Get Smart: Net Smart

Howard Reingold’s Net Smart is really the perfect companion to a class about Information Use. Including elements from class that we have already studied (the Halo Effect, Information Diet), Net Smart also introduces new literacies like Participation and Collaboration that tie everything together.

What struck me most about Reingold’s writing was his chapter on Attention, specifically his ideas around solitude and mindfulness. He describes how a “media triggered distraction can be … a cause for a dangerous loss of solitude.”

In an ever-connected world, I really feel like all of us (especially educators) are losing our connection to ourselves. As an introvert, it can be difficult to navigate this new, ever-collaborating world. It seems like every minute there’s a conference call, a “brainstorming session,” a group project...it’s completely overwhelming for someone whose internal voice speaks louder than her external. We introverts have become really good at “playing the (extrovert) game,” but inside all I want to do is sit down with a pen and some paper and get my own thoughts together before jumping into the mix. There’s this idea out now (a misconception, I think) that “two heads are better than one,” and while I believe there’s a need for collaboration and co-learning among humans (Mind in Society, anyone?), there’s also an equally important need for self-reflection and internal dialogue. For more on this idea, check out this TED Talk from Susan Cain (her book Quiet is a must-read for any teacher):

Some of our greatest thinkers and innovators were introverts who worked alone, and I think Reingold is aware of the mindful traits that made them special.

Copyright and Fair Use: Erlaubt oder Verboten?

This week we discussed at length Copyright law, specifically Fair Use, and how it affects us as educators. In short? Without a thorough understanding of Fair Use laws, we simply cannot be effective instructors.

Fair Use is a sticky wicket, mostly because there is so much misinformation out there circulating as fact. Teachers are warned about the dangers of Copyright fraud, and that at any moment we or our students could be subject to auditing by the elusive Copyright Police.

In truth, many “guidelines” for Fair Use and appropriate Copyright practices do not follow the actual legislation at all. They are typically written by media companies who want to keep teachers and others from using their materials without their permission (i.e. without paying license or royalty fees).

In truth, educators need to be aware of five main indicators of Fair Use:

1. Tranformation: are you and/or your students using the Copyrighted material in a new, innovative way to deepen understanding?
2. Purpose: Why are you using this particular material? (ex: it is an example of the German sense of humor or gives perspective into how Germans think culturally about a specific topic)
3. Nature: Are you intending to use the material in the same way or for a different reason? Are you expecting to make money off of the use? Are your intentions ethical?
4. Amount: How much of the material do you intend to use?
5. Market Impact: Is your use of the Copyrighted material going to take market business away from the original creator? Are they going to lose income if you use the material?

It is a relief to finally be accurately informed about Fair Use. As a German teacher, it is essential that I incorporate authentic materials into my instruction. Students must be exposed to German that was created for and is used by Germans! Music, images, short films, newspaper and magazine articles are all part of these authentic cultural materials. It would be a disservice to my students to expose them to anything less (i.e. textbook or teacher-created “stand in” materials for the real thing). I can now evaluate my use of these Copyrighted materials, and make my own decisions as to how I want to use them (and how I want my students to use them as well) in my classroom.

Passing the Torch

When I first read the description of what the “creative spirit of design” was, I couldn’t help but think on one of my favorite TED Talks by conductor Benjamin Zander. In his talk he discusses the power of classical music, but also his life’s goal: leave your audience “with their eyes shining.”

His is a powerful message. As teachers, we aren’t simply deliverers of information, just as our students aren’t simply receptacles for it. We are all dynamic human beings with our own perspectives and ideas. Letting our students become designers allows all of us to tap into our creativity and enrich not only our minds but our spirits as well. Our goal is for our students to leave our classrooms with their eyes shining, excited about what’s to come.

In the reality of day to day teaching, that is a tall order. It’s tough to get some of our kids to consistently bring a pencil to class, let alone get them to create a high-quality website/blog/promo video, etc. But with some carefully designed scaffolding, we can guide our students to an end product that they can be proud of, while also helping them strongly grasp our learning goals.

The term “scaffolding” comes from construction; the supports around a structure that is in the process of being built or renovated. The problem with scaffolding, however, is that it’s very obviously present and can be a real eyesore. I like to think of the structure and support we give our students more as an invisible fence. The boundaries are there, but they aren’t so obvious or imposing. Students know not to wander off too far, but the view of their product isn’t obstructed, nor is their creativity staunched by rules and regulations.

A good “invisible fence” needs three things: clear expectations/outcomes, solid background knowledge, and regular checkpoints for feedback. These are all elements of lesson design, and can be achieved through rubrics, examples/modeling of the final product, and opportunities for evaluation and reflection before the final product is due.

As a middle school teacher, laying a reliable invisible fence is so important. My kids are at one of the most creative points in their lives. They have more knowledge about the world than when they were in elementary school, but they haven’t yet grown out of the magic and imagination of early childhood. Without a good fence, they are destined to wander all over the place and never get to where they need to go. But with a good one, they can design their way to an end idea that aligns with my learning goals.

Justifying the Means

The biggest lesson I took from our fifth design principle (The Means Principle) is that it is not about technology so much as it is about good lesson design. Technology should only be implemented into a design after “mindful consideration” in regards to both the “cognitive and social” aspects of your lesson as well as your “content and learning activities.”

A technology may encourage creativity and collaboration and be really engaging to students, but that doesn’t mean it is right for your learning goals.

The biggest paradigm shift for me was understanding where to start. You don’t pick a technology you like and then work backwards to build a lesson around it. You have to start all the way at the beginning, with your design ABCS. Once you have your lesson design - your authentic problem, learning goals and activities, etc. then you can analyze what needs you and your students will have based on those goals. After you know what your students need, you can then begin vetting technologies that satisfy those needs.

The technologies that you choose for your Background Building activities may be completely different than the technologies necessary for your Construction activities. But because you started with a design, all technologies serve a purpose: to meet the needs of your learners.

Teaching with technology is, after all, still teaching. And good teaching always starts with a strong design.

Situated Cognition and Comprehensible Input

There is so much I want to say about the third design principle, The Knowledge Principle. So much of what Brown, Collins, and Duguid have to say in their article “Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning” aligns, almost seamlessly, with the progressive methods of teaching a world language today. I’ll try to keep my thoughts organized and to the point.

Dr. Bill Van Patten, professor of Second Language Acquisition of Michigan State University, in his article “Creating Comprehensible Input and Output,” defines communication as “the expression and interpretation of meaning in a given context.” Context is defined as the setting (physical space) and the participants (including their ages, roles, genders). He goes on to explain that “the classroom is one context with fixed participants and a fixed setting. So the classroom context will affect how we express and interpret meaning as well as what kind of meaning can be in focus.”

But just because my context is a classroom, it does not mean that I am restricted to the culture of a traditional classroom; i.e. the typical student-teacher dynamic (teacher as “sage on stage,” students as compliant pupils following directions) or that my interactions with my students are inauthentic.

So here is my struggle: what is the “culture” of my content? One would think that would have a very simple answer, because as a German teacher I am expected to teach German culture, but the “culture” that we learned about through John Seely Brown, et. al. has a slightly different meaning. In their article on situated cognition, enculturation refers to the practice of exposing students to the behavior, language, and culture of practitioners. For conventional core subjects, these practitioners are usually professionals in the field: historians, poets, doctors, chemists, etc. But who would be a practitioner of German? A linguist? A translator? Or the just plain folk (JPF) of everyday Germany?

In order to find the answer, we’ll have to backtrack a few steps. Van Patten explains that “learners hear and see language in a communicative context that they process for meaning. We call this type of language input. Input cannot be equated with the staple of much traditional language teaching: explanation about grammar, presentation of vocabulary lists, practice, fill-in-the-blanks, and so on. For mental representation to develop, learners have to hear and see language as it is used to express meaning.”  Brown, Collins, and Duguid reinforce the idea of input with their theory of “legitimate peripheral participation.” They state that “this peripheral participation is particularly important for people entering the culture. They need to observe how practitioners at various levels behave and talk” From here, then, we can make the assumption that input should come from an authentic place - what would students communicating in German likely talk about? In what communicative/conversational situations would my students likely find themselves? I therefore believe that my job is to enculturate my students into the world of JPF Germans, where they can converse and communicate with peers and native Germans alike.

In conclusion, I need to give students opportunities to hear language in an authentic context, even if that context is a classroom. I just have to make sure the input and communication flows from culture of JPFs communicating and conversing rather than that of a teacher explicitly teaching language rules to her students.

An example of this could involve the following: I tell my students a story about what I did over the past weekend. This is a conversation they would very likely have with a teacher, a friend, or a coworker. Students are given the task of remembering who I saw, and what I did with each person and when (for example, I went to the movies with my husband on Friday evening, but went shopping with my sister on Saturday). Students can then use this model to discuss their weekends with me and the rest of the class. By the end, we’ll have a record of what everyone did over the weekend. I can then pull up an infographic of what Germans enjoy doing in their free time (bike riding, watching TV, playing soccer), and we can compare and contrast our findings, reconnecting them to the work of Germany and its people.

Throw out those Lesson Plans!

Paradigm shifts are scary: they mean that everything you were doing before was misinformed or counter-productive. All those hours gone to waste. And what do teachers hate more than anything else? Having our precious time wasted. Oh, yeah, and being wrong. We hate that, too.

It all comes from a good place, though. We want to do our best. We want the kids to learn and grow. It’s important! We’re important! And it takes a ton of time to plan meaningful and motivating lessons for our students. We give up our lunch breaks, mornings, evenings, and weekends planning out activities, aligning said activities to standards and content goals, assessing the activities in order to give our students feedback and inform our next round of planning, etc.

We’ve worked so hard to create the plans we’ve used in our classrooms everyday. And now we have to throw it all away?

Well, yeah.

And here’s why: Lesson “plans” are not the place to start. A plan is just a list; a series of exercises in chronological order that keep students busy and fill class time with content-centered activity. Having a plan is important, but should always come second - or even third - to design.

“But design and planning are the same thing! I design my lesson plans!!” one may argue.

Well, no.

Design is the big picture: the architectural concepts and sketches behind the final blueprints and construction.

Unlike planning and logistics, Design lives in a conceptual space. The world in which Design lives does not have any rules - gravity and the laws of planetary motion do not exist in Design World. So what does? Creativity, abstract thought, invention, flashes of brilliance, that feeling of elation you get when you finally remember the name of that actor from that movie with Barbra Streisand that made you cry.

Anyone who has ever had a brilliant “Aha!” moment has started here, in Design World. Once design is in place, once the idea has formed, then the planning and logistics can begin.

So what can implementing design do for me as a teacher?

A good design can:

• Solve a common problem, usually in simple and innovative ways.
• Inspire new ideas or perspectives.
• Communicate an overarching message or theme.
• Elicit a specific emotion or reaction from an audience.

Implementing design into our teaching not only makes our content more engaging for our students, but it inspires them to incorporate the skill of design into their own lives. Take a look at your curriculum. Do you see an authentic problem that you want your students to solve? Do you want to communicate an overarching concept or theme to your students? Do you want your students to walk away with a specific feeling about a topic? Start there. Allow yourself to break the rules of Tradition and hang out in Design World for a bit.

Eureka! You’ve got it? Now you can start planning!