**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding a P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
By Kristi Meeuwse, ADE
Where’s the Beef? Show me the money! What’s the bottom line?
In today’s results-oriented, data-driven mentality in education, we all fall under the large accountability umbrella of test scores. Certainly, there are skeptics who question putting iPads in the hands of young children. It is asked, “How can we justify the cost of this technology when school budgets and programs are being cut and teachers are being furloughed?” I too, asked those questions at the beginning of this pilot. After all, my pay has been decreased from furloughs and no step-increases for experience or cost of living. My answers came directly from the very people for whom I work…my students.
Let me say that I teach children, not tests. I want my students to find a love for learning that sustains them for a lifetime. In a previous post, I described what kind of reader I am. I want my students to be filled with wonder and inquiry and to find joy in reading and learning. A commentary written in USA Today states that the goal of education should be to prepare students to be competent and original in their thinking and that focusing on test scores hurts innovation. When we start focusing on scores, we often stop focusing on innovative teaching methods and divergent thinking. Don’t get me wrong…teaching involves assessment and assessment drives instruction. The problem comes when we stay focused on the one-dimensional scores and not look at the whole child. William Arthur Ward states “Wise are those who learn that the bottom line doesn’t always have to be their top priority” Sermon over.
All of that being said, I do understand that the purchase of the iPads was intended to close the achievement gap and raise scores. So far, they’ve delivered on that. I’ve been using the iPads for 13 months. Last school year, we began implementation in late January. My class results are here. ipad-data pdf We were thrilled! Systematic teaching in Reading and Writing Workshop, along with differentiated instruction with the iPads allowed all 30 of my students to end the school year reading on or above grade level. This year, with 12 weeks of school remaining, 92% of my students read on a first grade level or higher and the remaining 8% are on grade level. Interesting to note, the 8% are students who came to my class after Christmas from other schools. They have moved from being non-readers to reading on-grade level in 3 months.
While I don’t solely focus on test scores, I can’t deny the results I am seeing. These are results that can’t be overlooked. If good teaching, and iPads as educational tools, result in higher achievement, then how can we argue that our children aren’t worth the investment?
This post originally appeared on iteachwithipads.net and has been republished with permission.
Kristi Meeuwse teaches kindergarten in Charleston, South Carolina. In January, 2011, her kindergarten class started a 1:1 iPad pilot for the school district and the results so far have been very successful. You can read more about it on her blog iteachwithipads.net.
Since the 1980s, there has been robust real-world evidence of a preference for hiring women for entry-level professorships in science, engineering, technology and math (STEM). This evidence comes from hiring audits at universities. For instance,in one audit of 89 US research universities in the 1990s, women were far less likely to apply for professorships – only 11%-26% of applicants were women. But once they applied, women were more likely to be invited to interview and offered the job than men were.
But what went on behind the scenes with these hiring decisions? Did women applicants give better job talks than men, publish more or in better journals, or have stronger letters of recommendation? Were hiring committees trying to address the faculty gender balance that typically skews more male than female?
To find out why academic faculty preferred women, an experiment was needed, and we recently conducted one.
Collecting hypothetical hiring data
Previously, in five national experiments, we asked 873 faculty from 371 colleges and universities in all 50 US states to rank three hypothetical applicants for entry-level professorships, based on narrative vignettes about the candidates and their qualifications. We told participants our goal was to collect information about what faculty looked for in job applicants when hiring, so we could advise our own graduate students.
We asked them to imagine that colleagues in their department had already met these hypothetical applicants, evaluated their CVs, attended their job talks, read their letters of recommendation – and rated the applicants as 9.5 out of 10 (very impressive) or 9.3 (still impressive, but just less so).
One of the applicants was an outstanding woman, pitted against an identically outstanding man. Because men and women were depicted as equally talented, any hiring preference had to be due to factors other than candidate quality. We included a third, male, foil candidate as one of the many ploys we employed to mask the gendered purpose of the experiment. In this previously published research, we found that both female and male faculty strongly prefer (by a 2-to-1 margin) to hire an outstanding woman over an identically outstanding man. The sole exception to this finding was that male economists had no gender preference.
Faculty of both genders exhibit 2-to-1 preference for hiring women applicants with identically outstanding qualifications, with the exception of male economists.
Even when we gave faculty only a single applicant to evaluate, those given the woman rated her more hireable than did those given the identical applicant depicted as a man. Not surprisingly, this finding caused a media frenzy, as it contradicted what many believe to be sexist hiring in academia.
Note that these experiments were not designed to mimic actual academic hiring, which entails multi-day visits, job talks and so on. The purpose of our experiments was not to determine if women are favored in actual hiring but rather to determine why data suggest they are in real-world conditions. To answer this question, one needs a controlled experiment to equate applicants.
Remember that our experiment looked at typical short-listed candidates – who are extremely qualified – at the point of hiring, and did not address advantages or disadvantages potentially experienced by women, girls, men and boys throughout their development. It is worth acknowledging, though, that a 2-to-1 advantage enjoyed at the point of tenure-track hiring is substantial and represents a pathway into the professoriate that is far more favorable for women than men.
Finding the limit to a preference for women
We wondered how deeply the faculty preference for women that we’d previously identified ran. Do faculty prefer a woman over a slightly more qualified man? How about a much more qualified man?
Ourmost recent experiment, just published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology, examined this question.
Using the same methods from our earlier study, we presented 158 STEM faculty with two male applicants and one female applicant for a tenure-track assistant professorship in their specific field. We presented another 94 faculty with two female applicants and one male applicant. In one contest, the female applicant was slightly less outstanding than her two male competitors, although still impressive; in the other, the male applicant was slightly less outstanding than his two female competitors.
It turned out that faculty of both genders and in all fields preferred the applicant rated the most outstanding, regardless of gender. Specifically, faculty preferred to hire slightly more outstanding men over slightly less outstanding women, and they also preferred to hire slightly more outstanding women over slightly less outstanding men.
Reconciling with other STEM sex bias research
These results show that the preference for women over equally outstanding men in our earlier experiments does not extend to women who are less accomplished than their male counterparts. Apparently, when female and male candidates are not equally accomplished, faculty view quality as the most important determinant of hiring rankings.
This finding suggests that when women scientists are hired in the academy, it is because they are viewed as equal or superior to males. These results should help dispel concerns that affirmative hiring practices result in inferior women being hired over superior men.
The absence of preference for a less outstanding man does not necessarily imply that academic hiring is meritocratic under all conditions. It is possible that with different levels of candidate information (or if the candidates were somewhat less competent, as opposed to being stellar), results might differ. Discrimination may be a concern when candidate qualifications are ambiguous, but, based on our study, not when candidates are exceptionally strong. Thus, our interpretation of our results is that women who are equal to or more accomplished than men enjoy a substantial hiring advantage.
These findings may provoke concerns. If affirmative action is intended to not merely give a preference to hiring women over identically qualified men, but also to tilt the odds toward hiring women who are slightly less accomplished but still rated as impressive, gender diversity advocates may be disheartened. Those who’ve lobbied for more women to be hired in fields in which they are underrepresented, such as engineering and economics, may find the present findings dismaying and argue that extremely well-qualified female candidates should be given preference over males rated a notch higher.
One claim finds no support in our new findings: the allegation that the dearth of women in some fields is the result of superior female applicants being bypassed in favor of less accomplished men. If excellent women applicants were given short shrift, the slightly less qualified man would have been chosen frequently over more qualified women. But this scenario occurred only 1.2% of the time – similar to the number of times a slightly less accomplished woman was chosen over a more accomplished man.
None of this means women no longer face unique hurdles in navigating academic science careers.
Nor do the present findings deny that historic sexism prevented many deserving women from being hired, or that current implicit stereotypes associating science with menare not related to lower science course-taking.
All of these studies suggest areas in need of further work to ensure equality of opportunity for women.
On the other hand, based on hundreds of analyses of national data on the lives of actual faculty women and men across the United States, we and economists Donna Ginther and Shulamit Kahn found that the overwhelming picture of the academy since 2000 is one of gender fairness. Our analyses examined hiring, remuneration, promotion, tenure, persistence, productivity, citations, effort and job satisfaction in every STEM field. The experiences of women and men professors today are largely comparable, as is their job satisfaction.
Our new experimental findings call into question unqualified claims of biased tenure-track hiring. Sex biases and stereotypes might reduce the number of women beginning training for the professorial pipeline, but when a woman emerges from her training as an excellent candidate, she is advantaged during the hiring process.
As much progress as technology can help a classroom make, it isn’t always a positive force. There are some drawbacks to trying to introduce technology into classrooms, even when the implementation is done in the most thoughtful and well planned out of ways.
Most dramatic shifts in how humans act and interact are accompanied by difficulties, especially at the outset. Though these difficulties may not outweigh the benefits of the new paradigm, they are nevertheless real. Technology in schools is no exception. Here are some of the problems associated with technology:
Technical difficulties. We all have memories of a teacher struggling to get a projector or program to work, or of losing a week’s work on a project because of a glitch in a system.
The issue of access. Many schools must deal not only with students who lack access to technology, but also with those who have too much access. Some students spend most of their free time at home playing computer games, surfing the Internet, or texting on their cell phones. This obsession with technologically based entertainment spills over into the school environment. Teachers must be aware of students who are surreptitiously playing games on cell phones or tablets in the classroom, who are using school computer time to communicate with friends, or who are not getting the social contact or exercise they need because they are hunched over their device at every free moment.
Harmful information. Another difficulty is that the World Wide Web contains not only beneficial information, but also information that may be harmful. Young people may not have the skills or desire to filter out the negative elements from the positive. As a teacher, you should be aware of this and should make an effort to tutor children in possible danger areas on the Internet: chat rooms, sexual trolls, and so on.
Just as you as a teacher must do your research on how to best extract benefits from technology, you must also do your homework when it comes to being prepared to combat the negative impact technology can have. Make sure you’re equipped to handle not just the best, but also the worst of what happens when the modern age comes to school.
Let’s hear your opinion. Educators – how do you deal with the difficulties of seamlessly incorporating technology and teaching?
Cell phones: good or bad? There’s no denying they’ve made modern life much more convenient. Communication happens at the drop of a hat – or at the click of a button. However, the instant gratification can make cell phones a little too attractive, making it hard for students to let go and focus on learning.
In our increasingly technological society, teachers have to deal with the fact that students as young as seven own cell phones, and many bring them to school. Some schools initially banned cell phones, but with the multitude of tragedies that have happened over the last decade, many have changed their policy. Also, parents pushed for the change, insisting their children needed to use their cell phones to reach them after school hours and to schedule rides. Many schools have now lifted their bans on cell phones.
Unfortunately, while restrictions on cell phone use have either been lifted or relaxed by most school districts, the distractions caused by cell phones and smart phones have increased. This is partly because the cell phones of today allow users to do much more than they could in the past. In addition to texting and making calls, students can take pictures, record short videos, play games, surf the Net, and more.
As a teacher, you’ll undoubtedly have problems with students abusing cell phones by texting each other during class, sending answers to exam questions, and harassing and bullying classmates. Because of this, you’ll need to impose strict rules to combat these issues. Your school may already have rules in place concerning cell phones that they require all teachers to adhere to. If it doesn’t, consider implementing the following rules in your classroom:
Students who are caught using a cell phone in the classroom without permission will have points deducted from their class participation score.
Students who are caught using a cell phone during a test will receive a one- or two-grade deduction from their test score.
Students must place their cell phones in a basket at the beginning of class. When class is over, they can retrieve their phones.
Cell phones in the classroom are not all bad, because they can be used as powerful teaching tools. Many feature multifunction calculators that can be used during math and science classes. The camera can be used to take wonderful photos, and the video feature can be used to take short videos. If your school does not have laptops available for classroom use, students can use the Internet browser on their phone to search for valuable information or to complete complex projects. Students can even use a dictionary app.
The cell phone can be a powerful distraction or an educational tool. You have to decide which it will be in your classroom. Make sure that you explain the school’s policy on cell phones at the beginning of the year. In the absence of formal school rules, you can make your own. Take advantage of this powerful teaching tool, but don’t let it distract your students.
Children in today’s classrooms will most likely be digital natives, people who were born in the digital era and have used technology all their lives. These students may be more receptive to instruction involving technologies. Technology can be used successfully if a teacher has the tools and knows how to use them. For example, cell phones are often disruptive elements in the classroom. A savvy teacher might take advantage of cell phones as instructional tools, rather than allow them to be an intrusive element in the classroom. The Internet, computers, and communication devices are things that today’s children live with. Using them successfully will increase student enthusiasm about knowledge, and teachers will have the opportunity to lead richer classes.
You’ll be required to find ways to introduce technology into your classroom, not only to make your life easier, but also to ensure that your students are exposed to technology. The modern working world will require even the most unskilled of laborers to be technologically literate, which makes it important for this exposure to begin within the classroom. This will not necessarily require you to make every aspect of the learning process dependent on technology. You could simply use technology to deliver standards-based lessons, or to change some activities to make them more interesting for students. Linking Web-based activities with standards-based curricula will keep students’ attention on what you need to teach them, but it will also help them to think and develop their own understanding of the topic.
The field of technology is advancing rapidly, and you’ll need to remain in touch with ongoing developments to avoid missing opportunities to leverage technology in your teaching practice. Professional development is an essential investment; attending technology expositions or conventions assists pre-service and in-service teachers in learning about available new advances in technology. The staff on hand at these events can explain practical instructional applications. Increasing your understanding will enhance your confidence when introducing technology to your class.
The Internet allows access to nearly limitless information. It’s estimated that the information contained in a week’s worth of the New York Times is more than the information a person in the 18th century would have in a lifetime. Students now have access to online information inside and outside school. And although this information is easy to access and relatively easy to find, you’ll guide students to determine whether it’s reliable and guide them to avoid becoming overwhelmed by the enormous amount of online information.
Consider all the resources, whether in hardware or software, that you have at hand to bring into play in your classroom. Figure out how each can be used as an effective teaching tool. As a teacher, you have little enough time and space already; use technology to make your curriculum bigger and stronger, not just more cluttered.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest column by Dahlton Grover
Millennials grew up in a unique era of transition as the Internet began to flourish and social networking was born. They were the first generation to have seemingly unlimited resources to learn from, which altered the way they learn, think about and feel about knowledge. The result is a world of visual learners craving digital content. With this unique disposition, millennials don’t learn the same way baby boomers did, so our education techniques must grow and change accordingly. Educators have the opportunity to utilize a plethora of new technologies in order to increase student engagement, and encourage what is known as a participatory culture. For STEM education, this type of culture optimizes results.
When it comes to STEM education, people are starting to really take notice. STEM certainly had merit 20 years ago when the term first came into use, but recently it has taken seed and grown enormously. Why now? Social media is certainly one force driving awareness. Some experts believe the exorbitant use of social media has effectively created a culture of instant gratification and lessened learning, but is this really accurate? As the millennial generation grew up with social media in a fast paced information-age, they also helped to transform it into something more useful. The first social sites such as MySpace were out of style as soon as millennials had their fun and were ready to move on. Next on the landscape was Facebook, which statistics now indicate is also on the decline in terms of millennial usage. So what have millennials moved onto? Fast-paced, information-rich sites that incorporate bite-sized pieces of data coupled with visual stimulation in the form of either photo or video.
Instagram and Tumblr are exploding because of the seamless flow of information they have created, which also satisfies the craving for visual stimulation amongst millennials. How are these new sites revolutionizing the way people see STEM? Not only do they easily connect people with like-minds and interests, but it also allows the world to see innovation in action. STEM-based hash tags like #EdChat, #STEMEd and #Dronestagram are proof that social sites are creating a world of participatory culture by showcasing STEM in its raw, honest form. Sites like Reddit are encouraging this on an even grander scale.
Reddit is a community news forum. Unlike Instagram and Tumblr, Reddit does not allow images or visuals in the posting system, but it still delivers a continuous stream of information on a variety of topics. With Reddit, the world is getting smaller, meaning getting information and finding a community with similar interests is becoming increasingly easier. For example, Reddit hosts what are known as AMAs or Ask Me Anything forums. Many of the hosts in these forums are STEM professionals ranging from NASA astronauts to geologists. Students of all ages have the opportunity to question them about the work they are doing and their profession in general. This type of forum is exactly what STEM students need to get them excited about learning, and encourage STEM dialogue to become a part of their daily lives. It has been proven that people gain the majority of their science knowledge outside of formal classroom, and social sites like Reddit are helping to encourage this more and more.
Learning outside the traditional classroom is also driven by the large amount of free, open-source software and hardware available which generate active, vibrant social communities. For example, Arduino is a computer programming language which is open-source and enables anyone to learn to code and control devices from simple robots to wearable technology. Instead of established companies controlling the markets, the social nature of the Internet has created an environment of learning that encourages users to use, create, invent and improve upon what is already available. Participation in community forums about such open-source software and hardware empowers students to learn and develop confidence in their skills, through relevant, real-world projects. Social sites are used to share new discoveries and new skills around open-source software and hardware used in STEM fields.
So what does all this mean for STEM educators around the world? How can they utilize this information within their unique teaching methodologies? The answer to this is not black and white. Creativity is needed and student input is extremely helpful. If students have a lot of fun learning through organic Reddit feeds, researching STEM feeds could be a potential project. If students are Instagram-lovers, encourage them to find some of the most popular STEM-based accounts and put together a compilation of their top posts and explain the STEM content each illustrates. Or, if students want to learn computer coding, open-source software can be easily used in classrooms to encourage student-driven learning. Whatever the project may be, social media and learning go together hand-in-hand. Social networking is so much more now than where it began, and has generated a world of self-taught, lifelong learners. Even more important is that many of these sites encourage dialogue, which reinforces the idea of a participatory culture and fosters confidence in student’s abilities. Social media can be used in so many different ways within the classroom, and often inspires students to continue actively seeking information outside of school, which many STEM educators work to achieve.
_________________
Dahlton Grover is the resident Curriculum and Content Coordinator for PCS Edventures, and is in charge of overseeing final products, marketing collateral, photography and videography. Additionally, she works on Investor Relations, runs monthly webinars, served as a project manager for the Saudi Arabia international project and occasionally spends time teaching students in the Lab. Ms. Grover received her B.A. in Global Studies from the University of California, Santa Barbara in 2013. Following her education at UCSB she pursued a 200 hour Yoga Alliance certified yoga teacher training program in San Luis Obispo, CA, after which she returned home to Boise, ID. Ms. Grover has extensive experience in writing, sales and marketing and her Global Studies background fuels her passion to change the face of education worldwide. In addition, Ms. Grover was an original PCS Edventures student, as she attended their preschool at a young age and grew up around their curriculum and technology for many years; because of her experience Dahlton brings a unique student perspective to the production of developing new curriculum.
The North Dakota Center for Distance Education on-line learning opportunities provide the perfect venue for inquisitive students who want to explore the world through their fingertips, without ever stepping foot into a classroom. They have made it one of their priorities to expand the minds of students in rural areas by offering unique online classes and a high school diploma program to students who never thought it was possible to learn in this unique manner.
In largely populated areas students are typically able to choose from a wide variety of core and elective level classes with a hands-on learning experience in a classroom setting. In districts with only a handful of students, combined with a tight budget, the variety of options outside the core curriculum isn’t always possible for a district. Because of this situation the North Dakota Center for Distance Education (NDCDE) chose to expand their curriculum offerings with courses provided bythe #1 publisher of online career and elective courses, eDynamic Learning.
“It is our responsibility to ensure ALL students receive the best education possible, no matter what the circumstances,” said Barb Meidinger, NDCDE’s secondary principal. “With the addition of eDynamic Learning elective courses, schools and students can select from over 50 engaging, relevant courses to round out their education.”
Today’s tech savvy students enjoy the user-friendly format and the freedom to access classes anytime from anywhere. At the North Dakota Center for Distance Education students have the option to take as little as one class per semester, or they can enroll in the high school diploma program and graduate from NDCDE ready for college. These unique opportunities would not be possible without the ala Carte list of classes and the flexibility and vision of eDynamic Learning founder and CEO, Kevin Viau.
“I met Kevin back in 2007 when he was just starting eDynamic Learning. At that time he only offered two Social Studies classes! The eDynamic portfolio might have been limited, but I knew our students would benefit from the high-quality, relevant content the courses had to offer,” said Meidinger. “It was easy to make the decision to work with Kevin in 2007 and here we are 8 years later still engaged with him and the company! His vision and his ability to understand the type of content that engages students keeps eDynamic Learning at the forefront of online learning.”
Over the years NDCDE has adopted dozens of core and elective courses offered from a select group of vendors, including eDynamic Learning. However, students gravitate toward eDynamic Learning courses to study unique subjects as: culinary arts, forensic science, public speaking, law and order, criminology, and so on, because they are so different from a traditional course.
“We receive a lot of positive comments about eDynamic Learning courses from students on the evaluation survey we send to them after every course they take,” explained learning management systems manager, Mike Miller. “They are learning new information with every course and it is refreshing to hear them say they are being challenged in a good way.”
NDCDE staff believes they are filling the educational gap between electives and core curriculum by providing the courses that smaller districts can’t offer. They couldn’t do it without the courses offered and created by eDynamic.
“We asked Kevin if he could create a new mythology and folklore course because ours was tired and uninteresting and he granted our request! eDynamic Learning created the course just for us, and now it’s part of their course catalogue and one of our most popular classes,” stated Meidinger.
In the early 1930’s, North Dakota led the way in recognizing the learning limitations that were forced on rural students. The state championed NDCDE as one of the first schools focused on correspondence courses. The school, once dependent on snail mail, is now ahead of its time with 24-hour accessibility to a quality education with course variety and career exploration thrown into the mix.
“The mission of the school is to introduce students to things they may have never seen or thought of, and self discovery is one the best parts of being in education,” said Meidinger. “Teachers like teaching the eDynamic Learning courses and students like taking them! You can’t get any better than that.”
NDCDE hopes to expand student opportunities even more by opening their first ‘Learning Lab’ where students K-12 are able to go for additional hands-on learning experiences. The lab, located in the offices of NDCDE, will open in late summer 2015. The Center for Distance Education will work with schools throughout North Dakota to make similar labs available for their students.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
Guest post by Bob Hildreth
Ask the “best” colleges about the student debt crisis and they are likely to trot out the very low default rates of their graduates, only 1 to 2 percent. Most of the defaulting students, they point out, come from for-profits. They also believe that the national default rate at 11.8 percent is at a manageable level.
But these rates hide more than they reveal. Default rates are managed to be low. It is in the best interest of everyone involved to keep them low: the government wants to keep the lid on its troubled policy, the government’s collection agents want to earn their fees by keeping debtors current, and the colleges want to keep the mother’s milk of government subsidies flowing in their direction.
The “best colleges” have little experience with debt defaults. They either don’t know or are reluctant to admit that, when it comes to the government’s loan program, colleges are all bunched together. Even for a college with zero defaults the only default rate that matters in a crisis is that of all debtors from all colleges.
The government is lenient, letting 9 months of no repayments pass before calling a student in default. Compare that to only 90 days on car loans or 3 months on mortgages. Students are also allowed to clear their defaults by switching from stricter repayment plans to easier ones. College lobbyists have convinced the government to measure default rates after only three years knowing that defaults accumulate over time. In fact, one in five students with over $15,000 in debt defaulted on his or her loan in the 10 years after graduation. That’s a 20% default rate.
The Federal Reserve of New York has created its own measure to gage student debt stress. Using consumer data the Fed measures how long students go without paying their debts. By this calculation in 2014 past due rates on student debt reached as high as 63%.
That leaves the government like the famous emperor without clothes. If the future of our children and the solvency of our colleges were not at stake the government might have already stopped lending. But there is probably no default rate so high that the government would abandon these priorities. At the same time it is easy to guess that changes are afoot. One of the most likely targets are controls on tuition increases. That will cause a fire storm on Washington’s DuPont Circle, the home of college lobbyists. If these lobbyists can suggest a way to put clothes back on the emperor, they should speak now.
____
Bob Hildreth is the Founder and Chairman of the Board of Inversant, a Boston-based non-profit that helps families learn about, apply for and save for college without incurring student debt.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Garrett Zimmer
OK so I’ve been wanting to ask this question lately. Who do we lean on for input and advice when we have to teach or create something? Maybe advice isn’t the right word, perhaps I’d rather use perspective.
What stakeholders are we looking to for their perspective when designing a project, a lesson, a company, or technology? As teachers, leaders, or even team members do we put stake in the perspective of everyone, or are we dismissive of some perspectives simply because they don’t hold a specific degree or level of experience. I’ve had my share of high growth leadership experiences and I’ve found some of the best results and insights seeded from the most unlikely sources.
Let me briefly share my example. During the very beginning of my 1st career in Sales and Marketing I sat in a strange and unique position. I believed I was gifted, charismatic, intelligent, and I even outsold most of my co-workers with years of sales experience. My youth gave me little credibility, in spite of the fact that I’d been professionally selling since the age of 7. See I grew up in a very religious organization where going door to door selling bible philosophy for hours each week was the norm. I experienced rejection, learned and honed abilities in ice-breaking and relating to people’s needs, but my unique perspective and experience went unrecognized, till a few years in when my talents were noticed by a great manager.
See it’s very easy to seek out someone’s views if they come with a degree, or 50 years of experience, and quite honestly I think those views should hold much more weight. But are we just as apt to dismiss the views of someone else a little lighter in experience?
Let’s take a step into the EdTech and general Startup landscape though. Market research and understanding your market is so important for startups and getting it wrong can have devastating impact. I’ve seen and heard of countless companies fail a launch or cost themselves so much by putting out a product that just failed to meet the needs of their intended target market. I’ve also seen many companies launch a product and spend their marketing dollars targeting one segment, and a year later shift their marketing to a whole different audience because it turns out that the product is actually perfect for the later.
It’s easy to take a top level approach when designing a piece of software, a tool, or a business product and say Who’s Buying this, let me appeal to them. Who’s backing this, or investing in it, let me appeal to them. However, are we forgetting about who is using this? I remember my good friend Shawn Q, a clinical informatics specialist, told me a story of the E-Health Management system that went over budget by something like 500% because it just didn’t work for the ground floor nurses who were supposed to be using it. This is directly resulting from not keeping the end user in the loop and conversation.
EdTech and the Education market though is so much more complex. Education is so directly tied to every level of our lives that the stakeholders are vast and varied. Governments, Administrators, Lobbyists, Employers, Post Secondary Institutions Teachers, Parents and Students are all Key Stakeholder groups with a public and personal interest. Of course with so many voices in the discussion, efficiency dictates that emphasis be placed on those who pay the bills. The Administrators, the Governments, and the Institutions. I advocate for that voice as a strong part of the equation in the hopes that that voice resonates the needs of the rest. But even further I support the importance of actually connecting with each stakeholder group, to make sure nothing is missing.
Some Educational tech companies seem reluctant to drive their business with Teachers and Students in mind, and instead pay homage to their own vision of what is good and right and effective. In everything from connectivity to compatibility and even down to price modeling, some still fail to match their offering to meet the needs of the people using it. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not disparaging. There are many that build Advisory Groups and speak with Teachers, and Administrators and the Thought Leaders with years and years of experience. And I do the same in my development. But how many are going to the students, to the brand new fresh out of college teachers to see what their perspective is?
What a thought Garrett, you’re CRAZY! Ask an uneducated student to give insight on a project that they can’t even begin to understand the complexity of designing, much less the complexity of the market. Wait! Ask a teacher who just stepped out of college and doesn’t understand what it’s really like in the classroom yet? CRAZY! All you would get is kids that want every game ever made loaded into the software, and teachers who want the price to be free. I say “so what!” Yes you’re going to get some of that, but you will also get a wealth of information that adds amazing value for that group. And perhaps that’s the value add, that really makes your product stand out and help millions of students and teachers.
I’m a Kid Friendly YouTube Content Creator and I can tell you 100% that there are some really amazing and intelligent kids out there who know what they want. My interactions around my own EdTech startup company with Teachers and thought leaders, both inexperienced and experienced, have yielded such amazing insights into what they need and want. By working closely with a diverse group of end users, designing for them, my product has become theirs as much as ours. I strongly believe that by keeping all the stakeholders in the conversation, our product will solve real teacher and student concerns.
So if you’re a Teacher, an Administrator, or even an EdTech Startup yourself and are not regularly in the trenches to talk with the day to day soldiers, you’re likely missing valuable information that could make you more successful. To reword a Famous President’s mantra: “And so, my fellow leaders – ask not what you can do for students and teachers, ask what they can do for you.”
Garrett Zimmer is an experienced entrepreneur, speaker, and leader with a background in business and a passion for educational leadership. Garrett has been awarded a Parliamentary Citation from the Government of Canada and various honors for his work with educational boards and councils across Ontario Canada. He continues to advocate and work for the future of students everywhere in the educational sector. Garrett has spent the past 10 years as an entrepreneur and runs a popular Kid Friendly Youtube Entertainment Channel called PBJellyGames.
If you’d like to learn more about Garrett or MineGage, follow him on twitter: @PBJellyGames or visit the Minegage website www.minegage.com.
There is a growing global demand for science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) professionals. At the same time, experts in science education are calling for students to become more “scientifically literate.” This call, however, is about more than filling jobs.
A basic understanding of scientific concepts, processes, and ways of thinking is critical for students to succeed in the world of today and tomorrow. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s2014 report on the results of the international PISA 2012 science assessment, “An understanding of science and technology is central to a young person’s preparedness for life in modern society.”
This means that students must go beyond memorizing science facts and theories; they must gain experience with the tools and practices of science. Technology can help. While technology alone does not create scientific understanding, it represents a key tool for promoting inquiry investigations.
A substantial body of research confirms the positive impact of inquiry-based instruction on students’ understanding of science, including substantially higher learning when compared to traditional instruction. Further, education experts specify that technology is most effective in supporting student learning in science when it is used in an inquiry context. Indeed, blending technology into data collection, analysis and visualization as part of inquiry-based instruction has been shown to deepen students’ understanding, and increase their motivation and interest in science.
Districts transitioning to or implementing STEM programs should consider the following points:
Lab investigations and technology tools should be connected with classroom experiences, including lectures, readings and discussions. Lab experiences and technology are much more effective when fully integrated into the curriculum and the flow of classroom science lessons.
Whether teachers choose to use a structured, guided or open inquiry format, lab activities should give students the opportunity to apply the scientific process to their learning. These activities should allow them to question and investigate; make predictions; collect, analyze and interpret data; refine their questions; and engage in argumentation from evidence. This builds problem-solving and higher-order thinking skills, as well as “soft skills” such as communication and collaboration.
Inquiry-based investigations inside and outside the classroom should engage students in real-life scientific and engineering practices. Students should also have the opportunity to use real-world tools to make data meaningful for them while they “do” science.
Traditional labs can be time-consuming and classroom sets of industry equipment can be prohibitively expensive. Be sure that lab investigations and technology tools are specifically designed for instructional use to save time and money, and reduce frustration. For example, traditional cell respiration labs are typically complex and inaccurate. In a respiration lab activity built to facilitate student understanding, the setup for a carbon dioxide or oxygen gas sensor should be simple, so accurate data can collected in minutes with minimal frustration.
To maximize your technology investment, make sure tools such as sensors and probes are compatible with any classroom environment and work on a variety of platforms, including iPads, Chromebooks, Android tablets, Mac and Windows computers, and netbooks. In addition, make certain the tools match the ability levels of your students.
A key part of the scientific process is the sharing, analysis and discussion of data. Consider how students’ data will be transmitted from tools, such as sensors, to their computer or tablet. Will it be done via a USB or wireless connection? Will the data be transmitted directly to the student’s device or will it go to the cloud first? Can students do this themselves or will they need teacher assistance? Allowing students to get their data faster gives them more time for analysis and discussion, which is key to building scientific understanding.
When possible, consider investing in multi-measure sensors that allow for the collection of multiple, simultaneous measurements in a single sensor, e.g. for areas such weather, advanced chemistry, or water quality. This not only helps keep costs down, but also helps conserve instructional time by reducing the time it takes to set up sensors and collect the data.
If inquiry-based instruction is new to your district, conduct professional development workshops that guide teachers to begin with more highly-structured activities and then move students, over time, to open-ended investigations where they take more responsibility for planning their activities. Each stage of this transition should informed by teachers’ assessments of students’ readiness to complete learner-led investigations.
Instructional resources and professional development workshops should also provide suggestions on ways to scaffold student capabilities. This will ensure that teachers can provide multiple levels of guidance and support for investigations. It will also help teachers to select the level of support that best matches their students’ skills and experiences, so they can accomplish challenging tasks.
Across the country and around the world, teachers are effectively implementing inquiry-based science instruction that takes advantage of technology tools for collecting, analyzing and visualizing data. When students “do” science, rather than simply read about it, they deepen their understanding, they develop problem-solving and critical thinking skills, and they retain more content knowledge. They are also more motivated to learn and to continue building their science literacy. This is not only critical for students who decided to pursue STEM careers, but also for life in the modern world.
Steven Korte is the CEO of PASCO Scientific, a developer of innovative teaching and learning solutions for K–12 and higher education since 1964.
