Would they have sound intellectually defensible coherent answers? What evidence would they bring to bear to this challenge?
Click to read full article>>>
It is a jungle out there! Jungles are treasure troves of beautiful vegetation and exotic animals. They are also habitats for poisonous snakes and a breeding ground for deadly tropical diseases. Modern technology, including the Internet, is also a jungle--a digital jungle filled with exotic and intoxicating tools, a wealth of information and gadgets as well as viruses, predators, and moral quicksand.
Technology is ubiquitous with both a light and a dark side. On the light side, hundreds of millions of people all over the globe can download and watch videos and TV shows, search the vast storehouse of human knowledge on the Internet, instantaneously communicate by email or text message with virtually anyone in the world, take pictures, listen to music, play games, and receive turn-by-turn GPS generated directions on a small, inexpensive device clipped to a belt or slipped into a pocket or purse. Oh, and it makes calls too, to anywhere in the world with no wires! The world's vast storehouse of knowledge is instantaneously and freely available 24/7 with just a few keystrokes on a keyboard. Students, teachers, and professionals can access open source customizable textbooks written by experts from around the world--free to anyone at anytime. Wireless, rugged laptops for under $200 are being used by impoverished school children in third-world countries where there is no running water, limited electricity, and no indoor plumbing.
On the dark side every conceivable form of hatred, perversion, ignorance, vulgarity, and sheer lunacy is instantly available to our children 24/7. Predators lurk in the corners of chat rooms and prowl social networks like Facebook and Myspace. Anonymous access to pornography leads to addiction, ruined lives, broken marriages and destroyed careers. Illicit affairs are fostered online and hatred and abuse are foisted upon the vulnerable and unsuspecting.
Technology is simultaneously heralded as a messiah for education, the economy, and of culture or demonized as the end of learning and the catalyst for the destruction of culture. Michael Parsons, editor of CNET.co.uk, writes the following about America's penchant for worshipping at the altar of technology:
If you get too excited about technology you end up in Silicon Valley, where pretty much everyone is either making, drinking, or selling Kool-Aid about the potential for technology to make wondrous things happen. In the Valley, there's the added excitement that technology can also make you incredibly wealthy, although the fiercely idealistic geek elite eschew any vulgar mention of money: it's all about trying to change the world, man ... It's easy to believe in America that technology will save you. It's part of the secular religion of progress and success that drives American society.
As school leaders it is our responsibility to stay abreast of technological developments and to understand their implications for our students and our schools. Our students are digital natives, (see the Digital Native research project run jointly by the Berkman Centre for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School and the Research Center for Information Law at the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland for more information) the first generation to grow up with the Internet, cell phones, and free-wheeling social sites. A recent FRONTLINE documentary, Growing Up Online, profiles the attitudes, struggles, dangers, and potential of this new medium and its impact on students and learning.
We must think deeply about the complex issues involved while maintaining a prudent and visionary appreciation for technology's potential for fostering good education or distracting from it. We must also develop well informed and thoughtful answers to essential questions about technology.
The impact of digital technology reaches far beyond social concerns. Digital technology has created a paradigm shift in world economics, the labor force, and by extension education. The world has and continues to change--rapidly and profoundly. It is hard to understate how profoundly digital technology has changed world economics and the future that our students will inherit. To put it simply, any job that can be done digitally can be outsourced to anyone in the world with the necessary knowledge and skills.
In the new information-based globalized economies of the world, brains are replacing brawn in the workplace. Neef (1998) observes: "Low-skill, blue-collar positions have been disappearing at an alarming rate…knowledge in the form of complex problem solving, technological innovation, creative exploitation of new markets, and the development of new product or service offerings is central to success in these areas" (p. 2). This systemic change in our economy and the resulting rise of the information worker is dramatically illustrated by the following chart from the Wall Street Journal showing our movement from an agrarian to an information-based economy.
According to Reich (1997) the result of this economic shift is that the economic boats of redundant and in-person service workers have sprung leaks and are sinking. Even middle level management jobs, particularly those associated with redundant production typical of hierarchical corporations operating within post-industrial and Fordist economies (Brown & Lauder, 1997, p. 175), are being displaced as routine jobs are moved to Asia and Central and South America. In his provocative essay An Era of Man-Made Brainpower Industries, Lester Thurow warns that:
With the ability to make anything anywhere in the world and sell it anywhere else in the world, business firms can ‘cherry pick’ the skilled…wherever they exist in the world. Some third world countries are now making massive investment in basic education. American firms don’t have to hire an American high school graduate if that graduate is not world-class. His or her educational defects are not their problem. Investing to give the necessary market skills to a well-educated Chinese high school graduate may well look like a much more attractive investment (less costly) than having to retrain…a poorly trained American high school graduate. (cited in Neef, 1998)
By contrast, symbolic analysts (Reich, 1997)—those who solve, identify, and broker new problems—are prospering. Possessing the knowledge and skills most needed in the information-based, technologically driven economies of the West and in parts of Asia, the symbolic analysts are able to auction acquired knowledge and skills to the highest bidder.
The ability of American firms to cherry pick the best and the brightest at the lowest possible cost has contributed a significant increase in outsourcing for talent as illustrated by the following graph from the Wall Street Journal.
Unfortunately, far too many of our students are ill prepared for global competition. in recent international comparison of mathematics literacy (U.S. Department of Education: Institute of Education Sciences (2003), U.S. performance in mathematics literacy and problem solving as measured by The Program for International Assessment (PISA)was lower than the average performance for most Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental organization of industrialized countries. The United States also performed below the OECD average on each mathematics literacy subscale representing a specific content area (space and shape, change and relationships, quantity, and uncertainty).
The PISA 2003 uses six proficiency levels (levels 1 through 6, with level 6 being the highest level of proficiency) to describe student performance in mathematics literacy and three proficiency levels (levels 1 through 3, with level 3 being the highest level of proficiency) to describe student performance in problem solving. In mathematics literacy, the United States had greater percentages of students below level 1 and at levels 1 and 2 than the OECD average percentages. The United States also had a lower percentage of students at levels 4, 5, and 6 than the OECD average percentages.
Results for each of the four mathematics content areas followed a similar pattern. In problem solving, the United States also had greater percentages of students below level 1 and at level 1 than the OECD average percentages, and a lower percentage of students at levels 2 and 3 than the OECD average percentages. The following table ranks the mathematical performance on the PISA. In mathematics literacy and problem solving in 2003, even the highest U.S. achievers (those in the top 10 percent in the United States) were outperformed on average by their OECD counterparts.
We must come to grips with the reality that even if our standardized test scores are above the national average they are likely well below international standards. In other words, we may be comparing ourselves to a low standard of achievement. As indicated above, the highest performing U.S. students were outperformed on the PISA.
To put this poor performance into perspective, consider the troubling observations by Peter Drucker, Bill Gates, and The Conference Board.
The dominance of the U.S. is already over. What is emerging is a world economy of blocs represented by NAFTA, the European Union, and ASEAN. There’s no one center in this world economy. India is becoming a powerhouse very fast. The medical school in New Delhi is now perhaps the best in the world. And the technical graduates of the Institute of Technology in Bangalore are as good as any in the world. Also, India has 150 million people for whom English is their main language. So, India is indeed becoming a knowledge center. Peter Drucker (Schlender, 2004)
When I compare our high schools to what I see when I'm traveling abroad, I am terrified for our work force of tomorrow. In math and science ... by the 12th grade, U.S. students are scoring near the bottom of all industrialized nations ... In the international competition to have the biggest and best supply of knowledge workers, America is falling behind. Bill Gates
The authors of a recent report by The Conference Board titled Are They Really Ready for Work?, Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L., (2006), ask a poignant question, "How can the United States continue to compete in a global economy if the entering workforce is made up of high school graduates who lack the skills they need, and of college graduates who are mostly “adequate” rather than “excellent”? The authors go on to observe that:
The quandary is particularly problematic because it comes just as the workforce is entering a period of realignment. As the baby-boomers retire—taking their skills and knowledge with them—America faces a shortage of available workers. This report indicates that the pool of talented workers available is even smaller. (p. 7)
If by most estimates too many of our students lack the skills they need to compete in a highly competitive, globalized economy, then what are those skills and how do we ensure that our students have them?
Contrary to the assumptions held by some and the hyperbole that often surrounds this issue, 21st Century Skills do not replace traditional skills and knowledge. On the contrary, 21st Century Skills embrace, enhance and extend both traditional content and pedagogy. In other words, the choice is not between traditional content and 21st century skills. The choice is whether or not as school leaders we are going to recognize that our students' futures depend on reshaping curriculum and instruction to match new realities and commit ourselves and school resources to producing systemic change in our schools.
The basics are still the basics. In fact, we must do a better job with the basics. As noted above, U.S. students are falling behind in academic achievement relative to industrial and industrializing countries. Too many Christian schools are complacent, assuming that because our standardized test scores are higher than the national average that we are doing a good job. Given the poor performance of so many U.S. students relative to world standards that is like suggesting that a Chevy is an excellent car because it is better than a Yugo. The Chevy may be better than a Yugo but the better standard may be a Toyota, Honda, or Nissan.
21st Century Skills place great emphasis on strengthening core skills in reading, comprehension, math, science, history, literature, composition, etc., but do so within a context that recognizes the explosion in human knowledge and the implications of new technologies and globalization for teaching and preparing our students for the 21st century workplace. The authors of 21st century skills for 21st century learners, write that:
Information and communication technologies are raising the bar on the competencies needed to succeed in the 21st century, and they are compelling us to revisit many of our assumptions and beliefs” (p. 4). The sheer magnitude of human knowledge, world globalization, and the accelerating rate of change due to technology necessitates a shift in our children’s education—from plateaus of knowing to continuous cycles of learning. Therefore, policymakers and educators alike must define 21st century skills, highlighting the relationship of those skills to conventional academic standards ... Basic literacy—the ability to read, write, listen, and speak—is more important than ever, and the definition of basic literacy has changed over time to reflect that increasing importance.
In the early 1900s, basic literacy meant the ability to write one’s name. That definition was later expanded to mean the decoding of text, and by the 1930s it had come to include reading and expressing oneself through writing (Bransford et al., 1999). The National Literacy Act of 1991 defined literacy as “an individual’s ability to read, write, and speak in English, and compute and solve problems at levels of proficiency necessary to function on the job and in society to achieve one’s goals, and develop one’s knowledge and potential” (National Literacy Act of 1991, Sec. 3). (NCREL and Metiri Group 2003, pp. 5,16, emphasis added)
The authors go on to note that:
Authors of the National Research Council’s Building a Workforce for the Information Economy suggest that workforce preparation is dependent on the ability of schools to promote students’ cognitive abilities, such as logical thinking, problem solving, analysis, careful observation, and data management. The authors contend that “these abilities are highly valued in the workplace” and vital to successful performance (Committee on Workforce Needs in Information Technology, 2001, p. 225). ((NCREL and Metiri Group 2003, p. 9)
Although there are various on the theme of 21st century skills, the following diagram provides a useful reference point.
According to the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory and the Metiri Group, the "following skill clusters, when considered within the context of rigorous academic standards, are intended to provide the public, business and industry, and educators with a common understanding of—and language for discussing—what is needed by students, citizens, and workers in the Digital Age." (p. 12, emphasis added)
Each of the skills listed above, including basic skills, are fleshed out in the full report, which I strongly encourage you to download and read. I am also sharing over 200 technology related research papers and reports that I have collected. Click here to access the files. My only request is that if you share the content from these files with others, in whatever form, or quote from them, that you attribute access to the information to this blog and refer your readers or audience to this blog for reference (http://christianschooljournal.blogspot.com/).
It is a jungle out there. Are your teachers prepared? Are your students prepared? Are you prepared? The task of a leader is to peer over the horizon to assess the impact of current realities for the organization and to anticipate new realities, new challenges and new opportunities. Our students, staff and parents are immersed in a digitally rich, information-based, globalized world. We cannot continue to educate 21st century students with a 20th century model. We must refine, enhance, extend and adapt our curriculum, our instructional methods and our tools to the new realities. Anything less is malpractice.
References
Brown, P., & Lauder, H. (1997). Education, globalization, and economic development. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown & A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: culture, economy, society. NY: Oxford University Press.
Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. Workforce.
Neef, D. (Ed.). (1998). The knowledge economy. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory and the Metiri Group. (2003). enGauge 21st century skills for 21st century learners: NCREL and METIRI Group.
Parsons, M. (2007, August 31, 2007). Worshiping at the altar of technology. Retrieved January 19, 2008, 2008, from http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/personal_tech/article2364133.ece
Reich, R. (1997). Why the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown & A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: culture, economy, society. NY: Oxford University Press.
U.S. Department of Education: Institute of Education Sciences (2003) International outcomes of learning in mathematics literacy and problem solving: PISA 2003 results from the U.S. perspective, Highlights. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2005003
Click to read full article>>>
Lord willing, over the next several weeks I will be posting a series of articles titled Beyond the Hype and PR, Technology that Works and Inspires. The title is intentional. Too much of our technology is peripheral to the curriculum rather than being integrated as a natural and ubiquitous tool of instruction and learning. More often than not, we have purchased technology (primarily computers) for marketing reasons (parents expect it); not because we have made a research-based assessment of its pedagogical potential nor thought deeply about the theological implications for technology (at least not beyond the problem of pornography).
I intend to write a series rather than a long article because shorter articles are easier to read on a computer, can be updated frequently, and are easier to share with others. The tentative plan is to write short articles on the following topics (I may decide to add sub-topics as well):
You may find the following video thought provoking. What will school be like if textbooks can be completely customized on the fly by experts from all over the world?
See example Chemistry text: http://www.college-cram.com/study/chemistry/presentations/509
Connexions Site: http://cnx.org/
Technorati Tags: Technology Integration,Technology
Click to read full article>>>Reposted to Correct Formatting Problems
Here is the hard and sad truth: over the last several decades Christian schools have invested tens of thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars on staff
training programs and conferences but with little sustained impact. Despite all of the research, despite recent advances in neuroscience, notwithstanding the wide-spread availability of increasingly affordable and effective technologies, and despite our grandiose pronouncements, our classrooms are virtually indistinguishable from classrooms from the 1920's or 1950's. Only the furniture has changed.
We may have made changes at the margins, but systemic change is hard to find. There are teachers, scattered here and there, who exemplify the best in teaching. And there are a few schools that break the mold and provide paradigms for others to emulate. Sadly, most of these schools are not Christian--they are public or secular private schools. By in large, most Christian schools have hearts of gold while stuck in an industrial model of teaching that has little in common with a rich biblical understanding of the learner or the effective and consistent application of current research and technology.
A harsh indictment I know. It is nevertheless motivated by a deep love for Christian education and an insatiable desire to see our schools standing as beacons of excellence, schools characterized by creative nurturing environments, rigorous learning, thoughtful and informed dialog, problem-based learning, integrated technologies, and authentic assessment.
Why—despite our best intentions and the investment of substantial time and money—do our schools remain largely unchanged? There are many reasons. One of the most important is the relatively ineffective way we design and implement staff development programs. Most of our training programs go something like this; we have a week of training in which we discuss biblical integration or some other topic du jour. Most of the training is delivered like most teachers teach—didactic presentations, perhaps supplemented by PowerPoint slides. There is nominal interaction and virtually no immediate, real-time practice or application of the concepts covered. There is seldom follow-up or accountability. With the exception of yet another discussion of biblical integration (more on this later) topics and emphasis changes from year-to-year. Teachers sit through the presentations but little changes. School begins; teachers return to their classrooms close their doors and teach just like they always have. We return to our offices to deal with day to day exigencies. Within a month in-service is forgotten. Then, sometime in the spring, we plan for next year's in-service and the cycle begins again, just like the movie Groundhog Day.
Through this process, teachers learn that "this too shall pass." Teachers often view in-service as something to endure or a time to catch up on relationships. For most, it is not an occasion for deep reflection; it is seldom stimulating, and seldom leads to change in the classroom or systemic change in our schools. Each year we pick our in-service topic, throw it against the wall and hope it will stick. It usually doesn't.
I am not cynical but my observations arise from 20 years of attending conferences, conducting in-service training programs, and consulting with other schools. Too many of our teachers reflect the sentiments expressed in the following video:
Good teachers are to education what education is to all other professions—the indispensable element, the sunlight and oxygen, the foundation on which everything else is built. They are central to assuring excellence and rigor in the educational experience of every young person in America (Milken, 2000, p. 3).
Our schools are only as good as our teachers. Accordingly, our top priority is to hire, train, and retain the finest Christian teachers in the country. Hiring the right people from the outset is essential. Over the years I have discovered that despite my best efforts, marginal teachers with marginal gifts will only make marginal improvement. Motivated by Christian charity and patience, I have expended enormous energy and devoted countless hours striving to transform mediocre teachers into, if not great, at least effective teachers. With the satisfying exceptions when I have discovered diamonds in the rough, I have failed. Frogs do not become princes no matter how often and passionately we kiss them!
Although we cannot turn frogs into princes, we can transform teachers with the gift of teaching—the right stuff—into remarkably effective teachers. A few can be transformed into master teachers. This situation is analogous to a good coach. A coach can only do so much with athletes lacking raw talent. However, a good coach can take athletes with natural talent and transform them into MVP's and championship teams. That is our task. For the sake of God's glory, the advancement of His kingdom, and for our students, we can do no less.
Presuming we have made good hires, designing effective training programs is the key to enhancing the effectiveness of our teachers and for creating dynamic world-class schools. There as several components to an effective training program: 1) Designing training for the adult learner, 2) Defining measurable organizational and pedagogical expectations and goals, 3) Accountability, 4) Practicing what we teach, and 5) Establishing multi-year training programs.
Adults learn differently than students. Their motivations are also different. The following table highlights the differences between student and adult learners. For more information on adult learners, click here.
Source: Honolulu Community College. (2007, February 8, 2007). Faculty Development: Teaching Tips. Retrieved December 22, 2007, from http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/teachtip.htm
It is particularly important to understand that as adult learners, teachers expect the learning to be immediately useful. Too often our training is theoretical and conceptual rather than immediately applicable.
Although it is essential that teachers have a thorough knowledge of theory, concepts, and research they will not change their teaching unless the application of the learning is demonstrated. We should not assume that teachers will connect the dots—we need to connect the dots between theory and practice for them.
This is the problem with much of our biblical integration training. It is lofty, mission oriented, theological, philosophical and conceptual but is seldom practical or actionable (See more on this below under Practicing What we Teach).
For example, I often ask prospective teachers to give me a specific example of biblical integration in mathematics with two caveats: they may not make reference to a statement like "numbers are orderly because God is a God of order," nor may they make reference to the animals going into the Ark two-by-two or anything similar. With rare exception teachers struggle to provide concrete, specific, theologically coherent examples. They cannot get beyond generalizations to meaningful and applicable integration.
Likewise, I have asked prospective teachers to give me a specific example of biblical integration in history but with the following caveats: they may not make reference to American history and they must go beyond a statement of God's sovereignty. Once again they are often stumped. If they cannot make reference to the Christian influence on American history or to God's sovereignty they have little idea how to integrate biblical truth in history.
I have gone through this exercise with literally hundreds of teachers with the same results. With few exceptions, most Christian teachers do not know how to provide concrete, practical, sophisticated, and actionable integration within academic subjects. Yet, training in biblical integration and the development of a biblical worldview has received more attention and time in staff development than any other single concept. By in large, the same can be said of other topics covered in our staff training programs. Teachers go through the process but little changes for the vast majority of our teachers. How is it that we are so ineffective?
I believe it is because we are not teaching the way adults need to learn, we often do not provide actionable examples, we do not have specific measures of success, and we do not hold teachers accountable for the training. We also do not take time to reflect upon the process most adults follow in deciding whether or not to embrace change. The following table provides a useful summary of the process of change acceptance that most adults go through. Click on image for larger view.
Note also that adults tend to move from no response to seeking alternatives for maximizing the changes. The above responses typically correspond to the change process outlined below, which moves from "I am not concerned about it" (This too shall pass) to "I have ideas that will work even better." Click on image for larger view.
The central question is: "How do we get our teachers to move from "I am not concerned about it" to "I have ideas that will work even better?" I make no pretense of having all of the answers but I offer the following for consideration and dialogue.
Early in my corporate career I was taught an invaluable lesson from my boss; I was NEVER EVER TO ASSUME ANYTHING! His language was colorful and he made an ineffaceable impression on me. I do not recall the reason for his instruction (obviously I assumed something that I should not have) but I did learn an invaluable lesson, making assumptions will get one into trouble or at minimum reduce one’s effectiveness. I believe we make the same mistake by assuming that teachers understand our specific expectations of them and goals for our schools. We may be right but we should not assume this to be the case.
It is critical that we clearly state our expectations and that we match our training programs with those expectations. In other words, our training and expectations must be integrated and this integration must be deliberate, not hap hazard. If our training is to move us closer to realizing our goals, our goals must be clearly defined.
What are our goals for our schools? I am not referring to our mission statements or our philosophy of education. Nor am I referring to our strategic goals per se. In this context I am referring to specific expectations for our classrooms and our schools. A statement of clear classroom expectations might look something like the following:
Classroom instruction will be dynamic with high levels of student-to-student and student-to-teacher interaction, quality questioning, Socratic dialogue, use of integrated technology, teaching strategies informed by neuroscience, and thoughtful, specific, and sophisticated biblical integration and at least two authentic assessments per quarter.
To ensure that our teachers understand clearly what is expected them I recently issued a memo outlining specific expectations. This memo was distributed to all teachers, is posted on the school's SharePoint server, and was discussed with all teachers and principals during faculty meetings. Central to our expectations is the goal of creating vibrant, engaging, creative, rigorous classrooms where students are not passive recipients of information but are engaged in the learning process.
Clear expectations also provide a framework for the design of our professional development programs. In other words, once we define the goals for instruction, training is designed to advance those goals. Training has a sustained and coherent focus. The table below illustrates how specific expectations can be matched to focused and coherent training.
Upon the wise recommendation of Mr. David Balik, our Dean of Faculty and Academic Affairs, we modified the evaluation instrument to match our expectations. The evaluation instrument includes a number of specific expectations tied directly to prior staff training, e.g., use of technology, questioning techniques, etc. This heightens faculty attentiveness and response to training by making it clear that "This shall NOT pass." We expect that the concepts and skills covered during staff training WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE CLASSROOM. Failure to do so is not acceptable.
In other words, we are not offering ideas for consideration during in-service, we are providing training. To make this point clearer, consider an example in another profession, the medical field. Can you imagine a physician attending a training conference on the latest techniques in surgery and then ignoring them on the operating table? Can you imagine your physician going to a professional conference with the attitude that “this too shall pass?” Of course not; true professionals take training to enhance their practice--not to go through the motions. Similarly, can you imagine your tax accountant going to a seminar on changes in the tax code and then choosing to ignore them when preparing your tax return? Doing so would be malpractice and would result in fines, revocation of a license, and possible imprisonment. You could multiply the example indefinitely for pilots, attorneys, engineers, etc.
Why then do we permit professional teachers to ignore their professional training and fail to apply it in their classrooms? Are not the souls and minds of students more precious than the physical well being of a patient or the size of our tax refund?
I have had some wonderful professors in my graduate programs in educational leadership. I learned an immense amount from them and I am grateful and indebted to them for their scholarship and instruction.
Unfortunately, I must admit that more often than not, my professors taught in a manner inconsistent with the learning theories, concepts, and principles they so passionately promoted. By-in-large my learning consisted of reading, taking legal pads full of lecture notes, writing papers, and taking tests—pretty traditional practice and perfectly valid—to a point. Sadly, I can count on one hand the number of professors of education whose instruction incorporated Socratic dialogue, problem-based learning, concept attainment, authentic assessments, technology integration, cooperative learning, or a host of other techniques that research clearly demonstrates are highly effective.
I have been guilty of the same inconsistency. Too often my in-service instruction consisted of lectures supplemented by PowerPoint slides. There is a place for this style of instruction and it can be effective. Unfortunately, it is difficult to convince teachers to change the way they teach unless we model it for them. We are not credible if we lecture about Socratic dialog but do not ask probing questions, if we lecture and never engage teachers in problem-based learning during in-service, and never provide them an authentic assessment of their own learning.
We must practice what we teach. You will soon find, as I have, that this requires more thought, more time, and is harder than giving a lecture. If nothing else, it makes one more empathetic to the challenges facing our teachers!
I can, however, give two examples of practicing what we teach--not perfectly, but in good faith and with good results. One involves biblical integration and the other technology.
Teachers who have been employed in Christian schools for any length of time have been exposed to biblical integration and the goal of helping students develop a biblical worldview ad nauseam. A harsh indictment I know but frankly our experienced teachers are beginning to yawn (quietly) at another lesson, in-service program, workshop, or keynote speech on biblical integration. They get it and are committed to it, but, as illustrated above under Design Training for the Adult Learner, most do not know how to integrate and many do not know that they do not know.
In an effort to address what I see as a significant problem in our schools—teachers who are unable to provide systemic, concrete, specific integration within each discipline—we redesigned our training program using several different approaches. We also provided helpful resources and tools.
First, biblical integration was defined in very specific terms for the faculty. They were given examples of what integration is and is not. For example, it is not icing on a cake—Bible verses applied here or there, it is not devotions before class, it is not prayer before class, it is not chapel services, and it is not simplistic, overly generalized theological concepts superficially overlaid onto an academic concept, skill, or fact. Integration is like yeast; it permeates, it infuses the curriculum content that so that it is inextricable from lesson content.
Second, most teachers have not been well prepared theologically for integration. Without solid theological grounding integration is not possible. Unfortunately, the theological knowledge of most of our teachers is limited to what they have learned from sermons, Sunday School, and through personal devotions. I find that even Christian college graduates are poorly trained for integration.
To address this deficiency, Briarwood Christian School created a Worldview Bibliography. This bibliography was taken from a bibliography available from a Christian college and significantly expanded for our faculty. We purchased most of the books listed on this bibliography and systemically assigned readings from the bibliography prior to in-service and prior to the completion of Biblical Integration Concept worksheets or BICs. Please feel free to download this Worldview Bibliography for your use. Any suggested additions would be greatly appreciated.
Third, Biblical Integration Concept Worksheets or BIC's were created. BICs are simple templates designed to help teachers work through an integrating concept for a particular lesson. This is not a perfect instrument but it does provide a tool to guide teachers in thinking through a lesson and deciding what theological truth(s) are applicable. Two completed BICs provide a good example of how teachers use them: one for math and one in science.
Forth, we provided team practice. During in-service training teachers were shown how to complete the BICs. After this introduction they were divided into discipline specific teams to spend several hours actually completing BICs as a group. During these practice sessions I visited the different groups to answer questions and to offer suggestions. Just as I suspected, most teachers had trouble thinking of specific integration concepts.
It was during one of these break-out sessions, Algebra to be specific, that I had a revelation. Standing at the back of the room, I witnessed a group of godly Christian professionals struggling to integrate theology and algebra. What I suddenly realized was that they were confusing moralizing with integration. Despite previous training, ACSI and CSI conventions, workshops, readings, keynote speeches, etc., they still conceived of integration as trying to teach a moral lesson or a character trait through the academic discipline! In this example our algebra teachers were trying to teach students to be good through algebra!
Fifth, this revelation led to more training and a different approach. In addition to reviewing the BICs, I found photos of a flower, a humming bird, and the Sombrero Galaxy. Important scientific facts were listed with each photo. Then, rather than lecturing, I broke the entire staff into new teams and ask them to complete the following exercises over several hours.
One: Taking the facts presented and studying the images of the flower, the Sombrero Galaxy, and the humming bird, what does this information teach you about what God values, how God thinks, the nature of His work, His perspective on/approach to function, beauty, and His purposes? This is exegeting natural revelation.
Two: as image bearers, if we are to imitate God, what are the implications of the answers you provided above for the way we think, work, and live? Give specific examples for each occupation listed in the table below. The table is significantly truncated due to space limitations on the blog.Sixth, in addition to integrating expectations, training, and evaluation, teachers were required to submit four BICs per quarter. The principals and I reviewed the BICs and provided feedback to the teachers. This added a level of follow through and accountability to ensure that the training affected classroom practice while also providing additional practice.
Technology IntegrationRecently BCS implemented several new technologies including SMART Boards, Video-Conferencing, SharePoint, Edline, and a Rapid Notification System, to name a few. Without getting into the details of the technology, one example of integrating a school expectation/goal with training will be helpful for illustrating how goals should drive training and subsequent accountability.
There were several goals for the purchase of SMART boards for every upper school classroom. SMART boards were to provide an effective means for integrating technology into instruction and to provide teachers with real-world exposure to using technology.Additionally, we mounted the SMART boards in the center of existing white boards. We did so in order to place them front and center in classrooms making it easier and more natural for teachers to default to the SMART board rather than seeing it as an auxiliary technology or tool. This strategic placement of the SMART boards essentially forced the issue—teachers would have to work hard at deliberately not using this new technology.
Just as importantly, for the first year teachers were required to submit SMART board lessons to the principals and to me for review. This ensured that every teacher was learning to use and integrate the new technology. It could not be ignored. Moreover, I developed and presented all of my in-service training programs on a SMART board to ensure that I was practicing what I teach.Designing a multi-year plan is simple. It may look something like the following:
Second only to making good hires, training is the critical element to ensuring that we provide our students a Christian education of world-class quality—one that prepares them to “take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.”
This article merely scratches the surface of creating effective staff development programs. Please share your insights and best practices.
Technorati Tags: Training,Staff Development,Professionalism,Change,Adult Learning,Organizational Change,Systemic,Biblical Integration,Worldview,Instruction,Evaluation,Accountability
Reference: Milken, L. (2000). A matter of quality: A strategy for assuring the high caliber of America's teachers. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Family Foundation. p. 3
(Copyright © 2008 Barrett L. Mosbacker, Ed.D. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced or distributed without the expressed written permission of the author.)
Click to read full article>>>“Discipling students, in community, for mission.” At Seven Rivers Christian School, this has become the distilled version of our vision and mission statements and as such has pressed leadership to examine our efforts at impacting students’ hearts as well as their minds.
We believe that even if we did nothing overtly “spiritual” and focused only providing a traditionally based liberal arts education, we would still disciple students. In fact, that has been at the very core of leadership’s efforts in strengthening the program of SRCS. We have focused our resources toward curriculum development, teacher training, advancement in the arts, and improving athletics.
Our aim at students’ hearts, however, has been less thoughtful. We have used the traditional weekly chapel, added a junior/senior retreat, and a conference or a special event. Several teachers have found themselves mentoring students, albeit informally.
For a while, we have been wondering if we can do better.
It is true that teachers are the frontline of discipleship, and that is why we have invested heavily in professional development, particularly worldview training. But our theology and view of the kingdom began pressing in on the chapel model, as did our understanding of the priority of worship in a school, and the relationship with Seven Rivers Presbyterian Church.
After a season of discussion, our leadership team has settled on the following:
As a result we have suspended weekly chapel in favor of the following model:
Our desire is to improve our discipleship program as much as the rest of our school programs have improved and we will use the second semester to implement these ideas.
Response:
Response?
ScienceDaily (Dec. 7, 2007) — Parents prefer teachers who make their children happy even more than those who emphasize academic achievement, a new University of Michigan study shows.
This post is taken from Science Daily. I believe you will find this article intriguing.
When requesting a teacher for their elementary school children, parents are more likely to choose teachers who receive high student satisfaction ratings than teachers with strong achievement ratings, said Brian Jacob, the study's co-author and director of the Center on Local, State and Urban Policy at the U-M Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy.
These findings, however, mask striking differences across schools. Families in higher poverty schools strongly value student achievement and appear indifferent to the principal's report of a teacher's ability to promote student satisfaction. The results are reversed for families in wealthier schools.
"The value of this study is that it helps education practitioners and policymakers better understand how factors such as family poverty can influence what parents are looking for in a school," Jacob said. "While all parents presumably want what is best for their children, this can mean very different things depending on the school and neighborhood context."
Lars Lefgren, an economist at Brigham Young University, co-authored the study.
The study is the first known review of its kind to examine parents' preferences using information on parent requests for specific teachers within a school. The sample included more than 300 kindergarten through sixth grade teachers in a mid-sized school district in western United States. This district did not have a formal procedure for parent requests, but parents could submit requests to principals before class assignments were made.
Within a school, there were no differences between more and less advantaged parents who requested a teacher in terms of the value the parents placed on student satisfaction versus student achievement.
The findings were consistent with a model in which high- and low-income parents have similar preferences for student outcomes, but face constraints that are correlated with school demographics. Academic resources are typically more limited in higher-poverty schools—for example, such schools generally have more disruptive peers, lower academic expectations, fewer financial resources and less experience teachers. Parents in these schools may seek teachers skilled at improving achievement even if it means sacrificing student satisfaction, the researchers said. In higher-income schools, where academic resources are more abundant, a teacher's focus on academic achievement may be less valuable than his or her ability to help students enjoy school and learning.
The study also found that parents of low-income, minority and low-achieving children are less likely to make requests for specific teachers than other parents.
"Programs that increase the focus on basic skills or classroom management at the expense of student enjoyment or other academic outputs not measured on standardized tests are more likely to be unpopular in higher-income schools," said Jacob, who is the Walter H. Annenberg Professor of Education Policy and Professor of Economics at the Ford School.
The findings appear in the new issue of the Quarterly Journal of Economics.
Adapted from materials provided by University of Michigan.
Response:
Source: University of Michigan (2007, December 7). Parents Want Teachers Who Make Children Happy. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 30, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2007/12/071206163305.htm#
Click to read full article>>>I have started using a new and free service called Tripit. So far I am very impressed. What is nice about the service is that both my administrative assistant and my wife have access to my complete itinerary including any changes that are made. TripIt is a personal travel assistant that automatically organizes all your travel plans. TripIt is free and makes it easy to...
Check it out!
Did you realize that you can affordably outsource those tasks you do not like or do not have time for to someone on the other side of the world? That's right, more and more "regular" Americans are now outsourcing everything from mundane tasks to major projects to personal assistants in the Philippines, India, and other countries.
You can outsource scheduling your next trip, updating your resume, getting tickets, compiling research, preparing a presentation, renting a car, planning a wedding, answering your phone, updating your contact list, etc. Before you write this off as preposterous, take a minute to view this video. This Wall Street Journal article is also very informative. Take special note of the test that the WSJ 
Here is a sample of how this works:
Here is list of a few outsourcing resources:
I may try one of these services for a few selected tasks, those that my assistant doesn't have time or the expertise to accomplish. Outsourcing well-designed PowerPoint presentation in which I provide the basic content but the "virtual" assistant handles all of the design work would be an example.
Response:
Does your work and home life sometimes seem out of control? Too much input, too many expectations, decisions, meetings, post-it notes, too much stuff? Not enough time? Too much stress? Do you ever feel like you are constantly putting out fires, dealing with the urgent but not necessarily the most important?
You are not alone. All of us have felt the pressure of today's rapid pace and information overload.
I have been on a relentless quest to find the habits and tools for reducing stress, getting more done, and having time for quality horizon oriented thinking. I am still on the quest but I have recently made significant strides.
I have a clean desk, a current and managed email inbox, an uncluttered office, and a clean computer desktop. I share this not as self promotion, but as encouragement. It is possible to get a lot done, to be organized, and to have significantly reduced levels of stress.
I have always been somewhat organized but I have often found it difficult to stay on top of hundreds of pieces of information, emails, projects, papers, books, articles, phone calls, etc. However, four things converged recently to significantly improve my productivity: Attending a Getting Things Done (GTD) conference, release of Office/Outlook 2007, discovering Jott, and the purchase of Mindmanager. GTD is the key to staying organized, getting things done and reducing stress but is too involved (albeit easy to understand and implement) to explain here. The GTD video promo will introduce you to the basic thinking behind GTD. I encourage you to visit the GTD web site to learn more. I also highly recommend David Allen's book Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity.
Here are some tools and tips that you can use to maximize your time and your talents.
Outlook, for me, is the best tool for managing emails, projects, tasks, delegated assignments, phone calls, and appointments.
Following the GTD model, I have created categories (GTD "contexts") and lists for all to-do items and projects. For example, I have projects, agendas for each direct report, waiting for items (tasks delegated to others that I am waiting for (more on using Outlook to assign/delegate later), calls to make, tasks that are done on the computer, in the office, etc.
I have setup an Outlook Project for major projects (a project is defined in GTD as anything requiring two or more actions to complete). Each project is tagged with a Red category (easy to spot and emphasizes importance). I have created a corresponding Red file for each project for holding paper. I use notebooks for large projects.
One of the very useful things about using Outlook's Tasks feature for projects is that you can embed copies of emails and documents in the notes field of each project so that everything related to a project is in one place.
Additionally, an email can be made into a task (for yourself or to delegate to others) simply by dragging it to the Tasks Icon. Click here for for a demonstration (note: this is a large file so it may take a few minutes to load). Delegating a task is easy to do and easy to track. Once the task has been created, select Assign Task, select the name of the person you are delegating a task to, write any pertinent message, insert document if desired, select Category (e.g., @Agenda Administrative Assistant, or @Agenda HS Principal and/or @Waiting For). Click Send. The recipient receives the delegated task and can provide updates, including "completed." When completed is selected, Outlook automatically marks it complete in your Outlook task list.
Another great feature of Outlook 2007 is that tasks that have due dates show up at the bottom of your Calendar view on the day they are due! This is a very effective and simple way to keep up with important due dates for your tasks or those you have delegated to others. What's more, if you select Outlook's Weekly View, you can scan the week for what is due from others and send them a friendly reminder.
I have captured quality time by scheduling meeting preparation time and meeting wrap-up time on my calendar. This time is scheduled for every meeting. Meetings are not scheduled back-to-back in order to allow time for preparation and wrap-up. The exception is out of office meetings, which may be scheduled back-to-back without intervening wrap-up time. However, wrap-up time is scheduled at the end of a series of such meetings.
I use wrap-up time to go over my meeting notes and create tasks for myself or to delegate to others, consolidate notes, create projects in Outlook and create corresponding folders. The result is that at the end of each meeting or series of meetings I am able to capture and consolidate all of the Next Actions and put them in my "system."
I also pre-schedule short project times several times per week on my calendar. One of the most important project times is Friday morning. I use this extended time (3 hours) to focus on major complex projects and initiatives, e.g., compensation revisions, staff reorganization, staff development plans, curriculum revisions, etc. This time is not interrupted unless there is an emergency. I also use this time to conduct my GTD weekly review. The weekly review is particularly important. David Allen in his book Getting Things Done, writes:
If you’re like me and most people, no matter how good your intentions may be, you’re going to have the world come at you faster than you can keep up. Many of us seem to have it in our natures consistently to entangle ourselves in more than we have the ability to handle. We book ourselves in back to back meetings all day, go to after-hours events and generate ideas and commitments we need to deal with, and get embroiled in engagements and projects that have the potential to spin our creative intelligence into cosmic orbits.
The whirlwind of of activity is precisely what makes the Weekly Review so valuable. It builds in some capturing, reevaluation, and reprocessing time to keep you in balance. There is simply no way to do this necessary regrouping while you’re trying to get everyday work done (pp. 184–185)
I have my administrative assistant type all of my messages into Outlook's Notes feature. This has several advantages: 1) All of my messages are in the same place and in the same format, 2) They are archived by date, 3) They can be searched, 4 ) I can note my response to each message, and 5) I can print them so I can make calls from the car. Click on image for larger view.
Jott is cool and amazingly efficient! It is also free! Basically, you call Jott and leave yourself or others messages that show up in the appropriate email inbox and/or as a text message. This video will give you a good idea of how Jott works. Try it for two weeks. I am convinced that you will wonder how you got along without it!
I am not a good note taker. However, after reading Getting Things Done and attending a GTD workshop, I learned to be more deliberate about noting Next Actions (the next physical thing that must be done to move a project forward) when taking notes. I have developed a practice of writing "@call Mr. Jones; @Write summary memo to principals; @Send email to...." During my meeting wrap-up time I go through these Next Actions and enter them as Tasks into Outlook. The result is that I seldom have things fall through the cracks.
Share your best productivity tips!
Click to read full article>>>Glassbooth is a very interesting site that has great potential in history, government, economics, ethics/Bible, and social studies classes. Here is a very exciting way to use this site in your school:
How did class research and discussion change the aggregate results for the class? What did students learn that they did not know before? How would they compare/contrast:
Take the quiz yourself. Also note the "Explore Candidates" feature, which I find very helpful.
Response:
Search this Blog
All articles on this site are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
