THE INSTITUTE for Learning Centered Education NEWSLETTER

TOPIC:  REFLECTIVE STRATEGIES That WORK

Newsletter Edition #38__________Date:  September 11, 2000

Carol Amberg of Gouverneur has designed effective strategies for addressing and teaching multiple intelligences with her students. I will share these strategies in this newsletter. I also want to share how I learned of the work Carol is doing with multiple intelligences.

Within the past week, I have received e-mails from four teachers who spent a week, in early August, at our summer conference, developing their plans for creating learner centered classrooms. Each of these teachers was exuberant about the work they are doing through our "Targeted Instructional Staff Development" grant Initiative.

Carol's e-mail was typical of the four in terms of the positive tone:

"Who says learner-centered strategies don't work in senior high schools?"  After only 3 days of school, my seniors have written in journals, have an awareness of the 8 intelligences, have worked with partners, read each other's work, used graphic organizers, and written two pieces which will be candidates for their eventual portfolios."

"WOW," I reacted, as I read Carol's overview of her first three days.
I'm still searching to find my own areas of expertise, but I know that "multiple intelligences" is not among them. So I immediately e-mailed Carol a request to describe how she had created an awareness of the multiple intelligences and how she integrated it into her teaching strategies. Here is her detailed response:
 

"On the first day of class, I introduce communication theory and ask the students to brainstorm diverse ways we send messages (body language, sign language, writing, talking, dance, scent, songs, etc.). I have a "wheel graphic" of the multiple intelligences, labeled in "shorthand": Word Smart, Math Smart, Body Smart, People Smart, Self Smart, Music Smart, Picture Smart, Nature Smart posted on the bulletin board. I introduce multiple intelligences using that and we talk about how people with each kind of "smarts" send and receive messages.

Then I ask them to come up with jobs in which each intelligence would be an asset (i.e. architects=spatial intelligence, athletes=bodily-kinesthetic, etc.)  We carry that over into our discussions of characters we meet in poems we analyze together, each of the first three days, and authors we discuss (i.e.Thoreau must have had nature intelligence to live at and write about Walden Pond.)

This is carried over into our first novel, "Siddhartha" (as background for our later India exchange,) where we conclude that someone who practices meditation develops intrapersonal intelligence, someone who becomes an ascetic scorns bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, etc.  In other words, I try to weave it into everything we do to reinforce the learning.  The same thing goes for how we receive messages through our senses, so poets and writers appeal to them through imagery.

I find that starting with theory and then recognizing concrete examples as we go helps them apply the theory as well as remember the examples.  The process culminates in the students designing projects near the end of the semester where they choose one self-identified preferred/strong intelligence and one weaker one and use both in demonstrating their understanding of a communication concept."

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

A correspondence from a staff developer I respect and admire, set me to thinking about what I will share in a moment.  Here is the concern expressed by this staff developer, in an e-mail:

"I happened upon something that Dr. Schlecty had said - that we in education really do not have the luxury of time.  We need to make changes NOW, in order to have our kids get the kind of education they will need to become global competitors.  This is so close to what I have heard Bill Daggett say. Why do I feel we are standing still?

My response:

You feel we are "standing still" because change takes time and is gradual. Watching for change is like watching your child grow. Sometimes you need the perspective of an Aunt who hasn't seen your child in two years who can instantly cite the growth (emotionally, intellectually, and physically). The field of education is not standing still. If you could go back in time, twenty  years, and visit a typical classroom, I expect you'd see major differences between then and now. While we have dinosaurs in some of our classrooms today, isn't the average classroom of today much more inter-active? The term "rubric" was foreign to almost every professional educator in 1995 when we began our summer constructivist conferences. Aren¹t many parents and students more conversant with rubrics, today, than teachers were six years ago?

I recall a story Pat Flynn told of visiting a model small group learning program in a tiny section of Germany, at least a decade ago. This model took 100 students and five teachers through a five year process of staying together and working in teams (grades 5 - 10). Almost everyone Pat met spoke highly of the evidences of success.

Pat asked the principal "Since this appears to be working so well, why is it limited to this small area - why isn't it spreading throughout Germany?"

The principal smiled and responded, "The trouble with you Americans is that you are impatient. Change takes time, about a generation, I guess."

I am not suggesting we should sit back, relax, and trust that educational change will be accomplished. God Bless those of you who are not accepting the status quo. However, the work (overload) of every good teacher, administrator, and staff developer is so substantial that those of us who cannot learn to measure our success in increments, are doomed to burn out and, at some point, take our talents out of the arena of educational change. Nothing is as sad to me as a talented professional educator or parent who drops out in frustration over what is not happening, rather than continue with pride because of what is happening.

I¹d like to conclude with some quotes.

Mark Twain: "It's better to shoot for the moon and wind up on the fence post, then shoot for the fence post and wind up on the ground."

John F. Kennedy: "I hope that I am an idealist with no illusions."

As my correspondent indicated, it is frightful to feel that we are "standing still" in our efforts to change education. The needs of our children for change in our educational process are so enormous and so diverse that we must shoot for the moon in setting our targets for change. However, we must be capable of seeing and celebrating our successes along the way at the same time we continue to confront the obstacles. If we only focus on how far we have to go on this endless journey to improve education, we are doomed to join the idealists "WITH ILLUSIONS" and if we lose too many of our idealists, we will be standing still.

Hang in there and have faith. As we say at the annual constructivist conferences: "Trust the Process."

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Following up last week's newsletter, I¹d like to refer to a correspondence from an award winning teacher, whom I also respect and admire. This teacher is concerned that neither the standardized assessments nor the administrators in his district are supporting the kinds of changes toward performance learning, and critical thinking, that the State seems to be asking teachers to address.

My reaction is that this teacher, along with many others, is a victim of being ahead of the times. The standardized assessments are changing, but not rapidly enough. While assessments, each year, assess performance and critical thinking to a greater degree than in the past, few assessments require student demonstration of higher level thinking skills to the degree implied by the written standards published by the State of New York.

I look at this teacher and say "WOW, this person is way ahead of most of us in devising performance based activities and teaching critical thinking skills."

However, this outstanding teacher, obviously, is more focused on how the slowness of the change process (and attitudes of others) keeps him from moving more quickly toward the design of the "ideal" classroom.

About a year ago, our esteemed colleague, Steve Rudolph of the Jiva Institute, India, indicated that it is part of the culture in India to value the journey over arrival at the destination.

As I reflect on Steve's observation of Indian culture, it occurs to me that those of us leading (or joining) the effort at educational change need to be able to appreciate what we are accomplishing on the journey, not continue to frustrate over how far we are from our destination.

Harry Chapin said the same thing in his story-song entitled "Greyhound":

"It's got to be the goin,
Not the gettin there that's good;
That¹s a thought for keepin
If I could;

It's got to be the goin
Not the gettin there that's good!"

Every time you see evidence of progress, through your efforts, however little the progress, savor the moment.

Hang in there, take pride in what you are accomplishing, and have faith in the long term value of our short term efforts.

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

ATTENTION STAFF DEVELOPERS AND SED

You are not, in my opinion, going to significantly raise standards and have  teaching staffs that are able to address the new state standards until teachers have the opportunity to learn teaching strategies that, for many teachers, are relatively new.

The good news is that teachers are starved for specific strategies, will utilize them if given the opportunity and support, and are reinforced by the results.

The bad news is that the proliferation of training that is occurring does not always focus on practical ways for teachers to implement teaching strategies that engage students, enable them to take responsibility for their own learning, and create opportunities for students to teach other students that which we want them to know.

Three years ago, at a workshop for 84 teachers in the Buffalo area, I asked, at the start of the two day session "How many of you have ever used a jigsaw or carousel in the classroom?" Three people had used a carousel and eight had seen a jigsaw.

I then proceeded to put the participants through a jigsaw, asked the eight teachers who had previously used jigsaws to explain how they had used different course contents to jigsaw students, and then reviewed the jigsaw we had just used and discussed how to apply it in the classroom.

The next day, a science teacher began our ice breaker saying "What's new is that after learning the jigsaw last night I tried it in my classroom today for the first time. What's nice is that I saw more learning occur in ten minutes of a jig saw then I had ever seen in any ten minute span of my teaching for the last 20 years."

Now it's three years later and I asked 30 teachers at workshops last night and the night before "How many of you have ever used a jigsaw?"

Five indicted they had.

We then took 45 minutes to jigsaw the 12 constructivist strategies from chapter 11 of  "A Case for Constructivist Classrooms." During the jigsaw, the teachers became deeply engrossed in dialogue about teaching strategies. In other words, they became engrossed in the content of the jigsaw (chapter 11), and they enjoyed the jigsaw process.

After the activity was completed we processed it out. I asked each of the five teachers who were familiar with the jigsaw to explain how they used it in their classes.

A social studies teacher explained how he divided his class into groups to learn about religions - each group studied a different religion for a week before they jigsawed and taught each other. A science teacher shared how she teaches systems by breaking them into parts and having a different group learn each part and then share. An English teacher discussed how she divides chapters of a book (or chapters from different books) and may ask students to address character development in  the chapter for which they are responsible.

The point was made that jigsaws can be used for kindergarten children or college students, and in any discipline.

We tied our discussion of jigsaws into the learning cone which indicates we learn most that which we teach others. The jigsaw and carousel are strategies for doing this.

Teachers do not have time to waste and professional development has a bad reputation with most teachers because too much of it is wasted time.
Teachers do want practical strategies they can use in the classroom.

I am tempted to say "I don¹t understand why we don¹t do more of this - help teachers hone practical strategies to improve student learning."

But I do know why.  We don't trust teachers. We don't trust people. We think we have to tell them everything they need to know. We even lecture to them about the fact that lectures don't work.

If a teacher buys into a concept (or teaching strategy), and is given time and resources (and patience) to develop their understanding and ability to apply, the teacher will continue the journey toward classroom implementation.

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Newsletter Edition #43__________Date: October 9, 2000

CAN YOU HELP????

If you can provide information on any of the following, it would be
greatly appreciated. In each case, I will forward your response to the
person who made the request:

WANTED:

1. Someone to lead curriculum mapping for approximately 15 people on November 9 and 10.

2. Research indicating the impact of block scheduling (particularly semestering, but also other kinds of block scheduling) on student achievement.

3. Ideas for community builders - for a teacher who has been using base pairs.

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

I believe that school districts, the State, staff developers and others who want to bring about education reform must focus on three avenues that are all too often inadequately addressed:

1. Long range, "detailed" planning

2. Teaching Strategies

3. Modeling

Let's look at these separately - very briefly - and then I will zero in on each in a separate article over the next month or two.

LONG-RANGE "DETAILED" PLANNING

A good long range plan requires:

1. Clear statements of measurable long-range (two to ten years) goals.

2. Clear statements of measurable short term (six to 12 months) objectives which will move toward the long range goals.

3. Clearly defined strategies (with specificity) for achieving the measurable short term objectives.

4. A process for assessing progress toward the objectives and revising either the objectives or the strategies if the objectives are not being achieved.

5. A communications process for developing ownership and understanding of the long range plan among as many stakeholders as possible.
How many districts do you know of that have a long range plan that meets these criteria? In districts that have a long range plan, what percentage of the staff and parents even know of its existence, much less utilize it?

2. TEACHING STRATEGIES

We will not raise standards, improve educational opportunities, and close the achievement gap until teachers are given sufficient opportunity to master strategies for authentic, interactive learning - learning in which the student learns to take responsibility for his/her own learning. It is easy to say we want students to take responsibility for their own learning. However, it takes the average person many years to master the strategies for teaching in this manner.

Are we doing everything possible to support those teachers who are working hard to become facilitators of student learning?

3. MODELING

Modeling is critical, not just because we won't pay attention to someone who doesn't model what he/she asks us to do. Modeling is critical because the strategies required to teach students to be responsible for their own learning are so difficult to master that teachers will only gain proficiency with these strategies when they are immersed in an environment that utilizes them.

We have to stop lecturing on the need to engage students in interactive, authentic learning. And this modeling has to start in Albany and be implemented at every level. When educators are called to Albany for a conference on education, are the strategies employed to convey information the strategies we want teachers to be using in the classroom?

My learning style is to observe a method and then I can implement it. If you lecture me on the need to use cooperative strategies I am learning to use a lecture; I am not learning to use cooperative strategies. Similarly, if you can¹t find a way to put me in a group and have me learn to teach in cooperative groupings, then what makes you think I will be capable of conveying information to my students through group work?

More to come!

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

If long-range planning, teaching strategies, and modeling are the keys to closing the achievement gap and achieving higher standards, then let's look at each more closely over the next few months. "Teaching strategies" are my passion, and I shall devote successive newsletters to this topic beginning shortly, but for today, let¹s focus on long-range planning:
 

LONG RANGE "DETAILED" PLANNING

In a moment I will use Stanford University's long range plan for sports supremacy as an exemplar of an effective long range plan. First, some words of introduction.

Just as I have yet to see a completely "aligned" curriculum, I do not know of a district that has:

1. a "detailed" long range plan which it follows, assesses at least annually, and adheres to for more than a year or two. Usually when the individual who induces the district to design a long range plan departs the district, the plan departs with him/her. This indicates that insufficient steps were taken to institutionalize the planning process.

2. a long range plan that has truly been designed with the active involvement, ownership, and follow-through of more than a handful of people.

Long-range (strategic) plans abound - they are in greater supply in school systems than ball point pens. However, good - effective - long range plans are non existent.

Why?

Because those school district plans which do exist almost always lack "measurable" objectives, and usually lack sufficient specificity in defining strategies for achieving their objectives.

On September 19, 2000, USA Today ran an article describing how Stanford University has become the number one sports power in the country. Stanford started with a vision statement, in 1991. Athletic Director Ted Leland told his staff he wanted Stanford University to become "the most dominant athletic program in the history of college athletics."

The Stanford vision statement is analogous to a school district vision statement: "We will educate all students."

Then there were the Goal Statements:

Goal #1: "We will be the winningest and most comprehensive sports program in the history of college athletics."

This is analogous to a school district goal statement: "We will provide opportunities and an environment in which all children can learn."

But here's where the Stanford long range plan differed from most school district plans - here¹s where it provided "specificity." The Stanford plan provided a list of "Tangible Objectives" for each goal that was articulated.

Under Goal 1 were the following "Tangible Objectives":

a. Rank all varsity teams in the top 20 nationally.

b. Win 25 National/NCAA championship titles over four years.

c. Win championships in five sports that haven¹t won before.

d. Go to the Rose Bowl or go to the Bowl Alliance.

e. Achieve a 50% ratio in female sports participation and financial aid.

f. add $1.7 million for incremental funding (above inflation) for new and existing sports.
 

There it is: measurable "Tangible Objectives."

For each "tangible" objective, Stanford then designed specific, "measurable" strategies for achieving it. If you look carefully at the Tangible Objectives (a-f), they are long range,  each would require several years to achieve. Therefore, benchmarks had to be established - if the goal is to get to the Rose Bowl within five years, what is the objective by the end of one year? Perhaps, it is to have a winning record in football.

At the end of each year, the entire sports department reviewed the plan and checked off how many "Tangible Objectives" had been achieved. If an objective had not been achieved, discussion ensued as to whether the objective had been unrealistic, or the strategies for achieving it had been insufficient in which case they would have to be revised.

Do any of you know of a school district which has a long range plan which articulates "Tangible Objectives," defines specific strategies for achieving them, and has a review process (at least annually) for assessing results and modifying the plan?

Is there a BOCES or Teacher Center that has such a process? How about the State Education Department - does it use such a process for its own planning?

In a district that claims to have a long range plan, can you or I walk up to any teacher and expect that teacher to be able to produce a copy of the long range plan and a brief sentence demonstrating some familiarity with the plan?

I doubt it.

In a district or BOCES that claims to have a long range plan, can you or I walk up to an active parent - one who is interested and involved - and expect that parent to demonstrate familiarity with the long range plan?

Once again, I doubt it.

My point is that most long range plans are known only to those few committee members who designed them, and these people rarely pay attention to their plans after they have spent hours writing them.

The concept of data driven long range planning is so important (witness Stanford University¹s success) that it requires an even higher priority than the State is giving the CDEP process.

Unless there are "Tangible Objectives," and "Tangible Strategies" for achieving the objectives, and unless ownership and understanding are developed among a district¹s stakeholders, our schools will be far less successful than they could be.

The author welcome 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) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.