Would you ask someone to walk through a doorway if the door were closed?

Of course not. You would have to open the door before you could ask someone to walk through the doorway.

Expecting students to understand (or pay attention to) a lecture, without first doing something to open their minds to the information about to be imparted is like asking someone to walk through a doorway when the door is closed.

This is why, in my previous newsletter, I stated:

“NEVER begin a lesson with the teacher speaking and the students listening (passively) except to take a minute to assign a task, put students in groups, or otherwise prepare them for their own interaction with each other.”

I suggested that an easy way to open the door to students’ minds is to pair students and challenge them with a question that will focus them on the concept or topic you are about to address. For example, a math teacher might ask: “What is the correlation among the legs of the triangle on the piece of paper I just distributed?”

As adults, do we automatically pay attention to anything anyone says at any time? Doesn’t something have to happen to motivate us to listen, attentively, when someone begins a lecture? Why do we expect more of a child than we know is true of ourselves?

It is a safe assumption that most students, when they enter a classroom, are not opening their minds to whatever the teacher is about to say. They may receive information from the teacher, but this does not mean they are ready to think about the information they are receiving.

Challenging students to THINK, then PAIR, then SHARE is an effective way to get students to think about what you are about to discuss with them.

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

At the Institute’s summer conference, a $50 restaurant certificate was awarded to the person who provided the best definition of constructivism, in 100 words or less.

The judges were split because of the number of excellent entries. Gayla LePage of Brushton-Moira is the recipient of the award, but all of the following were judged to be worth inclusion in this column.

Participants were asked to complete this sentence:

A student knows that he/she has a constructivist teacher when . . .

1. a teacher can provide evidence of learning experiences; you have fun when you’re learning; the teacher encourages the students to teach to learn and to learn to teach; the teacher encourages understanding for application for life; the teacher provides an environment where students can come up with their own definitions of constructivist learning and can apply them with other students; the teacher uses many strategies or multi-sensory strategies to encourage all learners to reach their potential.
Rhonda Speshock, Crown Point

2. a teacher makes the effort to provide learning experiences which inspire student work (and inspire students to work) as they learn.
Elaine Rice, staff developer

3. the student no longer feels a student/teacher relationship, but just that of active learner.
Christine Wood, Peru

4. her learning has intrinsically motivated her to continue her exploration beyond the classroom, and she has the skills to do so, as well as access to the resources she will need.
Frank Pickus, Gloversville

5. he/she has: helped the student teach fellow students; has helped the student explore how he/she learns best; has helped the student learn to evaluate his/her own work; has helped the student learn to work with classmates and teacher to develop a plan of learning; has enabled the student to feel confident about the ability to learn; has engendered a feeling of being an integral part of a community of learners.
Silke Huntington, Crown Point

6. the student is an active participant in designing his/her education; the teacher takes the role of facilitator; a rubric is designed and utilized by the students; learner centered strategies are incorporated in student-led classes; a student’s ideas are accepted without criticism; a student finds that he or she is reflecting on a daily basis both inwardly and outwardly with peers and teacher/facilitators.
Charles Harrington, Crown Point

7. you can hear the students say:
o When the bell rings at the end of class, I don’t want to stop working on my project.
o My teacher left the room, and I never noticed his absence.
o I can use the things that I already know to help solve the problem.” I feel proud of the work I do.
o I am not shy anymore when I have to work with my classmates.
o I can’t wait until tomorrow’s class.

Bob Dolan, Ausable Valley

8. they explore and discover interests that are related to curriculum. Students become the catalyst for learning while teachers become their guides.
Jennifer Daniels, Ausable Valley

9. students are actively involved in authentic tasks exploring and discovering knowledge for themselves with the teacher working the room interacting with students as a facilitator and coach.
Gayla LePage, Brushton-Moira

10. she’s down the hall teaming with another teacher; the sub forgot to come; and no one noticed.
Carol Amberg

11. the classroom reminds you of a “structured circus;” watching TV and playing computer games just don’t seem as much fun any more; a student can actually answer the question, “What did you learn today?”
Kevin Hulbert
Champlain Valley Educational Services

12. learning just seems to happen; learning flows almost effortlessly; learning works.
Rita Jackson, Massena

13. the student realizes that he/she is a constructivist student. As teacher, I “construct” the bridges to the pearls of knowledge that are found in the classroom; I not only allow students to create bridges for me to cross, but through my interactions with them, I allow the construction of “new pearls of knowledge” that await me on the other side.

An exciting aspect about being a constructivist teacher is that we know what bridges that we must construct for our students, but we do not know what bridges they will construct for us. What bridges will we cross tomorrow?
Adam Staab, Copenhagen

Carol Kissam and Elaine Rice submitted diagrams which will run in this space as soon as the writer obtains help with the appropriate technology. We thank everyone who submitted an entry and gave us all worthwhile definitions to contribute to our own construction of the definition of constructivism.

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Random Thought #1

President Bush has declared two wars:

o A war on terrorism.

o A war to educate all children (“No Child Left Behind”).

I don’t question the necessity of fighting either of these wars. Both are necessary. However, I do question why one of these wars is funded to the point that there is no ceiling on expenditures (when money is needed, it is appropriated without regard to the impact on the budget deficit), yet the money needed to avoid leaving any child behind is cut back because of the declining economy and the increased amount of funding needed for the other war.

Random Thought #2

A headline in today’s paper indicates that the American people are smarter than their elected leaders: “AMERICANS WANT BUSH TO KEY IN ECONOMY.”

The first paragraph of the article states:

“A majority of Americans say the nation’s economy is in its worst shape in nearly a decade and that President Bush and congressional leaders are spending too much time talking about Iraq, while neglecting problems at home,” according to the latest New York Times/CBS news poll.”

Random Thought #3

The length and depth of the market slide has not yet been reflected in the economy. The stock market is a predictor of the economy. Check your history: when have you seen such a prolonged and strong market movement, in either direction, that wasn’t followed by an economy moving in the same direction?

What this country needs is for Democrats and Republicans to accept the fact that there will be a serious recession or depression. This is inevitable. The economy is like a long train. Once it picks up speed, in any direction, it cannot easily be switched to a different track. The sooner our government accepts the fact that no government policies can prevent a major economic dislocation, the sooner it can focus on policies to alleviate the hardships on those who will suffer the most.

• Admittedly, Franklin Roosevelt could more easily recognize the depths of the economic problems in the 1930s, and act effectively to ameliorate the situation because he inherited the economic problems and didn’t have to risk being blamed. The longer George Bush, and his advisers, remain optimistic, the harder it will be for them to escape blame when it becomes apparent to everyone that the economy is in dire straits.

I AM NOT saying that Bush and the Republicans deserve any more blame for the current economic slump than the Democrats. The kind of economy we have does not evolve from two years of government policies. I am saying that a serious economic slide (the worst since the 1930s), is underway, is irreversible, and the sooner government accepts that fact the sooner it can adapt its policies accordingly.

Currently, government policies are focused on turning the economy around. Except for an extension of some unemployment benefits, little is being done to support the people most affected by the economic slide. This is tragic. We need government spending that will put people to work and, simultaneously, accomplish necessary tasks (such as building roads, enhancing social programs, retraining competent people for teaching, nursing, and other fields that are understaffed). At a time of a shrinking economy, necessary government services are cut back. What a propitious time to create work in areas where the private sector and state and local governments are cutting back.

Random Thought #4

There is a good chance there will be a climactic market tumble over the next week or two. Most market plunges occur in October following a September slide. If this occurs, we will probably have a strong market rally through the winter (from much lower levels that will be hit within the next one to three weeks). Whether the lows hit this October will be a market bottom, or whether the market will resume its slide in the spring (as happened in 1930) remains to be seen. Keep in mind:

o The market crash of October 29, 1929 brought the market approximately 30 percent below its historic highs of the 1920s. Already the NASDAQ is 80 percent below its historic highs of the 1990s and the Dow Jones Averages are 33 percent lower than their historic highs of the 1990s.

o The market had a major rally between October 29, 1929 and the spring of 1930. Then it resumed its slide, ultimately going almost 90 percent below its historic high of the 1920s.

I am suggesting that we will hit a low in the Dow Jones Averages, for the time being, within the next week or two, but whether the climate for investing will be healthy after that will depend on what happens following a winter rally.

Random Thought #5

We must all exert whatever influence we have to see that, during the current economic slump, the field of education is not left behind. Our country’s future depends on our ability, and willingness, to put education ahead of everything else, not leave it behind. The war to educate every child must be fought with the same resolve (and financing) as every other war.

Random Thought #6

The question is often raised, “Why do we need to spend more money on education when so much money is already wasted?”

I am often the first one to agree that money is not always well spent in the field of education. However, this does not mean we can conclude that no additional money needs to be spent. We see frequent examples of money wasted by the military. Do we conclude that we can win the war on terrorism without increasing our military budget?

The solution in education, as in the military, is to increase our priority on determining where and how to spend money wisely, not in deciding not to increase our spending.

At this time in our history, we need courageous leaders to step forth and fight for the priority education needs if our country is to emerge from the current economic crisis the better for it.

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

· Do you require journals of your students? If so, have you ever written a journal entry? Think about the value of writing your own journal entry and distributing it, if not on every occasion when you require an entry of your students, at least occasionally. My university students are required to write an entry after every class. Usually, I write five or six during a semester.

· Here is my most recent. Please note that this also offers an excellent way to communicate with students, in a less threatening way. And it provides an exemplar that can improve the quality of the students’ entries. Remember, we gain an understanding of teacher expectations from a combination of three strategies:
1. a rubric
2. dialogue about the rubric
3. an exemplar

I am pleased with the progress of this class. Most students seem to be giving thought to their comments in class, I am impressed with the value systems, and caring, of most students and the grasp of concepts in the course curriculum is high.

All of the groups seem to be working well together. Usually there are one or two where some members are not being fair to the others – either making it difficult to schedule meetings after class, or not adequately keeping the communications flowing. So far, this doesn’t appear to be happening in this class. I’ve only had one student indicate, in a journal entry, that another group member has been “difficult.”

The quality of the first “issue” papers (all of which I have graded) was very good. I was pleased that most students did an excellent job of defining their terms – such as ”mainstreaming,” or “zero tolerance policy,” before articulating their arguments for and against.

The quality of the group presentations has been high. I am particularly impressed that that the “peer assessments” reflect thought, more so than in previous classes. It is apparent from the ratings and from some of the comments. Attendance has been very high and I appreciate this because this course, more than most, is dependent upon the continuity that evolves when there are a limited number of absences. The few people who have had absences have, for the most part, submitted their “makeup” assignments within the required two weeks, and this impresses me.

Do the students really understand the meaning of “constructivism?” Do they assume it’s as simple as equating “constructivism” with interaction? Can they distinguish between a teacher who, occasionally, uses a constructivist strategy and a teacher who facilitates a constructivist lesson? It is my challenge over the next few weeks to probe and learn how well students can define this term?

I will be assessing very closely over the next couple of weeks to see what concepts are being understood, and what needs work.

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Two seemingly conflicting questions arise when we discuss Multiple Intelligences:

1. Shouldn’t students be required to work in areas of their weakest intelligences so that they improve in these areas since, in the real world, they will be required, at times, to utilize all nine of the Intelligences identified by Howard Gardner?

With regard to question 1:

Whether students should be required to work in areas of their weakest Intelligences or should be given options that allow them to select tasks where they can focus on their strongest Intelligences depends on the teacher’s purpose:

a. Yes, it is true we should all be required to do a certain amount of work in areas where we are weakest in order to develop minimum proficiencies. That is why I was required to take Art and Music even though I could not write my name legibly nor carry a tune. If the teacher’s learning objective relates to interpersonal skills, knowledge of music, writing, or reading, etc., then you cannot allow the student to avoid using the Intelligences required to master the learning objective.

b. However, the teacher must distinguish between the learning objective and the methods the student will use to demonstrate mastery of the learning objective. If a teacher’s purpose is to assess whether students understand the causes of the civil war, or whether they have grasped the concept of fractions, what difference should it make whether the student demonstrates proficiency through composition of a song, use of a graphic organizer, rendering of a verbal report, or creation of a game?

In short, if the learning objective is proficiency with writing an essay, then I must require an essay; however, if the learning objective relates to understanding the motives of Hamlet, why limit students to demonstrating that proficiency only through an essay?

Yesterday, I asked twenty St. Lawrence University undergraduate students the following question: “If you were to be asked to demonstrate your understanding of a complex term, would you prefer to do so:

· with pictures and charts

· with a one page essay

· with a three-minute verbal explanation

· by writing your own words to a popular tune

Five students indicated “pictures and charts,” six students would select “an essay,” five would opt for the verbal explanation, and four would choose to express themselves musically. Does it make sense that I, as the teacher, arbitrarily select only one of these options and require every student to demonstrate proficiency through a mode that favors a few?

Yet, in a traditional classroom we would not offer options. Every student would be required to use the same method to demonstrate their understanding of a complex term – probably an essay. Is it not obvious that the higher grades would probably go to the students with the strongest linguistic intelligence? Yet, if our purpose is to assess understanding of a complex term, we will get a more valid assessment by allowing students to take different approaches.

It is precisely because traditional classrooms rely primarily on assessments that favor students with strong linguistic and/or mathematical-logical intelligence, while the real world allows us much more flexibility in demonstrating our abilities, that study after study indicates little correlation between success in school and success in the real world (whether measured by happiness, social status, achievement, or financial accumulation).

With regard to the second question I posed (above): Johnny is uncomfortable working in groups so why should we force him to do so?

If Johnny is uncomfortable writing, do we waive all writing assignments for him? If Johnny is uncomfortable reading, do we waive all reading assignments? If Johnny doesn’t like to study rock formations, do we allow him to skip that part of Earth Science?

Research of the business world indicates that 80 percent of the jobs that will employ students when they graduate require a substantial amount of group work. The ability to work effectively in groups is as critical to success in the real world as the ability to read or write. Why is it all right to mandate minimum standards for reading and writing, yet not require students to engage in a minimum amount of group work? The argument that because students are uncomfortable engaging in group work they should be allowed to avoid it is ridiculous!

OK, Mesibov, on the one hand you are saying that certain skills, concepts, and knowledge should be required, yet, on the other hand, you are advocating students be able to focus on their strong Intelligences, at times, and avoid working in areas that require proficiency with their weakest Intelligences. How do you reconcile these thoughts?

It’s simple: when our learning objective requires students to focus on a particular Intelligence, it should be required. Students should be required to do a certain amount of work to hone each of their Intelligences. However, we should provide options so that students can choose to work in areas of their strongest Intelligences when they have to choose a method to demonstrate their mastery of a learning objective.

I AM NOT suggesting that people need to work in areas of their strongest Intelligences all the time. I AM saying that we should be able to utilize our strongest Intelligences at least some of the time. In a traditional classroom environment, some students can go through an entire school year without a single opportunity to utilize their strongest Intelligences. A veteran teacher told me recently, “I went through 17 years of formal education and never said a word in class. It’s not that I never had anything to say, but I am not extroverted and there were few opportunities for me to share without feeling I was in a spotlight that made me uncomfortable. She made this observation at the end of an all day workshop, with much small group work and large group sharing. She observed that she had spoken more during this workshop than in her entire scholastic career.

Think about the student with strong musical or artistic ability, or excellent inter-personal, but poor writing ability. I am not suggesting that this student needs to be given the opportunity for artistic, musical, or verbal expression for entire class periods, or every day. Sometimes, five minutes in which we can shine (when an activity focuses on Intelligences where we are strong) will encourage us to pay attention and maintain our effort for long periods of time when the emphasis is on Intelligences and abilities that are not our strengths.

I am suggesting two ways that teachers adjust their strategies to create opportunities for every student, at least occasionally, to use his/her strongest Intelligences:

1. Create – at least occasionally - some activities that require strength in artistic, musical, verbal, or intrapersonal Intelligences.

2. Allow students different ways of demonstrating understandings and competencies. (If your goal, as an English teacher, is that students demonstrate an understanding of plot, character, setting, and theme, then why not let each student select a book he/she prefers (subject to your approval) rather than require a specific book as the vehicle? On the other hand, if the learning objective is to understand Shakespeare’s development of character, obviously you cannot allow students to use a play by a different author.)

I am indebted to Mike Smith of Niagara University for highlighting this web site on Multiple Intelligences:
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/month1/

This is an excellent web site – it breaks down Multiple Intelligences in a practical way that can be related to the classroom:

Among the questions it addresses:

What is the theory of multiple intelligences (M.I.)?

How does this theory differ from the traditional definition of intelligence?

What do multiple intelligences have to do with my classroom?

How has M.I. theory developed since it was introduced in 1983?

Who are the critics of this theory and what do they say?

What are some benefits of using the multiple intelligences approach in my school?

How can applying M.I. theory help students learn better?

How can I find out more about M.I. theory?

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

An observation from one of my St. Lawrence University students, and an NPR story about the late pianist Glenn Gould set my thought processes in motion about the need for a teacher to “grab” a student’s attention at the start of a lesson.

Three of my SLU students were telling me about their visit to a sixth grade class where they led students through a 40 minute discussion of how to prepare for college. High school principal Ron Hockmuth of Alexandria Bay, says that students teach the way they have been taught by teachers they admire. Therefore, I am flattered that these students began the sixth grade class with an exploratory activity, similar to the way we start each of our college classes.

“We put the sixth graders in a circle and asked them to share their names and create symbols that represented them,” said one of the SLU students telling me about their experience. “I could see the teacher eyeing us nervously,” she continued, “and, I admit, the kids could have gone wild with this activity, but they didn’t. Everyone behaved, some of the kids were quite creative, but within appropriate bounds, and the activity worked beautifully, to the amazement of the teacher.”

I share this experience of my SLU students and the sixth grade teacher who was skeptical of their opening activity because often when I relate an activity that worked with students, teachers will tell me that the same activity wouldn’t work at their grade level, or in their discipline. However, I find that most activities which break the ice, challenge students to think, give students options, and/or make students more responsible for their own learning will work at any grade level and in any discipline, allowing for modifications based on age and developmental differences of the students. The story of my SLU students and the sixth graders is an example of an activity that many teachers would not dare to try with their students because, they would explain, “My age group (or discipline) is different.”

The recent NPR interview was focused on pianist Glenn Gould. The narrator indicated that Gould was intrigued with counterpoint and that his favorite composer was Bach.

The narrator claimed that when Gould played Bach, the audience knew in an instant that it was hearing a different rendition. In an interview recorded in the 1960s, Gould proclaims that if you are not going to do something at least a little differently than it’s been done before, there is no point doing it.

This prompted the narrator to ask whether Gould had a purpose in being different or whether he simply wanted to be different to draw attention to himself. His reply: “I want to grab the audience’s attention at the beginning. I want people to know this is going to be a little different than they’ve heard from anyone else. I want them to know they need to pay attention.”

This caused me to reflect on how teachers begin a lesson. Pat Flynn, Mike Smith, Paul Vermette, and I have written extensively on the need for a good exploratory activity at the start of a lesson. Recently, I devoted two articles to the importance of beginning a lesson with group interaction, not lecture, if only for the first five minutes.

Gould’s point – “I want people to know this is going to be different,” brings home the importance of the role of the exploratory activity in breaking the ice and in motivating the student to take an interest in what is about to be discovered (learned). In fact, it is more important for a teacher to create an exciting beginning for a lesson than it may have been for a Glenn Gould to grab the attention of his audience at a concert.

Glenn Gould earned a worldwide reputation and his audience was (for the most part) in attendance wanting to hear the sounds he would produce. How many students are in class because they are excited about the teacher’s reputation and they want to hear what the teacher is about to say?

My point is that teachers need to create a need/desire for the student to pay attention BEFORE proceeding with the lesson. Otherwise the teacher may have the satisfaction of knowing he/she taught the lesson, but not that students have learned it.

Would you disagree with the statement that “Most students come to class expecting to be bored and anticipating that every class will be like the ones they have experienced since they first were old enough to sit through a lecture?” If this is true, we must do something at the start of class to shake students out of their rut. Glenn Gould wanted the audience to know, at the start, “You are about to hear something a little different than anything you have heard before.”

As a teacher, I want my students to know they are about to experience a teaching style a little different than anything they have experienced before. I want them wondering (in a positive way) what will come next. While I want my students to know my course expectations, I also want them to have a healthy uncertainty about how we will achieve our objectives. I want them to be confident they can master the learning objectives (and that I will provide sufficient coaching), but I want them to feel that unless they pay attention they may miss something they need (and want) to hear, observe, manipulate, and/or elect as an option.

Glenn Gould did not choose to be different for the purpose of being different. He was wise enough to know that when we think we know exactly what is going to happen, we become complacent. When we are complacent, we do not challenge ourselves to think and we do not feel the need to fine-tune our senses.

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Recently, I reprinted definitions of “constructivism” submitted as contest entries at our summer conference. I indicated that two of the entries couldn’t be reproduced until someone with more technological literacy than I was able to come to my rescue and record the diagrammed definitions on the computer.

I am grateful to Brin Tucker of MONY in Syracuse for reproducing the definitions of “constructivism” that you see below.

These entries were submitted by Elaine Rice and Carol Kissam, two of the most talented staff developers (and teachers) that anyone will encounter. As you review their definitions, I urge you to think about the format they chose for their submissions and reflect on the multiple intelligences at work as they drafted their definitions. Ask yourself this question:

If Elaine and Carol had been students in a traditional classroom, would they have had the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of a term using the graphic format each chose – or, would they have been required to respond to a question about “constructivism” with a brief essay?

An essay question favors someone with strong linguistic intelligence. Yet, can anyone doubt that Carol and Elaine have met a satisfactory standard for understanding and articulating the meaning of the word “constructivism”? Would they have had this opportunity in a traditional classroom setting? Do you allow your students options for demonstrating their mastery of your learning objectives?

SEE DEFINITIONS BELOW:

Additional definitions of Constructivism…

The author welcomes comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2002, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.