The cerebrum -- which is just Latin for "brain" -- is the newest (evolutionarily) and largest part of the brain as a whole. It is here that things like perception, imagination, thought, judgment, and decision occur. I hope you are thoughtful as you leave your comments on this blog.
Thursday, May 03, 2012
Chapter 9: Continuous Improvement Through Practice and Sharing
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
Through my experiences i have realized that the students have more fun and are more interested in the subject when they are able to work in groups. As far as their learning and retaining the material, i would say its probably the same as if i was lecturing. There are a lot of ways to have the students working together and learning from each other. One thing that i like to do is have the students go to the board to explain a problem, and if they say that they don't know how to do the problem, then i tell them that they can call on their classmates for help. I have also made videos for my students to watch for homework, this allowed me to have them get right to work when class started and no lecturing was needed. The students actually really liked doing this and started asking me to do more, so i have been trying to find ways that it is appropriate. Because i don't think it fits well to do that on an everyday basis. I feel an important part about partnering is to ask the students for feedback. I feel often teachers hide what they are trying to do from their students. I try to be as open as possible with what i am attempting and how can i become better at it or be more effective.
I think there are many productive ways to teaching. Getting the students involved is the most successful way. When students are just being lectured day after day, they are bored and unfocused. Using technology and putting students in groups with their peers allows them to teach one another and do work the way that benefits them the most. Letting students use the smartboard is a great way to keep them involved because the enjoy the tool, they will want to participate in class. I think keeping the classroom exciting and making the students feel safe is key to letting them come out of their comfort zone and succeeding. Understanding your students on a individual basis is key to helping each one succeed.
Obviously the best way of teaching is partnering. Allowing the students to be the teachers and allowing them to create their classroom. The teacher is there as a guide and coach. I work in a kindergarten class and from my experience it is a little hard to incorporate partnering with a five year old. At this age they are very dependent on adults for many things. However, while I work with the children I do pose questions to them to have them explore options on their own. For example, they are beginning to write sentences in class and sometimes they will ask how to spell certain words. They have been learning sight words all year and we have a word wall with these sight words on it. So when the child asks me how to spell a sight word I will say, "Well that is a sight word, where do you think you could find out how to spell that?" Usually the child may try to sound it out or realize to go look at the word wall. Incorporating the children using technology to research is not really going to happen at five years old. They will use the SmartBoard to learn certain lessons or play games on it.
However, I know the older classes are very much lecture based. They basically tell the students what to do and how to do it. I feel the teachers are teaching to a test. I have heard some teachers in the faculty room say that they have responded to some students questions about why they are learning something, "Well you will see it on the test." I believe the older classes are teaching at a Level 0 according to the text.
The teachers are more concerned with being in control and having the power. I don't believe the students have the capacity for partnering, which is not good. These students are much more capable of things than we give them credit for. I think we would have better relationships with our students with we kept open minds and tried to engage in the students interests.
I feel through my experiences that my students' were more than capable of accomplishing the work independent from my lecture. My lecturing is usually pretty concise but I doubt I am accomplishing much when compared to the students' completing the research on their own. The level of achivement was often the same when they worked on an independent project.
Now with regards to my observation experiences, I have often noticed how many social studies teachers that I saw used little to no technology in the classroom. Computer work, such as webquests were non-existant. I would put most of these teachers at a level 2 of partnering. Lectures revolved around the use of Smart Board technology. Worksheets are the most utilized activity in these classrooms. The problem is that the teacher is not acting as a guide much but a depositor of recall information in students' minds. Students are usually doing very little partnering in my observation experiences. Student's are often not given choices and not allowed to explore their passions in the classroom.
When I started student teaching, because of the placement I was in, I began at level 0. I taught by lecturing because that’s what my cooperating teacher wanted me to do. All student practice was done on worksheets. It was uncomfortable because in my undergraduate classes, this was what I was taught NOT to do. The director of my program supported partnering, letting students discover, and making math real for students. In my first year teaching, I probably fluctuated between level 1 and 2. I wanted to lecture less, but I was torn because everyone else was lecturing and I wanted my students to do well on their regents exam. I felt pressured to conform to everyone else’s idea of successful teaching.
My experiences this year with a double period 8th grade class taking an Integrated Algebra regents course have led me to level 2 and 3. I soon figured out that lecturing does not work for them. The material is hard enough - they can’t possibly sit and listen to me talk for over an hour. It does not motivate them. I am grateful to the few awesome supporters who are helping me work toward level 5, but I know it doesn’t happen over night.
My students are happier now that they are at levels 2 and 3. They are doing more of the thinking rather than just listening. I am giving them more freedom to choose their assignments and assessments. I listen to their suggestions and they are actively participating in their own learning.
Based on the classrooms I have observed and been a part of during my students teaching and what not, I find that most teachers are probably level 2. I am most familiar with secondary health and physical education classrooms. In physical education it is much easier to be a level 5 because it is not your usual classroom experience in the gymnasium and the goal for PE teachers is to talk a little as possible and allow kids to move and explore on their own. In the health classrooms I have been a part of, I have seen teachers who create this interactive PowerPoint’s that have all of the information that they want the students to know and then they do an activity with the students to assess if the students took from the PowerPoint what the teacher wanted them too. Some lessons are not always like that and the students are actually doing activities the whole class but usually the information is given to the students and then they go on their own to complete an assignment about the material.
Through my own experiences teaching and observing I think children learn the most through things they are passionate about. I have worked in a preschool and we always used the creative curriculum, which use exploration and discovery as a way of learning. This curriculum is close to partnering in some ways because it does not believe in lecturing the child. It also does not believe in any homework or written assignments. Students are expected to learn through actively engaging in activities in the classroom that they are interested in. In this classroom the teacher is responsible for designing the center in a way where children will be able to learn through role playing, social involvement, communication, creativity and real life problem solving skills to name a few. Students will have different centers, which include different supplies, learning tools, and activities. For example the listening center will be somewhere students can go listen to books in the fall the science center might have different types of leaves, the math center will have puzzles and manipulative they can work with. Each day student’s will choose on their own what they want to learn about. Although each morning starts with a circle time to discuss a specific topic or area which children will see throughout the centers in the classroom. I thought this was an effective way of learning because students choose to work in the center that interests them. So even though they are not sitting behind a desk they are still learning which is the number one goal. AS with partnering children are learning through active discovery and exploration, and children are choosing to learn through things they are passionate about. I believe more curriculums of this sort should be implemented throughout the upper grades, but of course made more complex, such as partnering.
Its comforting to know that moving towards a partnered or a flipped classroom won't happen overnight, given the old paradigm of memorization and regurgitation.. Teachers need to get better at creating a partnering classroom, and students need to get better as learning in that environment. Prensky says that coaching, guiding, goal setting, questioning, designing, etc each have their own improvement curve, and its okay to not be perfect at first.. but this absolutely isn't a reason for me to not try the hardest to make it as perfect as possible in the beginning stages. I think the most important thing with improving is flexibility and keeping detailed records. Improvement can then be made through iteration, practice, and sharing. If you've ever played a sport, you know that practice does not make perfect.. "perfect practice makes perfect," or "If you can't do it in practice how can you expect to do it in a game." This is the same for partnering. Iteration is the repetition of a process, so although the first instinct may to be abandon something that does work as desired, teachers can improve through iteration. This helps teachers find the best things to practice in their own specific teaching by removing things that don't work, trying new things, and always reflecting. Teachers can monitor their progress, reflect on activities and engagement, and record what works and doesn't work for different students and the class as a whole in journals or on private/public blogs. Iteration also provides variety since teachers are working towards the best techniques for their students and always changing and improving. Student work should reflect their own improvements and progress as well as they become more partnered learners. Conversation should exist between teachers and students about what is working for them and what is not, and how they feel they have improved on their previous work and why. Once a more perfect practice is in place to provide a basis for partnering, students need to be able to practice self-motivation, self discipline, the verbs, and making connections between passions and curriculum. But to do this, teachers need to offer broader opportunities and options by leaving their comfort zone and guiding the students effectively. Teachers can share their experiences and struggles along the way with each other to receive feedback through videos or blogs and learn from each other. The more verbs employed in the teaching, the more likely a true partnering classroom can be reached. I think the "flipped classroom" definitely applies to what the level 5 partnering classroom is, where "Students are expected to, and do, find or create guiding questions, do research, make presentations, self-form into groups, complete self-designed projects, lead and participate in critiques and discussions" (170) and help the teacher design classes for maximum engagement. I think as the year progresses, students will naturally move to this level. To alleiate boredom its important to get your students opinions early in the year about what they are interested in, what they consider boring, giving them choice and opportunities to interact with each other and different medias as much as possible, and be excited yourself over what you are teaching. I'll never forget a quote from Remember the Titans, "attitude reflects leadership." Students will have a positive attitude if you are constantly improving and reflecting on yourself, come in every day happy and eager, and actively engage them in the learning process. If they are constantly doing things they like, how can they be bored?
After taking this course, I learned that teachers are responsible for using effective teaching strategies. I believe with what Kyle says, “students are more likely to understand and attain class concepts when information is interesting and taught in an Interactive way rather than when information is lectured to students.” This chapter shows that it is very important for teachers to be aware of how they are teaching. It is important that teachers consider having group activities and peer-tutoring based exercises. I never realized how useful technology is in the classroom. Teachers are encouraged to use as much technology possible when introducing class concepts. As a school Psychology major I find recommending technology and interactive activities for certain students is a major responsibility. School psychologists are responsible for collaborating with teachers and developing ideas for struggling students whenever teachers are in need of help. Sometimes students who have trouble learning in the classroom, may need only accommodations and modifications to help them succeed. Also, I think teachers should use technology strategies and group activities as much as they can to ensure that students are having an interactive learning experience.
In my experience as a special ed teacher, I know that students learn the most when they are actively involved in the lesson. They learn best by being hands on, or working in a group. For the most part they have difficulty with maintaining attention; therefore, lectures have to be minimal. A few times during the school year, I will do an interest inventory with my students to find out what they like and dislike. Getting feedback from students will give teachers an idea as to how to guide their instruction to tailor lessons to meet the student’s interests. It also shows that you care about them. Students enjoy sharing about their lives and experiences. Partnering is the best way to get all students to participate in class. I have re-designed my learning centers to coach my young students on how to be critical thinkers and also to use their environment to answer their own questions. I use the smartboard in my daily instruction, and the students use the smartboard to find solutions and answers questions. They use computers and work together to find suggested websites (for example). They correct each other, and I observe, evaluate and critique what they do.
In my observation of secondary classrooms, I have not experienced a lesson in which a teacher performed above a partnering level 2. A majority of the lessons that I have observed consisted of lecturing, some discussion, and practice using worksheets (level 0). Many teachers have also implemented videos in addition (level 1). I have also observed a number of teachers who utilize the SMARTboards in their classrooms as more than a projection screen and chose to include PowerPoints, videos and research-based projects. I believe that the partnering levels 3 through 5 are much more conducive to meaningful learning and fostering independence. Short lectures, a variety of hands-on activities, partnering, and student-led discussions and critiques should be the focus of all lessons. I agree with Prensky’s assertion that teachers should function as the coach, guide, and partner for their students. As I complete my observations for this course, I am starting to think of ways that each lesson can be re-worked to reflect the partnering model or the flipped classroom model. Students should take control of their learning. They should be given the opportunity to practice creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration. The students should be able to advocate for themselves and problem-solve.
In my observations during student teaching and subsitute teaching, I have noticed that partnering levels tend to go up based on the grade and class level. In the elementary schools, teachers make good use of the SmartBoards. DVDs,and other technology. However,most of the teaching is still done by lecturing. A teacher may allow students to come up and touch the correct answers on the smartboard, but she still controls the majority of the lesson and her student's learning. I have seen many middle and high school teachers stick to lecturing and worksheets in their classrooms. This seems to change in 11th and 12th grade classrooms,especially in accelerated and AP level classes. Teachers of higher level classes utilize partnering and technology much more, from what I have observed. I'm not sure why this is. Maybe some teachers feel that lower grades and regents level classes need more direction and lecturing in order to turn out their best work. However I can't say for sure. I think that most teachers would be able to achieve partnering level 4, but I think they are apprehensive about level 5. To be honest, it is a very scary thing to do, since you are not sure how it is going to work, and there's that fear of relinquishing total control to your students. But it never hurts to try! If it doesn't work the first time, try to figure out where it went wrong and just fix that. Don't just give up altogether. Practice makes perfect!
I absolutely love the idea of partnering. I love the idea of students discovering on their own terms, and the teacher acting as a guide. I have the opportunity to work with all grade levels N-12 in one week and although I think partnering can be done at all levels , I think it needs to be facilitated in different ways. Obviously, a Kindergartener will not be able to navigate the internet as well as a twelve grader. Yet, kindergarteners are great at group inquiry type questions. I like to ask them as a group, “what do you think will happen if…”. I give them an opportunity to discuss and then we work together to find the correct answer. It’s a great way for them to learn and be active participants during lessons. Older students do great when they are given guiding questions and then are able to self research and develop their own types of assessments to show their knowledge. Although, I am working at incorporating this flipped classroom and the idea of partnering, I have not yet mastered it. I as a lot of teachers, both new and experienced are working to perfect this new type of learning. These teachers are learning new ways to engage their students on individual basses!
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
I believe that there are many different ways to get students involved in the lesson at hand. I have always been a firm believer that the best way to learn something is to teach it to someone else. When you put students in groups you are allowing the students to work together, to teach eachother, and to learn from eachother. Throughout my experiences I have mostly been inside of a gym where partnering and working together is key to many lessons taking place. For example, I ran a project adventure class which was not able to function unless the students worked together from small groups of 2, to the entire class working together as one large group. I believe that partnering levels in a physical education setting are much different then in a classroom setting and I am not sure that when reading this book the author is thinking about all types of classrooms.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
I am almost ashamed to admit that, in my short career, I have hovered between levels 1 and 2 (and occasionally level 3) of the partnering scale. However, this was my own experience as a student, this is what I was taught in my Masters Methods classes, and this was also the guidance I received from my more established colleagues. Only recently have I discovered that “worksheets” is a dirty word and PowerPoint is boring and outdated. Now that I am enlightened with new partnering ideas, I can clearly see there are more efficient and effective ways of teaching. I believe this is especially true for older students who may require “real world” preparation (ie: learning how to research rather than being fed the information by the teacher.)
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
In my past experiences observing and student teaching, I have not really had the opportunity to experience anything higher than a 2 as far as the partnering levels goes. I think that partnering is not something than can be implemented in a classroom overnight. Teachers are always learning how to effectively reach every student in the classroom. I think partnering is an excellent way of teaching. I think children are a lot more capable of succeeding in a classroom like this than the typical classrooms we have now without partnering. Although in my past I have seen technology used in the classroom (such as the SmartBoard)-I have never seen it being used as a partnering tool. Hopefully more teachers will eventually take the leap and try to use all of these available tools.
Reread the section on “partnering levels” for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the setting that you are most familiar with.
I haven’t had many opportunities to observe a lot of classrooms; the few I have observed have been elementary special education inclusion classrooms. Unfortunately, I would rank the teachers and students at a level 2, where the teacher lectures and uses few partnering tools. A reason for this may be due to the disabilities among the students. However, as a teacher I would challenge my students and myself by incorporating class appropriate, and proper partnering methods. There are numerous web tools available that can be implemented within the classroom. Also, by introducing a new and different approach to the lesson may help get my students involved more.
My experience in the gymnasium can relate to partnering. While I have not necessarily used all aspects of partnering thus far, I can incorporate certain features. Even though students have the opportunity to work together and in groups often, it may be difficult for them to use certain nouns and verbs in the gym. As the teacher I think it is possible to take a step back and avoid lecturing too much throughout the lesson, especially in a physical education class where you want students to be active throughout the class. In a typical lesson, I would have the students get active with an instant activity and then bring the class into a circle for a set induction where I would discuss the lesson objectives and the main idea or skills we would be learning. I think it might be difficult for students to use “partnering” in the gymnasium only because there are no computers for students to find answers on their own. However, it is still possible to provide the students with a guiding question regarding a specific topic and have them do research for a homework assignment. For example, maybe we are doing a unit on soccer and I want the students to come up with their own way to display a specific country participating in the World Cup Games. They can also look up how to perform certain skills on YouTube. There are endless possibilities for students to do “projects” on a variety of units discussed in physical education and students may use any of the tools they would use in a regular classroom.
I think it is very possible for the teacher to act as a coach and guide the students in the right direction when working on a specific task. For example, in a cooperative games unit, students must work together in groups by communicating, collaborating and problem solving. In partnering, the teacher should not give the answer to the students, but rather have them work through the problem on their own. I think it is easy to help students find their passion or interest in physical education because students can provide the teacher with feedback on certain units or topics they would like to participate in. Partnering can also be relative when the teacher offers students choices in an elective program, where they can choose for themselves which activities they would like to participate in based on their interests.
I realized that students will have more fun when working in groups and being active participants in the lesson rather than listening to a lecture. I think by getting the students involved and letting them take some of the control; it will motivate them to stay engaged. It is also important to try and eliminate boredom by using partnering and having “more student participation, more differentiation, and maximum student use of technology” (172).
In my classroom observation experiences I can honestly say, I haven’t been in any classrooms where there was level 0 partnering (thankfully). The majority of classrooms I have seen were probably at a level 1 or 2. A fifth grade ICT classroom I observed utilized choice, students doing different assignments simultaneously, discussions ignited by guiding questions, and lots of technology. However, the teacher used the technology, not the students. The teacher used a smartboard, and taught lessons through projected computer animations, which contained pauses so that the teacher could ask questions to gauge understanding. When I saw this for the first time, I just thought about how innovative it was, how much more engaging it was than traditional methods of teaching, and I wished that technology like this existed when I was in school. It never once crossed my mind though that it could have been pushed further if the teacher would've allowed the students to actually interact directly with the technology. Students should always be actively involved in what they are learning, and by not having direct interaction with the technology, they are just as passive as if they were being lectured to. While using animations is far more interesting than looking at a board full of words, the experience could've been enhanced further if the students were allowed to use the technological tools.
I have also been in inclusive classrooms that have included head start students, and a first grade self-contained classroom where neither direct instruction, nor the use of technology were used. In these settings, lessons were conducted through music, body movements, and hands-on activities that were based on students’ preferences and choices. I love this method of teaching young students, but definitely think that the classroom experiences could have been enhanced by the use of technology. While I plan to utilize partnering in my classroom whenever possible, I don’t plan to strive for level 5 partnering. While I think high-level partnering with older children can be highly effective, ideally, I would love to teach kindergarten or first grade. Due to my experience with the younger children, I don’t think that their logical reasoning skills and perspective-taking abilities are advanced enough to facilitate level 5 partnering. I think that exploratory learning methods mixed with aspects of partnering would be more successful with the little ones.
I am currently substitute teaching and awaiting the start of a Physical Education leave replacement at a private school. In preparation for my leave replacement, I have been shadowed the teacher I will take over for for about two weeks. Mrs. B is a very ‘hands-on’ teacher that is very passionate about teaching. This particular school has class sizes of about 16 students, which allows Mrs. B to try out many new things and adapt a partial partnering curriculum. Mrs. B uses partnering in her 9th and 11th grade health classes between Level 4 and 5. Sample projects that have been assigned to these classes which model partnering are the 9th grade drug project and the 11th grade sexual decision-making and drug project. In 9th grade, students were put into groups of 3 and assigned a specific drug. Each group was given a booklet about the drug and given four other websites to use to get information (this would have been a good time to educate students on how to research online and allow them to find their own websites). Students were also given a worksheet of what to include in their project, which happened to be very broad. Students swarmed Mrs. B with questions about how to present the information, what information to include, what type of presentation to use, etc. She refused to answer any questions, which first, frustrated the students. However, after group collaboration (all students have their own laptops at this school so work was able to be done all in class on one laptop), students were able to see the creative possibilities they lay ahead of them. Students had three classes to work on their project and on the fourth class; they presented the projects to the class. The projects included PowerPoints, skits, hard-copy posters, videos, and even letters to drug users. It was very interesting to see how this project turned out and how the lack of guidelines from the teacher really enhanced the projects. Mrs. B was able to really help students during their classwork time but she did not constrain their creativity. The 11th grade sexual decision-making and drug project was similar to the 9th grade project but there were even less guidelines. Mrs. B told the class that they were to do a project about the effect of drugs on sexual decision-making…that was it. No other instructions, no other guidelines, just to make sure it is appropriate for school. I assume since these students have had Mrs. B for several years, they understood her style of teaching and knew that their questions about the project would not be answered. They too had three classes to work on their project. Students were allowed to leave the classroom to research/film/do whatever they felt they needed to to make a successful project. I was not shadowing the day the students presented but some of their projects included magazine articles, persuasive letters, PowerPoints, videos, and documentaries. With both projects students are working between a Level 4 and 5 on the partnering scale. Mrs. B still uses worksheets and gives written tests but rarely. Many of her activities are hands-on and really motivate the students to learn and research on their own. On the other hand, during my health observations, I witnessed a Level 1 on both the students’ and the teacher’s part. I observed a 5th and 7th grade health class that met every other day. Almost all of the class, the teacher lectured the students and the students wrote down notes and completed worksheets. The only time when students did their own research was for their quarterly current events assignments that they would present to the class. It was clearly evident that this style of teaching is not ideal or effective. Mrs. B’s style allows students to research, collaborate and prepare for the real world which engaging them in the learning process.
Just recently have I learned about partner teaching through Prensky. Partner teaching allow the students to be the teachers and allowing them to create their classroom. The students choose what they want to learn about. The teacher is there as a guide and coach, showing them tools on how to learn about their curriculum. Throughout my undergrad I was exposed to many different teaching styles including Montessori. Most of my observations took place in inner city schools with minimal technology resources; therefore minimal partner teaching was feasible. The classes were assigned to the computer lab about twice a week to conduct math and writing assignments that were monitored by their teachers. They students had no time to explore the interest and other web 2.0 resources besides the one program implemented by their school. Now working as a 1 on 1 in a first grade classroom on Long Island, I am exposed to far more resources than I was during my observations and student teaching experiences. My classroom consists of two computers and a smart board for the students to interact with. As of right now, the students were given the topic of nonfiction for their reading workshop curriculum. The teacher scaffolded how to properly read and learn from nonfiction but now the work is left in the hands of the students. The students are now able to choose what nonfiction topics they research and how they research it. The students are offered a large variety of nonfiction books. The students are also able to work with the class computers and smart board to research their topics.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
With my experience in the classroom during observations, I can say that the level of partnering with the teachers are at Level 2. Observing in these inclusion classrooms, I have seen the teachers make use of technology but the students don't get to experience the hands on part of using the technology. I think that these students would benefit more from the partnering experience if they were given the opportunity and the teachers might be surprised at what the students are capable of if they were allowed to be more creative.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
During this semester I had the opportunity of observing two great schools. One was a regular elementary school in Hempstead and the other one was in district 75, in Queens. I feel that these two school which were totally different in population, location, teacher and students ration were yet very similar in the way that the teachers were teaching their lessons. Therefore I feel that they are a level 4. These two teachers used guiding questions, students work on their own, and they followed by presentation and discussion on some days, with some topics. In addition, the teachers are using lectures, explanations, and worksheets some material. In one of the school the teacher used the smart board for lessons such as searching for different types of communities, using songs to teach children numbers, alphabet, days of the week, and many other lessons. I was also able to observe student work on their own and only came to the teachers for guidance. I also work in a school for children with special needs from 2.9-5 years of age and most of the teachers also believe that the students learn better when they are exploring in their own. My classroom is a 10:2:1 (ten students, two assistant, and one teacher) classroom. All the students in my class have a diagnosis of Autism, Down Syndrome, or other Developmental Delays. I have experience and notice that the students regardless of their disability feel better when the teachers allow then to figure things on their own, when the teachers give them the confidence and tell them that they can do it all by themselves, and whenever the teacher allows them to search or investigate the computer by themselves. In this classroom we use the smart board, computers, and all available technology to motivate our students. We have great expectations for all of our students. They are so young and they can learn so much with the right tools and proper guidance.
Based on the classrooms that I observed all teachers were in level 1. Except in a geometry class where the teacher was in level 2. He let students work in the smart board, computers and he asked constant questions to keep students engage in his lesson. All other classes where mostly done using worksheets and in few they add some videos. There were no partnering and teachers lecture the whole time. Students were not giving choices and couldn’t explore or relate the lesson in their real passions therefore they have little interest in the class.
I was blessed with the opportunity to go to a field trip to Manhattan Country School in Harlem. The school mission is to encourage a unified community and civil service. As a result, students have of the responsibility of not only making school lunches but also to the extreme of maintaining a farm the school. This school wants there students to be the front runner. Within the classroom both the teacher and students work on level 4 for partnering levels. Although I can not remember the exact topic of study in the 4th and 5th grade social studies class, the students campaigned and fund raised a supportive cause to the White House while learning the amendments and law. This made me understand the importance of technology but also the importance of students learning and teaching beyond the classroom. As a result of this school pedagogy, the future of students have ranged from CEOs to politicians.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
Last semester I observed a fourth and fifth grade special education class in Queens. When I observed this class I was not yet exposed to partnering pedagogy. As I reflect on that classroom observation experience I felt that the teacher was excellent. I remember feeling like she was doing her utmost best with a group of special education student. I now realize she was applying a standard on them that did not expressly coincide with the kind of learner that they individually are. Now I realize they are simply different learners. With my new found information about partnering, twenty first century learning and the 4 C’s (critical thinking, creativity, communication and collaboration), I now realize that the class was not offering the best possible avenues for the children to learn. I would rate the partnering level of learning with that particular educator and Para-educators at 2 or less. The children had computers and smart boards in the classroom that they were not permitted to touch. It is my opinion that these students would begin to thrive with a partnering approach to learning. The educators may be surprised at the positive learning shift that can occur in their class amongst these special education students. If granted the chance to use technology and relate the lesson to their own passions and experiences; asking viable questions that interest them, they would flourish.
28 comments:
Through my experiences i have realized that the students have more fun and are more interested in the subject when they are able to work in groups. As far as their learning and retaining the material, i would say its probably the same as if i was lecturing. There are a lot of ways to have the students working together and learning from each other. One thing that i like to do is have the students go to the board to explain a problem, and if they say that they don't know how to do the problem, then i tell them that they can call on their classmates for help. I have also made videos for my students to watch for homework, this allowed me to have them get right to work when class started and no lecturing was needed. The students actually really liked doing this and started asking me to do more, so i have been trying to find ways that it is appropriate. Because i don't think it fits well to do that on an everyday basis. I feel an important part about partnering is to ask the students for feedback. I feel often teachers hide what they are trying to do from their students. I try to be as open as possible with what i am attempting and how can i become better at it or be more effective.
I think there are many productive ways to teaching. Getting the students involved is the most successful way. When students are just being lectured day after day, they are bored and unfocused. Using technology and putting students in groups with their peers allows them to teach one another and do work the way that benefits them the most. Letting students use the smartboard is a great way to keep them involved because the enjoy the tool, they will want to participate in class. I think keeping the classroom exciting and making the students feel safe is key to letting them come out of their comfort zone and succeeding. Understanding your students on a individual basis is key to helping each one succeed.
Obviously the best way of teaching is partnering. Allowing the students to be the teachers and allowing them to create their classroom. The teacher is there as a guide and coach. I work in a kindergarten class and from my experience it is a little hard to incorporate partnering with a five year old. At this age they are very dependent on adults for many things. However, while I work with the children I do pose questions to them to have them explore options on their own. For example, they are beginning to write sentences in class and sometimes they will ask how to spell certain words. They have been learning sight words all year and we have a word wall with these sight words on it. So when the child asks me how to spell a sight word I will say, "Well that is a sight word, where do you think you could find out how to spell that?" Usually the child may try to sound it out or realize to go look at the word wall. Incorporating the children using technology to research is not really going to happen at five years old. They will use the SmartBoard to learn certain lessons or play games on it.
However, I know the older classes are very much lecture based. They basically tell the students what to do and how to do it. I feel the teachers are teaching to a test. I have heard some teachers in the faculty room say that they have responded to some students questions about why they are learning something, "Well you will see it on the test." I believe the older classes are teaching at a Level 0 according to the text.
The teachers are more concerned with being in control and having the power. I don't believe the students have the capacity for partnering, which is not good. These students are much more capable of things than we give them credit for. I think we would have better relationships with our students with we kept open minds and tried to engage in the students interests.
I feel through my experiences that my students' were more than capable of accomplishing the work independent from my lecture. My lecturing is usually pretty concise but I doubt I am accomplishing much when compared to the students' completing the research on their own. The level of achivement was often the same when they worked on an independent project.
Now with regards to my observation experiences, I have often noticed how many social studies teachers that I saw used little to no technology in the classroom. Computer work, such as webquests were non-existant. I would put most of these teachers at a level 2 of partnering. Lectures revolved around the use of Smart Board technology. Worksheets are the most utilized activity in these classrooms. The problem is that the teacher is not acting as a guide much but a depositor of recall information in students' minds. Students are usually doing very little partnering in my observation experiences. Student's are often not given choices and not allowed to explore their passions in the classroom.
When I started student teaching, because of the placement I was in, I began at level 0. I taught by lecturing because that’s what my cooperating teacher wanted me to do. All student practice was done on worksheets. It was uncomfortable because in my undergraduate classes, this was what I was taught NOT to do. The director of my program supported partnering, letting students discover, and making math real for students. In my first year teaching, I probably fluctuated between level 1 and 2. I wanted to lecture less, but I was torn because everyone else was lecturing and I wanted my students to do well on their regents exam. I felt pressured to conform to everyone else’s idea of successful teaching.
My experiences this year with a double period 8th grade class taking an Integrated Algebra regents course have led me to level 2 and 3. I soon figured out that lecturing does not work for them. The material is hard enough - they can’t possibly sit and listen to me talk for over an hour. It does not motivate them. I am grateful to the few awesome supporters who are helping me work toward level 5, but I know it doesn’t happen over night.
My students are happier now that they are at levels 2 and 3. They are doing more of the thinking rather than just listening. I am giving them more freedom to choose their assignments and assessments. I listen to their suggestions and they are actively participating in their own learning.
Based on the classrooms I have observed and been a part of during my students teaching and what not, I find that most teachers are probably level 2. I am most familiar with secondary health and physical education classrooms. In physical education it is much easier to be a level 5 because it is not your usual classroom experience in the gymnasium and the goal for PE teachers is to talk a little as possible and allow kids to move and explore on their own. In the health classrooms I have been a part of, I have seen teachers who create this interactive PowerPoint’s that have all of the information that they want the students to know and then they do an activity with the students to assess if the students took from the PowerPoint what the teacher wanted them too. Some lessons are not always like that and the students are actually doing activities the whole class but usually the information is given to the students and then they go on their own to complete an assignment about the material.
Through my own experiences teaching and observing I think children learn the most through things they are passionate about. I have worked in a preschool and we always used the creative curriculum, which use exploration and discovery as a way of learning. This curriculum is close to partnering in some ways because it does not believe in lecturing the child. It also does not believe in any homework or written assignments. Students are expected to learn through actively engaging in activities in the classroom that they are interested in. In this classroom the teacher is responsible for designing the center in a way where children will be able to learn through role playing, social involvement, communication, creativity and real life problem solving skills to name a few. Students will have different centers, which include different supplies, learning tools, and activities. For example the listening center will be somewhere students can go listen to books in the fall the science center might have different types of leaves, the math center will have puzzles and manipulative they can work with. Each day student’s will choose on their own what they want to learn about. Although each morning starts with a circle time to discuss a specific topic or area which children will see throughout the centers in the classroom. I thought this was an effective way of learning because students choose to work in the center that interests them. So even though they are not sitting behind a desk they are still learning which is the number one goal. AS with partnering children are learning through active discovery and exploration, and children are choosing to learn through things they are passionate about. I believe more curriculums of this sort should be implemented throughout the upper grades, but of course made more complex, such as partnering.
Its comforting to know that moving towards a partnered or a flipped classroom won't happen overnight, given the old paradigm of memorization and regurgitation.. Teachers need to get better at creating a partnering classroom, and students need to get better as learning in that environment. Prensky says that coaching, guiding, goal setting, questioning, designing, etc each have their own improvement curve, and its okay to not be perfect at first.. but this absolutely isn't a reason for me to not try the hardest to make it as perfect as possible in the beginning stages. I think the most important thing with improving is flexibility and keeping detailed records. Improvement can then be made through iteration, practice, and sharing.
If you've ever played a sport, you know that practice does not make perfect.. "perfect practice makes perfect," or "If you can't do it in practice how can you expect to do it in a game." This is the same for partnering. Iteration is the repetition of a process, so although the first instinct may to be abandon something that does work as desired, teachers can improve through iteration. This helps teachers find the best things to practice in their own specific teaching by removing things that don't work, trying new things, and always reflecting. Teachers can monitor their progress, reflect on activities and engagement, and record what works and doesn't work for different students and the class as a whole in journals or on private/public blogs. Iteration also provides variety since teachers are working towards the best techniques for their students and always changing and improving. Student work should reflect their own improvements and progress as well as they become more partnered learners. Conversation should exist between teachers and students about what is working for them and what is not, and how they feel they have improved on their previous work and why. Once a more perfect practice is in place to provide a basis for partnering, students need to be able to practice self-motivation, self discipline, the verbs, and making connections between passions and curriculum. But to do this, teachers need to offer broader opportunities and options by leaving their comfort zone and guiding the students effectively. Teachers can share their experiences and struggles along the way with each other to receive feedback through videos or blogs and learn from each other.
The more verbs employed in the teaching, the more likely a true partnering classroom can be reached. I think the "flipped classroom" definitely applies to what the level 5 partnering classroom is, where "Students are expected to, and do, find or create guiding questions, do research, make presentations, self-form into groups, complete self-designed projects, lead and participate in critiques and discussions" (170) and help the teacher design classes for maximum engagement. I think as the year progresses, students will naturally move to this level.
To alleiate boredom its important to get your students opinions early in the year about what they are interested in, what they consider boring, giving them choice and opportunities to interact with each other and different medias as much as possible, and be excited yourself over what you are teaching. I'll never forget a quote from Remember the Titans, "attitude reflects leadership." Students will have a positive attitude if you are constantly improving and reflecting on yourself, come in every day happy and eager, and actively engage them in the learning process. If they are constantly doing things they like, how can they be bored?
After taking this course, I learned that teachers are responsible for using effective teaching strategies. I believe with what Kyle says, “students are more likely to understand and attain class concepts when information is interesting and taught in an Interactive way rather than when information is lectured to students.” This chapter shows that it is very important for teachers to be aware of how they are teaching. It is important that teachers consider having group activities and peer-tutoring based exercises. I never realized how useful technology is in the classroom. Teachers are encouraged to use as much technology possible when introducing class concepts.
As a school Psychology major I find recommending technology and interactive activities for certain students is a major responsibility. School psychologists are responsible for collaborating with teachers and developing ideas for struggling students whenever teachers are in need of help. Sometimes students who have trouble learning in the classroom, may need only accommodations and modifications to help them succeed. Also, I think teachers should use technology strategies and group activities as much as they can to ensure that students are having an interactive learning experience.
In my experience as a special ed teacher, I know that students learn the most when they are actively involved in the lesson. They learn best by being hands on, or working in a group. For the most part they have difficulty with maintaining attention; therefore, lectures have to be minimal. A few times during the school year, I will do an interest inventory with my students to find out what they like and dislike. Getting feedback from students will give teachers an idea as to how to guide their instruction to tailor lessons to meet the student’s interests. It also shows that you care about them. Students enjoy sharing about their lives and experiences. Partnering is the best way to get all students to participate in class. I have re-designed my learning centers to coach my young students on how to be critical thinkers and also to use their environment to answer their own questions. I use the smartboard in my daily instruction, and the students use the smartboard to find solutions and answers questions. They use computers and work together to find suggested websites (for example). They correct each other, and I observe, evaluate and critique what they do.
In my observation of secondary classrooms, I have not experienced a lesson in which a teacher performed above a partnering level 2. A majority of the lessons that I have observed consisted of lecturing, some discussion, and practice using worksheets (level 0). Many teachers have also implemented videos in addition (level 1). I have also observed a number of teachers who utilize the SMARTboards in their classrooms as more than a projection screen and chose to include PowerPoints, videos and research-based projects.
I believe that the partnering levels 3 through 5 are much more conducive to meaningful learning and fostering independence. Short lectures, a variety of hands-on activities, partnering, and student-led discussions and critiques should be the focus of all lessons. I agree with Prensky’s assertion that teachers should function as the coach, guide, and partner for their students. As I complete my observations for this course, I am starting to think of ways that each lesson can be re-worked to reflect the partnering model or the flipped classroom model.
Students should take control of their learning. They should be given the opportunity to practice creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration. The students should be able to advocate for themselves and problem-solve.
In my observations during student teaching and subsitute teaching, I have noticed that partnering levels tend to go up based on the grade and class level. In the elementary schools, teachers make good use of the SmartBoards. DVDs,and other technology. However,most of the teaching is still done by lecturing. A teacher may allow students to come up and touch the correct answers on the smartboard, but she still controls the majority of the lesson and her student's learning. I have seen many middle and high school teachers stick to lecturing and worksheets in their classrooms. This seems to change in 11th and
12th grade classrooms,especially in accelerated and AP level classes. Teachers of higher level classes utilize partnering and technology much more, from what I have observed. I'm not sure why this is. Maybe some teachers feel that lower grades and regents level classes need more direction and lecturing in order to turn out their best work. However I can't say for sure. I think that most teachers would be able to achieve partnering level 4, but I think they are apprehensive about level 5. To be honest, it is a very scary thing to do, since you are not sure how it is going to work, and there's that fear of relinquishing total control to your students. But it never hurts to try! If it doesn't work the first time, try to figure out where it went wrong and just fix that. Don't just give up altogether. Practice makes perfect!
I absolutely love the idea of partnering. I love the idea of students discovering on their own terms, and the teacher acting as a guide. I have the opportunity to work with all grade levels N-12 in one week and although I think partnering can be done at all levels , I think it needs to be facilitated in different ways. Obviously, a Kindergartener will not be able to navigate the internet as well as a twelve grader. Yet, kindergarteners are great at group inquiry type questions. I like to ask them as a group, “what do you think will happen if…”. I give them an opportunity to discuss and then we work together to find the correct answer. It’s a great way for them to learn and be active participants during lessons. Older students do great when they are given guiding questions and then are able to self research and develop their own types of assessments to show their knowledge.
Although, I am working at incorporating this flipped classroom and the idea of partnering, I have not yet mastered it. I as a lot of teachers, both new and experienced are working to perfect this new type of learning. These teachers are learning new ways to engage their students on individual basses!
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
I believe that there are many different ways to get students involved in the lesson at hand. I have always been a firm believer that the best way to learn something is to teach it to someone else. When you put students in groups you are allowing the students to work together, to teach eachother, and to learn from eachother. Throughout my experiences I have mostly been inside of a gym where partnering and working together is key to many lessons taking place. For example, I ran a project adventure class which was not able to function unless the students worked together from small groups of 2, to the entire class working together as one large group. I believe that partnering levels in a physical education setting are much different then in a classroom setting and I am not sure that when reading this book the author is thinking about all types of classrooms.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
I am almost ashamed to admit that, in my short career, I have hovered between levels 1 and 2 (and occasionally level 3) of the partnering scale. However, this was my own experience as a student, this is what I was taught in my Masters Methods classes, and this was also the guidance I received from my more established colleagues. Only recently have I discovered that “worksheets” is a dirty word and PowerPoint is boring and outdated. Now that I am enlightened with new partnering ideas, I can clearly see there are more efficient and effective ways of teaching. I believe this is especially true for older students who may require “real world” preparation (ie: learning how to research rather than being fed the information by the teacher.)
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
In my past experiences observing and student teaching, I have not really had the opportunity to experience anything higher than a 2 as far as the partnering levels goes. I think that partnering is not something than can be implemented in a classroom overnight. Teachers are always learning how to effectively reach every student in the classroom. I think partnering is an excellent way of teaching. I think children are a lot more capable of succeeding in a classroom like this than the typical classrooms we have now without partnering. Although in my past I have seen technology used in the classroom (such as the SmartBoard)-I have never seen it being used as a partnering tool. Hopefully more teachers will eventually take the leap and try to use all of these available tools.
Reread the section on “partnering levels” for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the setting that you are most familiar with.
I haven’t had many opportunities to observe a lot of classrooms; the few I have observed have been elementary special education inclusion classrooms. Unfortunately, I would rank the teachers and students at a level 2, where the teacher lectures and uses few partnering tools. A reason for this may be due to the disabilities among the students. However, as a teacher I would challenge my students and myself by incorporating class appropriate, and proper partnering methods. There are numerous web tools available that can be implemented within the classroom. Also, by introducing a new and different approach to the lesson may help get my students involved more.
My experience in the gymnasium can relate to partnering. While I have not necessarily used all aspects of partnering thus far, I can incorporate certain features. Even though students have the opportunity to work together and in groups often, it may be difficult for them to use certain nouns and verbs in the gym. As the teacher I think it is possible to take a step back and avoid lecturing too much throughout the lesson, especially in a physical education class where you want students to be active throughout the class. In a typical lesson, I would have the students get active with an instant activity and then bring the class into a circle for a set induction where I would discuss the lesson objectives and the main idea or skills we would be learning. I think it might be difficult for students to use “partnering” in the gymnasium only because there are no computers for students to find answers on their own. However, it is still possible to provide the students with a guiding question regarding a specific topic and have them do research for a homework assignment. For example, maybe we are doing a unit on soccer and I want the students to come up with their own way to display a specific country participating in the World Cup Games. They can also look up how to perform certain skills on YouTube. There are endless possibilities for students to do “projects” on a variety of units discussed in physical education and students may use any of the tools they would use in a regular classroom.
I think it is very possible for the teacher to act as a coach and guide the students in the right direction when working on a specific task. For example, in a cooperative games unit, students must work together in groups by communicating, collaborating and problem solving. In partnering, the teacher should not give the answer to the students, but rather have them work through the problem on their own. I think it is easy to help students find their passion or interest in physical education because students can provide the teacher with feedback on certain units or topics they would like to participate in. Partnering can also be relative when the teacher offers students choices in an elective program, where they can choose for themselves which activities they would like to participate in based on their interests.
I realized that students will have more fun when working in groups and being active participants in the lesson rather than listening to a lecture. I think by getting the students involved and letting them take some of the control; it will motivate them to stay engaged. It is also important to try and eliminate boredom by using partnering and having “more student participation, more differentiation, and maximum student use of technology” (172).
In my classroom observation experiences I can honestly say, I haven’t been in any classrooms where there was level 0 partnering (thankfully). The majority of classrooms I have seen were probably at a level 1 or 2. A fifth grade ICT classroom I observed utilized choice, students doing different assignments simultaneously, discussions ignited by guiding questions, and lots of technology. However, the teacher used the technology, not the students. The teacher used a smartboard, and taught lessons through projected computer animations, which contained pauses so that the teacher could ask questions to gauge understanding. When I saw this for the first time, I just thought about how innovative it was, how much more engaging it was than traditional methods of teaching, and I wished that technology like this existed when I was in school. It never once crossed my mind though that it could have been pushed further if the teacher would've allowed the students to actually interact directly with the technology. Students should always be actively involved in what they are learning, and by not having direct interaction with the technology, they are just as passive as if they were being lectured to. While using animations is far more interesting than looking at a board full of words, the experience could've been enhanced further if the students were allowed to use the technological tools.
I have also been in inclusive classrooms that have included head start students, and a first grade self-contained classroom where neither direct instruction, nor the use of technology were used. In these settings, lessons were conducted through music, body movements, and hands-on activities that were based on students’ preferences and choices. I love this method of teaching young students, but definitely think that the classroom experiences could have been enhanced by the use of technology. While I plan to utilize partnering in my classroom whenever possible, I don’t plan to strive for level 5 partnering. While I think high-level partnering with older children can be highly effective, ideally, I would love to teach kindergarten or first grade. Due to my experience with the younger children, I don’t think that their logical reasoning skills and perspective-taking abilities are advanced enough to facilitate level 5 partnering. I think that exploratory learning methods mixed with aspects of partnering would be more successful with the little ones.
I am currently substitute teaching and awaiting the start of a Physical Education leave replacement at a private school. In preparation for my leave replacement, I have been shadowed the teacher I will take over for for about two weeks. Mrs. B is a very ‘hands-on’ teacher that is very passionate about teaching. This particular school has class sizes of about 16 students, which allows Mrs. B to try out many new things and adapt a partial partnering curriculum. Mrs. B uses partnering in her 9th and 11th grade health classes between Level 4 and 5. Sample projects that have been assigned to these classes which model partnering are the 9th grade drug project and the 11th grade sexual decision-making and drug project. In 9th grade, students were put into groups of 3 and assigned a specific drug. Each group was given a booklet about the drug and given four other websites to use to get information (this would have been a good time to educate students on how to research online and allow them to find their own websites). Students were also given a worksheet of what to include in their project, which happened to be very broad. Students swarmed Mrs. B with questions about how to present the information, what information to include, what type of presentation to use, etc. She refused to answer any questions, which first, frustrated the students. However, after group collaboration (all students have their own laptops at this school so work was able to be done all in class on one laptop), students were able to see the creative possibilities they lay ahead of them. Students had three classes to work on their project and on the fourth class; they presented the projects to the class. The projects included PowerPoints, skits, hard-copy posters, videos, and even letters to drug users. It was very interesting to see how this project turned out and how the lack of guidelines from the teacher really enhanced the projects. Mrs. B was able to really help students during their classwork time but she did not constrain their creativity. The 11th grade sexual decision-making and drug project was similar to the 9th grade project but there were even less guidelines. Mrs. B told the class that they were to do a project about the effect of drugs on sexual decision-making…that was it. No other instructions, no other guidelines, just to make sure it is appropriate for school. I assume since these students have had Mrs. B for several years, they understood her style of teaching and knew that their questions about the project would not be answered. They too had three classes to work on their project. Students were allowed to leave the classroom to research/film/do whatever they felt they needed to to make a successful project. I was not shadowing the day the students presented but some of their projects included magazine articles, persuasive letters, PowerPoints, videos, and documentaries. With both projects students are working between a Level 4 and 5 on the partnering scale. Mrs. B still uses worksheets and gives written tests but rarely. Many of her activities are hands-on and really motivate the students to learn and research on their own.
On the other hand, during my health observations, I witnessed a Level 1 on both the students’ and the teacher’s part. I observed a 5th and 7th grade health class that met every other day. Almost all of the class, the teacher lectured the students and the students wrote down notes and completed worksheets. The only time when students did their own research was for their quarterly current events assignments that they would present to the class. It was clearly evident that this style of teaching is not ideal or effective. Mrs. B’s style allows students to research, collaborate and prepare for the real world which engaging them in the learning process.
Just recently have I learned about partner teaching through Prensky. Partner teaching allow the students to be the teachers and allowing them to create their classroom. The students choose what they want to learn about. The teacher is there as a guide and coach, showing them tools on how to learn about their curriculum. Throughout my undergrad I was exposed to many different teaching styles including Montessori. Most of my observations took place in inner city schools with minimal technology resources; therefore minimal partner teaching was feasible. The classes were assigned to the computer lab about twice a week to conduct math and writing assignments that were monitored by their teachers. They students had no time to explore the interest and other web 2.0 resources besides the one program implemented by their school.
Now working as a 1 on 1 in a first grade classroom on Long Island, I am exposed to far more resources than I was during my observations and student teaching experiences. My classroom consists of two computers and a smart board for the students to interact with. As of right now, the students were given the topic of nonfiction for their reading workshop curriculum. The teacher scaffolded how to properly read and learn from nonfiction but now the work is left in the hands of the students. The students are now able to choose what nonfiction topics they research and how they research it. The students are offered a large variety of nonfiction books. The students are also able to work with the class computers and smart board to research their topics.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
With my experience in the classroom during observations, I can say that the level of partnering with the teachers are at Level 2. Observing in these inclusion classrooms, I have seen the teachers make use of technology but the students don't get to experience the hands on part of using the technology. I think that these students would benefit more from the partnering experience if they were given the opportunity and the teachers might be surprised at what the students are capable of if they were allowed to be more creative.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
During this semester I had the opportunity of observing two great schools. One was a regular elementary school in Hempstead and the other one was in district 75, in Queens. I feel that these two school which were totally different in population, location, teacher and students ration were yet very similar in the way that the teachers were teaching their lessons. Therefore I feel that they are a level 4. These two teachers used guiding questions, students work on their own, and they followed by presentation and discussion on some days, with some topics. In addition, the teachers are using lectures, explanations, and worksheets some material. In one of the school the teacher used the smart board for lessons such as searching for different types of communities, using songs to teach children numbers, alphabet, days of the week, and many other lessons. I was also able to observe student work on their own and only came to the teachers for guidance.
I also work in a school for children with special needs from 2.9-5 years of age and most of the teachers also believe that the students learn better when they are exploring in their own. My classroom is a 10:2:1 (ten students, two assistant, and one teacher) classroom. All the students in my class have a diagnosis of Autism, Down Syndrome, or other Developmental Delays. I have experience and notice that the students regardless of their disability feel better when the teachers allow then to figure things on their own, when the teachers give them the confidence and tell them that they can do it all by themselves, and whenever the teacher allows them to search or investigate the computer by themselves. In this classroom we use the smart board, computers, and all available technology to motivate our students. We have great expectations for all of our students. They are so young and they can learn so much with the right tools and proper guidance.
Based on the classrooms that I observed all teachers were in level 1. Except in a geometry class where the teacher was in level 2. He let students work in the smart board, computers and he asked constant questions to keep students engage in his lesson. All other classes where mostly done using worksheets and in few they add some videos. There were no partnering and teachers lecture the whole time. Students were not giving choices and couldn’t explore or relate the lesson in their real passions therefore they have little interest in the class.
I was blessed with the opportunity to go to a field trip to Manhattan Country School in Harlem. The school mission is to encourage a unified community and civil service. As a result, students have of the responsibility of not only making school lunches but also to the extreme of maintaining a farm the school. This school wants there students to be the front runner. Within the classroom both the teacher and students work on level 4 for partnering levels. Although I can not remember the exact topic of study in the 4th and 5th grade social studies class, the students campaigned and fund raised a supportive cause to the White House while learning the amendments and law. This made me understand the importance of technology but also the importance of students learning and teaching beyond the classroom. As a result of this school pedagogy, the future of students have ranged from CEOs to politicians.
Reread the section on "partnering levels" for teachers and students and discuss your experiences as they relate to teaching or observing in the settings that you are most familiar with.
Last semester I observed a fourth and fifth grade special education class in Queens. When I observed this class I was not yet exposed to partnering pedagogy. As I reflect on that classroom observation experience I felt that the teacher was excellent. I remember feeling like she was doing her utmost best with a group of special education student. I now realize she was applying a standard on them that did not expressly coincide with the kind of learner that they individually are. Now I realize they are simply different learners. With my new found information about partnering, twenty first century learning and the 4 C’s (critical thinking, creativity, communication and collaboration), I now realize that the class was not offering the best possible avenues for the children to learn. I would rate the partnering level of learning with that particular educator and Para-educators at 2 or less. The children had computers and smart boards in the classroom that they were not permitted to touch. It is my opinion that these students would begin to thrive with a partnering approach to learning. The educators may be surprised at the positive learning shift that can occur in their class amongst these special education students. If granted the chance to use technology and relate the lesson to their own passions and experiences; asking viable questions that interest them, they would flourish.
Post a Comment