Falling off the monkey bars

At EdCampOttawa today, the question came up; how does a teacher get to the point where they can let go of a prescriptive classroom approach that relies heavily on teacher-centred lessons? What does it take to allow students to have a bigger stake in driving the lesson? When are you ready to solicit questions from students and follow tangential lines of questioning while trying to stay within the boundaries of the curriculum?  Can a new teacher do that or do you need years of teaching experience to know what is important in the curriculum; to guide discussions and activities and have the confidence that experience brings to deal with issues, problems and questions as they arise?

How did I get to a point where it seems that I am more comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty in my classroom than many teachers? Nurture or nature? My father was an accomplished engineer and from him, my 3 brothers and I learned not to be afraid of trying things that we didn't know how to do.

 

Today I thought of another training ground.  I was in a classroom just down the hall from the computer labs where I spent a number of years teaching computer science.  At that time I told my students that computer science provided more opportunity for problem solving than any other academic course in secondary school - including Math.  And the beauty was that I didn't have, or pretend to have all the answers.  I could offer approaches for finding bugs but I rarely knew what the problem was.  It is liberating to know that I could never compete with the skills of some of my better students who were spending 4 or 5 hours every night on their computer.  I wasn't the expert (thank god) and I was smart enough to get out of the way of learning. 

The other thought that I had today was how it seems that many of the youth of today are crippled with anxiety.  I have often blamed it on over-protective parents and policies that don't allow kids to fall off the monkey bars anymore.  Kids don't have the opportunity to learn that a broken nose won't kill you. 

I now believe that schools are just as culpable is this crime against children.  We packaged our lessons in bite-sized pieces so students don't choke and we keep safety latches on doors of ideas so students don't pinch their fingers.  We caudle our students with simple tasks so they won't fall and hurt their ego.  We spoon-feed our students in a misguided attempt to ensure their minds are nourished with everything that they will need.  No wonder intellectual engagement amongst students drops steadily  from the primary years to high school.  We are stifling curiosity and play.

We have removed the monkey bars from the playgrounds.  Our classroom must become the new realm of daring and sometimes scary lessons.

If we are afraid, cautious and timid then chances are that our students will be afraid, cautious and timid.

If we are bold, adventurous and risky then our students have a chance to be bold, adventurous and risky.  We want citizens who are comfortable living with ambiguity as they face an ever-changing world with an uncertain future.

Take chances, make mistakes, get messy.   ~Miss Frizzle

Teaching is Hard, Criticizing is Easy

A student left my class yesterday to go to the washroom.  A short while later, her friend who had no doubt received a text message, excused herself so she could go to the aid of said student who was having a panic attack.  What precipitated this attack?  Me.

On the fourth day of the semester I was introducing the concept of functions by having students walk the first initial of their name and record the walk as a distance-time graph.  When I called her to the front of the class, I knew she was uncomfortable but I went ahead.  I felt she handled it well and she received spontaneous applause for her accomplishments. 

She did not come back to class.  I followed up the incident with a phone call to her appreciative mother.  Apparently there are other factors but, by her choice, she is no longer in my class.  In fact she is no longer registered in any Math class this year.  Ouch.

This morning I watched a lecture on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g2KjP2a20g by Amanda Ripley, the author of the recently published The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way.  At the end of the video she emphasizes how hard it is to be a teacher.  She goes great lengths to explain that even though her mother was a teacher she really, really did not understand how hard it is to teach; 'fighter pilot hard, CEO hard'.  I concur.

I searched for the video after reading a review of Ripley's book in The Economist, August 17th-23rd 2013.  For her book she interviewed American exchange students in other countries and she examined test results from PISA (Program for International Student Assessment).  According to The Economist article, "Pupils in Finland, Korea, Japan, and Canada consistently score much higher than their peers in Germany, Britain, America and France."  This is not news to me: nor is the fact that the classrooms in the countries that scored the highest are devoid of hi-tech gadgets. 

Although I haven't read The Smartest Kids yet, I like what I see.  Like most people, I tend to absorb ideas that support my beliefs and ignore or dispel of ideas that don't fit with my paradigm. 

There have been a few articles lately of a different bent that I have been busy dispelling. An opinion piece in Mathematics Teacher, August 2013,  argues that differentiation for individual student needs in education is a myth and will continue to be a myth until there exists a sophisticated computer program that can deliver and test concepts for each student as they advance in the curriculum.  The author implies that a machine can do a superior job of assessing students' needs, better any teacher.  (Thankfully the periodical's editorial panel reminds the readers that mathematics is a basic human activity and teaching is a fundamental human activity).  It seems to me that that despite evidence to the contrary, too many teachers share the author's view; the way to catch up to the Asian countries is with more and better technology.  I am also disturbed by the implications that the goal of math class, from elementary school up, is to ensure that students can do calculus.  Mathematics professor Peter Taylor once estimated that 20 of the 1600 first-year calculus students at Queen's University will every use calculus. 

The next article is a little more challenging.  Margaret Wente of The Globe and Mail http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/whos-failing-math-the-system/article14112165/ responds to the news that the latest test scores show that elementary school children's math scores are slipping.  She blames misguided educational trends that emphasis critical thinking and calls for 'back-to-basics'.  I quickly dismissed her premise but was curious to see how the public would react to the article.  Ouch.  

Ms. Wente struck a nerve, generating a flood of responses that are hard to ignore.  I read almost 200 of 275 responses, hoping that someone would challenge her ideas.  Almost all praised her views.  Blame was heaped on educational policy makers and teachers.  There were anecdotes  of how high school graduates who couldn't do simple arithmetic to complete a transaction when the electricity failed.  Sentiments expressed of how learning basic math facts like the multiplication table is boring but essential.  It seems many feel that that arithmetic is what mathematics is. 

Today's Margaret Wente column questions the fads and magic beans of educational pseudo-science. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/classroom-fads-and-magic-beans/article14168845/
The article quotes Tom Bennett, the author of Teacher Proof: Why Research in Education Doesn't Always Mean What it Claims; "I suspect that children learn when they are told stuff, and forced in some way to remember it, and practice it".  Ouch again.  Where's the research?  And we know this works because?  It worked in the past? I question how well it ever worked and I question how it could ever work with today's kids and I question how relevant any 'stuff' would be that I could tell students to prepare them for the future.  There are certain 'tried and true' approaches that I am glad we no longer subscribe to; like finding square roots with paper and pencil, corporal punishment, and blood-letting.  We don't need an industrial model of education that churns out human machines for our factories any more.  We need critical thinkers that can question and deal with all the challenges of an ever-changing world. 

I do wish that all my students could do basic math with speed and precision; it would make my job easier.  It bothers me that some can't and I am unsure how to change that.  But instead of trying to teach multiplication to 16 year-olds, I will spend classroom time doing more practical math like questioning the value of electronic stores' service plans and I will spend time on important mathematics such as examining the ramifications of exponential growth.

Parents sometimes bring up the same questions as Ms. Wente.  Are you experimenting on my child with new methods?   The gist of my response is "Every damn day".  I continue to search for more effective ways for my students to learn and I explore new methods to assess their progress.

My job is hard but I will also continue to listen to my critics.  It keeps me thinking critically about what I do and how I do it.

We are better together

Last night I won a Capital Educators' Award - sort of.  My colleague Al Overwijk and I got a joint nomination from our principal.  There were over 600 nominees from junior kindergarten to post graduate, 65 finalist and 15 individual  winners.  Nominations from students and parents - touching testimonials of teaching talent, passion and compassion.  It is a real honour to be included in this very inspiring group of professionals.  Yet in the 12 years of the award we were the first co-nominees since there was no such type of nomination - until now. That's our brilliant principal - not afraid to bend the rules when the rules need bending.

Two and a half years ago Al and I each had a section of grade 10 applied math.  We started with a germ of an idea and rebuilt the course on the fly.  The students would do activities every day and the math would build over the semester.  We met almost every lunch hour to talk about the latest activity and plan the next steps.  Our approach worked better than we imagined.  We are now helping other teachers change their practice to help more students have success in mathematics.

I think that Al and I are pretty good teachers but when we get together we produce our best work. I believe that advances in education come when teachers talk and work together.  The best teaching comes from collaboration. 

It was wonderful to be recognized for our work together, as a team of two.  I hope that this is the beginning of a trend for the Capital Educators' Awards where the work of collaborators will be recognized and celebrated. 

I have a slab of acrylic with my name on it sitting on my mantle.  Al has one with his own name as well.  One nomination and two wins. But I didn't win anything really - we won together.  I will have to take my little trophy somewhere to have Alexander Overwijk's name etched on it.  The only question is the order of the names.  Does Al come before Bruce or does McLaurin come before Overwijk?

The irony of all this is that my last class of the day before I left for the awards ceremony was lousy.  I had a collection of grade 9 students that I failed to engage, interest or control.  I always say that you are only as good as your last class.  Wednesday was good, but Thursday was lousy.  Thank goodness that Friday's class was fine. 

Now when my last class of the day is lacking, I can look at the acrylic trophy and console myself - or maybe it will just make me feel like a fraud.   

Opening up to new ideas

This is something from my clog or computer log.  A clog can be defined as a blockage which stops things from going out in the pipe.  I wrote a few ideas over the last year before I was brave enough to actually post anything on-line.

Unlike many classrooms where activities are used mostly to introduce a topic or to consolidate a concept, most of my math lessons are centered on activities, a picture or a news article. My colleague Al and I are often asked where we get our ideas from for our activities. That's a good question.

I remember Al looking at me one morning with wild eyes.  He took a plastic tumbler and rolled it on the floor.  “Fantastic, isn't it?”  It immediately made me think of the newbie mail room employee played by Tim Robbins in The Hudsucker Proxy.  He proudly shows off a circle drawn on a piece of paper that he pulls out of his shoe.  

“Take a look at this sweet baby. I developed it myself.”  Without giving the movie's plot away, the Robbins character rides his idea to the top of the corporate ladder.

When Al rolled his cup on the floor and it formed an arc of a circle, he saw all the mathematics in an activity that could span a number of days and a number of curriculum expectations. (Note that this was not Al's original idea but he recognized it for all its potential.)

I drove my son to his rowing practice this morning.  I had been up until midnight to submit a grant proposal and I was still buzzing.  I figured that I should start my day with a run to settle myself out a bit.  As I was running though a soccer field I noticed that the crossbar of the goal was reinforced with a triangular support. 

Within seconds a classroom inquiry-based lesson on linear relations and quadratic functions had formed in my mind. 

We often complain that our students are blind to the obvious in our lessons, often giving us bizarre answers that have no foundation in reality.  Their understanding of mathematics does not extend beyond the calculator results, the textbook examples or the walls of the classroom.  Yet we teachers are similarly plagued.  Our mathematical thinking is also confined in the pages of a textbook or the limits of a classroom activity.  If we can turn our backs on the so-called safety of our sanitized material, we can begin to see mathematics which surrounds us. 

We sometimes hear about how a song somewhat inexplicably came to an artist in a moment of brilliant clarity. I once heard that Gordon Lightfoot wrote the haunting Bitter Green during a London cab ride.  I believe that music is a very different experience to a composer than it is to me.  I enjoy listening to music – consuming it somewhat passively.  A composer defines the world through music and they hear it in places that I tend to be oblivious to.  Yet there was a time in my life I did make up my own songs.  I had no car radio and it was a 2 hour drive from school to home.

If we want to hear and see mathematics, we have to start turning off our usually feeds and start listening and looking for it. Once you stop being a consumer of ideas, you can begin to create your own ideas.  That is true for teachers and it is true for students.  Given the chance, students will see and create mathematics to explain the world around us.  We owe it to our students to stop feeding them with our ides and allow them the struggle and bliss of formulating their own ideas.  We owe it to ourselves.

Where do my ideas from? They come from anywhere and everywhere.  I just need to open myself up to it.  Later in my run I ran across an overpass and glanced down at the railway tracks that converged toward a vanishing point.  I immediately had a lesson on ratio and proportion.  

Big Al Overwijk

Starting a blog is a rather daunting task.  It feels a bit like stepping off a cliff.   A fool's endeavor? April 1st seems like a perfect start date.  

This week I received a nomination for Ottawa's Capital Educators Awards.  I am flattered by the nomination and wish to thank my principal, a woman who writes a mean reference letter.  But what delighted me the most was the fact that two of my colleagues were also nominated.  The first is a former student of mine who teaches in an alternative school.  There is nothing better as a teacher than knowing that your students are making a difference and that you might have had a small part in their success.  

Another nomination was for my partner-in-crime Al Overwijk.  'Big Al' is a gifted teacher and I am happy to say that I had a part in his latest path (as he did mine).  When the present math department head (me) asked the former department head (Al) to teach the grade 10 applied math course, Al agreed.  The course is considered by many teachers as one of the most challenging assignments.  Al is an experienced, dynamic teacher so I gave him the task.  After teaching the course three times Al was exasperated and was ready to hand the course off to someone else.  It was the end of first semester.  We opened a second section of the course.  I took the new section and convinced Al to stay on to revamp the course together.  With nothing to lose, we took a very different approach.  We often met at lunch time and figured out things as we moved forward.  We stopped thinking about teaching and emphasized learning - learning by activities - activities that spiraled deeper and deeper into the curriculum.  No more units.  The activities were not limited to any particular curriculum strand.  We had some activities that touched half the curriculum expectations.

The results have been remarkable as suggested by our board-wide exam results and with reduced discipline problems.  Over a number of semesters Al has honed his grade 10 applied course and has begun to transform academic math courses in this style.  He has done workshops to share his materials and success with other teachers.  Unable to respond to all the email requests, he is blogging - encouraging me to do likewise.

Last May I was sitting in a workshop at the OAME annual conference.  Queen's University Math Professor Peter Taylor was explaining the virtues of teaching Calculus though problem solving.  A colleague, who was sitting at the same table with me, asked "Doesn't Al teach like this?"  "Yes", I answered.  A moment or two passed and a second colleague said, "Don't you teach like this too, Bruce?".  Feeling cheeky, I responded with, "I am Dr. Frankenstein, Al is the Monster." 

You can read more at Al's blog http://slamdunkmath.blogspot.ca/

P.S. I hope to use this space for professional reflection as a high school math teacher.  I will post ideas and materials that I have used that worked or didn't work.  I hope to learn by sharing my thoughts and experiences and share my learning.