Blogush

Thursday was my first day of school with students. Each class was only fifteen-twenty minutes long(yikes). I plan my activities in the first day for very specific purposes. When the kids came in the room was darkened, my string of lights around the ceiling on, and everything is day 1 quiet. I walked to the front of the room and took out my guitar case, took out the guitar and hit a couple of strings—haven’t said a word at this point. I start some simple strumming of songs chords and then stop and say—“oh I forgot, welcome to the greatest class you will ever have.” Start up the strumming again and play an original song welcoming them and giving them some insight as to what will occur in the class, and inside themselves.

When the song is over I briefly talk about how this class will be different from any other class they have ever had, and that they will struggle in the beginning—but not to be afraid. The struggles, the tears, the joys and the smiles will all be worth it. I then played a video showing them quotes from last year’s kid’s final evaluations to drive home the point to stick with me through the struggles, because great things will happen.

I then hand out their million word assignment and explain how it is one of the most important assignments of the entire year.

Then I ask them if anyone is allergic to giraffes. I explain to the baffled faces that I needed to know for tomorrow’s class.

There is a lot of “unwritten” stuff that goes on between and during each thing, especially before I start playing the song—but hard to describe in words the “body motion” sorts of stuff done to draw them in.

So what is the purpose of those activities? I want them to know that I like them. I want them to like me. I want them to be desperate to come back tomorrow. I want them to begin to wonder why I did those crazy things, and wonder what will happen tomorrow. I want them to find my room to be a safe, trusting environment in which smiles are accepted.

What was the purpose of your first day with students? If you don’t have kids and you work with adults—what is the purpose of your first contact with teachers?

I am always looking for that magical list to guide my teaching…don’t know if this is it but it does make me think that maybe Mickey’s onto something. Thanks to Dale Basler for including a link to this in his blog.

Fast Guide to Mickey’s Ten Commandments

1. Know your audience
Don’t bore people, talk down to them or lose them by assuming that they know what you know.

2. Wear your guest’s shoes
Insist that designers, staff and your board members experience your facility as visitors as often as possible.

3. Organize the flow of people and ideas
Use good story telling techniques. Tell good stories not lectures.

4. Create a ‘come to me’ (the castle, the Epcot dome)
Lead visitors from one area to another by creating visual magnets and giving visitors rewards for making the journey

5. Communicate with visual literacy
Make good use of all the non-verbal ways of communication – colour, shape, form, texture.

6. Avoid overload
Resist the temptation to tell too much, to have too many objects. Don’t force people to swallow more than they can digest, try to stimulate and provide guidance to those who want more.

7. Tell one story at a time
If you have a lot of information divide it into distinct, logical, organized stories. People can absorb and retain information more clearly if the path to the next concept is clear and logical.

8. Avoid contradiction
Clear institutional identity helps give you the competitive edge. The public needs to know who you are and what differentiates you from other institutions they may have seen.

9. For every ounce of treatment , provide a ton of fun
How do you woo people from all other temptations? Give people plenty of opportunity to enjoy themselves by emphasizing ways that let people participate in the experience and by making your environment rich and appealing to all senses.

10. Keep it up
Never underestimate the importance of cleanliness and routine maintenance. People expect to get a good show every time. They will comment more on broken and dirty stuff.

status quo ante — “the state of things as it was before.”

During the first fourteen years of my schooling I was taught the status quo. Yes I answered a lot of questions, some of which I even came up with, but I never “questioned” anything. I learned about Pilgrims, read all the books “smart” kids were suppose to read, and was told pollution was bad. During this time I cannot ever remember having to think about what I was learning. I was just expected to become part of the status quo, and I should say, becoming part of the status quo was my goal.

In my sophomore year of college I had a professor who was somewhat controversial. He said and taught things that went against the status quo. He presented ideas that I could not help think about-controversial ideas that did not just flow into my brain, but something made me stop, make conclusions, and seek out evidence before accepting or rejecting them. He made me “think” about what I was learning and being taught—I started to “question” everything and have not stopped.

An idea that is controversial always makes me think more than one that re-states the status quo. I have not seen many blog posts, plurks, tweets, or ed websites that challenge the status quo. If you read most comments they all tend to be written to tell the writer why they agree with their point.

Can we truly teach kids to question things without bringing up controversial topics into our classroom? We can’t teach kids to challenge the status quo by simply having them answer questions about generic topics and maybe even sometime “creating” their own questions that they answer. I know I have stopped bringing up ideas of mine that would be considered controversial in school. Folks hear them and minds close-I am assumed to be wrong because my ideas do not support the status quo. I think that also applies to this blog–as a small time blogger I am afraid of having someone feel “offended.”

I know that I also do not feel safe talking about controversial topics in class. Kids would love it, but parents would not see it as an opportunity for their kid to question and examine their own belief system, examine evidence from multiple points-of-views, draw a conclusion and defend it with data and facts. All it would take is one single phone call from a parent to destroy my life. I am not ready for that.

I often question my ability to get students ready for the “real world.” Now don’t start getting all teacherish on me and start saying that the real world is now, or we all live in the real world, etc… I mean that first true experience in the business world, or as an entrepreneur. How many teachers have ever had a job other than teaching? How many teachers have a second job in the “real world” that takes their mind out of academia and into finance, construction, government, sales, or running a restaurant.

I have often joked with folks that every five years teachers should have to work as something other than a teacher for a year.

Many teachers I know went to school, worked as the camp counselor, and now teach. School is not the real world. We segregate people by age, ability, stay on task for 45 minutes at a time, do work that is for the garbage can, rarely get to talk freely, etc…

Just like you can never figure out what it is like being a teacher by just being a student in a school, you don’t know what it’s like to be a doctor by being a patient, or what it’s like being chef by eating in a restaurant. How can teachers get kids ready for the real world if they are simply consumers and observers? Do you have to be apart of the “real world” in order to properly prepare someone else for it?

Be nice…Just thinkin’…

Bear with me here–a short intro before I get to my point. If you are one of the 1000s of regular readers-ok, one of the 100s of regular readers–fine, if you are the regular read of my blog you probably have realized that I am not the best writer. And I really struggled with this post because I found a lot of difficulty to put my thoughts into a cohesive point. Also I found it difficult to bring out in this post that it expresses thoughts I have been wondering about, not firm beliefs. So please don’t attack in the comments, this is just a post about something that has been bouncing around my mind…

I fell into the 2.0 world in a weird way. I wrote a kid who was using a wikispace for a project about a cool graphic she was using and she wrote back and so did her teacher. The teacher and I then somehow decided to have both classes work on the project together. After that every time I found a new tool I tried to figure out how to use it to collaborate with another classroom or audience somewhere in the world. My mindset was fixed on using the power of the web to get my students out of our classroom and having them connect with classrooms and audiences across the world–I just thought those were the rules in the 2.0 world–it’s how it was introduced to me by Ben Wilkoff. We were already a funky out-of-the-box PBL classroom way before 2.0 came along. By integrating 2.0 tools into our classroom we were able to connect and collaborate with an audience or classroom in everything we did making us slightly twist the way we approached our projects and making all of our work more authentic. We did not become more creative or collaborative within our four walls, but the magic happened when connecting with folks out of our four walls. Really, when it comes right down to it, a creative lesson plan without 2.0 tools can almost mimic any of the skills, objectives, and conceptual ideas covered in any lesson that includes one. Almost every 2.0 tool when used in the confines of the classroom with a traditional lesson plan just gives the lesson a new coat of paint. Kind of like when I bring my guitar in and use it for a lesson. I sometimes wonder if teachers are simply relying on 2.0 tools to mask lesson plans that are not conceptual, interesting, appropriately challenging, creative, problem based or collaborative. Ouch? (For the record, I include myself as possibly “one” of those teachers)

I stopped and looked around the other day and noticed that 2.0 tools, especially plurk, twitter, wikis and blogs seemed to be getting a lot of teachers together, but how about their students? Are these tools being brought into a classroom to have their kids use within their walls, or are they being used to break down their walls? What’s that saying about how it’s not about how well the teachers teach, it about how the students learn… All of these Personal Learning Networks are great. Yes they are. But maybe they are missing the point. It’s not about how well the teachers are connecting, it should be about how well the kids are connecting. It’s not about just using tools because they are the future, it’s about using them in the way they will be used in the future. In business, 2.0 tools allow people to work across great distances collaboratively and present their ideas to audiences in a creative fashion. They are not using wikis and google docs within four walls, but to break down walls. My kids interviewed Colin Devroe of the interactive video hosting site Viddler. Colin uses skype and google docs to run Viddler with colleagues in Poland, Pennsylvania, and California. We may be using the tools of the future but are they being incorporated in the classroom in a manner that they are currently being used by businesses and entrepreneurs in the 21st Century? Are we using them within our four walls, or are we using them to take down our walls?

If you would like to take down a wall or two in your classroom, please see my prior post. And remember, I was just wondering…which might just be my way of being afraid that I am going to offend someone with this post? Will I?