for both students and teachers. Please share your ideas and suggestions. Thanks!

Leave your comment »

Posted in Assessment, Collaboration, Inquiry, Instructional Design, Problem-based learning, Project-based learning, Science, Technology

Tags: