Category Archives: LDT – GSE – Stanford

Curriculum Construction – Week 3 – Ideology Presentation

Today each group presented one of the curriculum ideologies:

  1. Religious Orthodoxy
  2. Rational Humanism
  3. Progressivism
  4. Critical Theory
  5. Cognitive Pluralism
  6. Care (Noddings)

Our group was assinged to Cognitive Pluralism.

Our game plan:


Prompt: Distill and Convey the ideology in a convincing way

Topic: Cognitive Pluralism

Details:

  • 7 minute presentation (5min + 2min Q&A)
  • Include Why, What and How
  • Tip from Molly → Preview Gardener
  • Important to include representation (think this means how student can symbolize)
  • Email Molly with presentation

Our Script

Open Role Play – modeling

  • Celine (teacher) introduces the Water unit and prompts each student to come up with a project they’d like to do
  • Each student gives short description of what they want to do and what drives their interest
    • Lucas
      • Erosion – how different water flow rates affect the course of a river
    • Mohamad
      • Energy – how water can be used to produce energy. I want to build a model dam that has the water flow produce electricity that can light a small light bulb, and thus explore water in that way. Might also be interested to build a small tidal energy system and see how water can be used to produce energy that way as well, and which system is better (Spacial & Bodily and a little bit Mathematical-Logical).
    • Lisa
      • Understand native american tribes and the symbols around water
      • I’d like to re-produce a water dance

Presentation

  • Celine introduces WHAT Cognitive Pluralism is
  • Mohammad explains Gardner’s idea of multiple intelligences
  • Lisa explains WHY we should teach Cognitive Pluralism
  • Lucas describes HOW teachers might incorporate the ideology in practice

Q&A

Material from Readings

    • Pluralism of meanings
      • Multiple ways of teaching and learning the same concept
        • Analogies (Dan Schwartz)
        • Metaphors
      • Intelligence as a verb versus a noun
        • Not something you have, something you do
        • Fixed versus Growth mindset
        • Brain as a muscle
      • Literacy
        • Expanded definition – not only reading words, but symbols
        • “…encoding or decoding of information in any of the forms that humans use to convey meaning” (Eisner, 1994, p.81)
    • Equity
      • Differentiation
        • Requires teacher to look at ‘internal conditions’ of student
      • “By creating a wider array of curricular tasks … opportunities for success in school are expanded.”  (Eisner, 1994, p.82)
      • Tasks must bare equal merit – arts vs science
    • Null Curriculum
      • Curriculum is as mind-altering device
      • What goes in is as important as what is left out
      • Missed opportunity to increase learner’s repertoire
    • Limited success
      • Teachers must have multiple forms of literacy – but most of us will latch onto one way of understanding and thus have a harder time explaining in multiple ways.

 

Our presentation slides

Beyond Bits and Atoms – Week 3 – Maker Movement / Makerspace essay

FabLabs in schools and professional development: how to do it?

FabLabs in schools provide an unique opportunity for teacher professional development, in all disciplines. They may provide a situated learning experience where teachers can recall the difficulties students have in the process of learning and thus reflect upon their own teaching practices. Given that the majority of teachers are not familiar with fabrication and electronics, they are put back into the beginner’s seat, providing the possibility of reflecting metacognitively about learning and teaching. Accompanied with engaging discussions and activities of grounded on the affordances the activities provide, teachers learn about the best practices of teaching through modeling and engagement in practice.

The nature of the activities in FabLabs range from exploring, designing, building, and asking questions – all traits considered desirable in today’s research in education. What if we could apply these features into an English Poetry class? How can we promote transfer from the teachers experiences in the FabLab into their ‘Monday’? I propose a PD curriculum that through engaging in FabLabs, teachers are provided the opportunity to reflect on how learning happens, how to transfer these ideas into their own practice, and ultimately affect learning outcomes of their students.

“In fact, the richness of makerspaces comes not from the fact that the abstract is left out, but that it is brought in together with new ways to build relationships with and between objects and concepts. ” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.5)

The process of tangibilizing ideas I believe is central to the learning process teachers would go through. How might a History professor tangibilize a class about the Industrial Revolution? Perhaps by reenacting a pivotal moment, trial, or protest where the students represent the historical figures. Students will be engaged by the shared responsibility of doing research on the topic, creating a skit, performing it, and finally discussing what they learned from the experience. This process has direct parallels to the activities in the FabLab where the goal is to learn in the making, where the process is the goal, and the final product is an experience.

“The history of educational technologies and education reform (Collins & Halverson, 2009; Tyack & Cuban, 1995) has repeatedly demonstrated that the implementation of “revolutionary technologies” often leads to considering their benefits as self-evident. We see research (done together with teachers) as a tool for both measuring learning outcomes and as a way for teachers to reflect upon and optimize their own practice.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.6)

This PD curriculum would also need to introduce new concepts of assessing if students are learning more or less once these new practices in teaching are utilized in the classroom. I am not proposing the elimination of ‘traditional’ testing but an added level of observation of the student’s process, effort, and progression to provide new measures of assessment. These measures would in turn provide valuable information for the teachers to formatively assess their own practice.

“Assessing the work that takes place in makerspaces is possible, but it requires a new set of approaches and tools. Teachers and practitioners need to be aware that the metrics of success will not necessarily be test scores but very different types of assessments—it is a common and dangerous trap to promise that students’ math scores will automatically improve as a result of a maker class.”  (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.10)

Finally, a sustained community of practice is needed to create synergies amongst teacher’s experiences, doubts, and shared knowledge. Utilizing the common thread of their FabLab PD, they could share and discuss how they applied what they learned in their disciplines, curricula, classroom activities, and assessments.

“Allowing teachers to “pair up” and design curriculum together, even if they are from different areas, greatly expands the range of activities that can be done in the labs and makes it possible to attract students with a variety of different interests.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.9)

The FabLab PD experience might trigger in teachers the desire for a more multidisciplinary approach to their practice where the connections between the abstract and the concrete are explored and transferred. “Knowledge is not merely a commodity to be transmitted, encoded, retained, and re-applied, but a personal experience to be constructed.” (Ackermann, 2001, p.7) To do this, they must be open to potential overlaps of different disciplines and creating opportunities for the students to engage not only mentally but physically with the concepts at hand.

With this intention in mind, FabLabs provide not only an opportunity for students to do so, but for teachers, as students, to engage and experience with potentially different approaches to teaching their discipline. There is no ‘magic bullet’ but I believe that FabLabs could provide an interesting mechanism to scaffold the teacher’s progression towards transforming their own practice.

On top of using the FabLab as a PD environment, the teachers might also be inspired to use the space for special projects within their discipline. Back to the History teacher, he might want to show how the evolution of machines has increased the production output of goods, having the students experience the speed with which they can prototype products using only pencil and cardboard versus using the computer to design and the laser cutter.

Hopefully, the now worldwide Maker’s movement will survive and prosper as a means to the ultimate end – improved learning outcomes – both for the students and for the teachers.

“We have the once-in-a-generation opportunity to establish something truly new in schools, make it sustainable, and deeply integrate it in the school day. We have the opportunity to give to millions of children a new entry point into the world of knowledge and science, and give them a much richer palette of expressive media for their ideas to come true, creating much more sophisticated “objects to think with.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.12)

For this to happen, all stakeholders must be committed and involved in the process. A FabLab PD might be one way to stimulate and help spread even more widely the affordances this kind of space can provide to all parties involved.

“The maker movement will only survive and fulfill its educational goals if the decisions are being made by teachers, education researchers, and education policy makers—professionals that really understand schools, teaching, and learning.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.12)

References:

Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference. Future of learning group publication, 5(3), 438.

Blikstein, P. & Worsley, M. (2014?) Children Are Not Hackers.

Brazilian Education – Week 3 – Class Notes

eduardo-zancul.jpg

Todays class was lead by Eduardo Zancul, POLI: Engineering Education in Brazil: current issues and initiatives” by  – USP

  • Internal talk about pedagogy and quality of learning that does not happen
  • Very low incentives for teachers to change their practice
  • Some teachers actually think that flunking half of their class is good teaching

Stanford – Electrical Engineering online course – one of the oldest running programs

Curriculum Construction – Week 3 – Reading Notes

Bruner, J. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  pp. 1-32, 43-54.

An Alternative Vision

  • Education planned for relations people might establish
  • Community’s interests should be attended but are varying
    • There is no “we” – only You and I
    • “… parental interests take on different priorities at different times, and reasonable people differ on what they mean by growth and acceptability” (Bruner, 1960, p.46)
  • Center around interests
    • “If tests are used at all, they should be given at the request of children (or their parents) who want to learn more about their own talents. By and large, interests – not tested capacities – should determine placement.” (Bruner, 1960, p.46)
  • Educate about human activities
    • “… things that are done by the complete man or woman” (Bobbitt, 1915)
    • “We need a scheme that speaks to the existential heart of life – one that draws attention to our passions, attitudes, connections, concerns, and experienced responsibilities.” (Bruner, 1960, p.47)
  • Care about self
    • “Central to caring for the physical self is understanding and accepting its potential and limitations.” (Bruner, 1960, p.48)
    • “If we regard our relations with intimate others as central in moral life, we must provide all our children with practice in caring.” (Bruner, 1960, p.52)
    • Dialogue is also essential in learning how to create and maintain caring relations with intimate others. Unfortunately, there is little real dialogue in classrooms.” (Bruner, 1960, p.53)
  • Against ideology of control – For shared living and responsibility
    • Develop in children the capacity for shared cares and concerns
    • Attend to multiple intelligences (Gardner)
    • Culturally filtered and grounded

Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. pp. 71-86.

Chapter 2

  • “Education is suffering from narration sickness.” (Freire, 2005, p.71)
  • Banking concept of education
    • “This is the “banking” concept of education, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits.” (Freire, 2005, p.72)
  • Teacher-student contradiction and oppression
    • “Projecting an absolute ignorance onto others, a characteristic of the ideology) of oppression, negates education and knowledge as processes of inquiry.” (Freire, 2005, p.72)
  • Education as a form of control
    • “The capability of banking education to minimize or annul the students creative power and to stimulate their credulity serves the interests of the oppressors, who care neither to have the world revealed nor to see it transformed.“ (Freire, 2005, p.73)
    • “Indeed, the interests of the oppressors lie in ‘changing the consciousness of the oppressed, not the situation which oppresses them’ for the more the oppressed can be led to adapt to that situation, the more easily they can be dominated.” (Freire, 2005, p.74)
  • Conscientização
    • “Such transformation, of course, would undermine the oppressors purposes; hence their utilization of the banking concept of education to avoid the threat of student conscientização” (Freire, 2005, p.74)
    • “Liberation is a praxis: the action and reflection of men and women upon their world in order to transform it.” (Freire, 2005, p.79)
    • “Liberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferrals of information.” (Freire, 2005, p.79)
  • Learn by teaching
    • “The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach.” (Freire, 2005, p.80)

Meek, A. (March 1991). On Thinking about Teaching: A Conversation with Eleanor Duckworth. Educational Leadership, pp. 30-34.

  • Owning the ideas (knowledge)
    • “You have to put them in a situation where they develop that understanding – it’s not going to happen from your telling them” (Meek, 1991, p.30)
  • Cognitive Pluralism
    • Read poem – discuss what you noticed – everyone notices ‘something’ – I never noticed that!
  • Provide a safe space for sharing and pushing back
  • Teacher PD
    • Have them experience learning again to affect their practice
      • “I want them to have the phenomena of teaching and learning to live through and think about, just as the kids live through and think about flashlights, batteries, and bulbs.” (Meek, 1991, p.32)
    • Meek’s PD
      • Model behavior
      • Practice teaching themselves
      • Become learners in the class with Meek
    • Communities of practice
      • Value of sharing
      • Learning to take their knowledge seriously
      • Be metacognitive about their work – teach how to do research
  • Investigate vs. find out about
    • “It’s between them and the moon with a little help from each other.” (Meek, 1991, p.33)
    • Document your work, your process, and reflect upon it
  • Curriculum for finding
    • “When they’re really into it. asking their own next questions and figuring out how to answer their own next questions, how does that go? That seems to me what curriculum development has to be” (Meek, 1991, p.33)

Gardner, H. (1999). The Disciplined Mind. New York: Penguin Books. pp. 15-40.

  • The ultimate goal of education
    • Truth, beauty and good
    • “We need an education that is deeply rooted in two apparently contrasting but actually conplementary considerations: what is know about the human condition, in its times aspects; the contemporary (and the coming ) scene.” (Gardner, 1999, p.20)
  • Educate to ensure roles are going to be filled by the next generation
  • Educate to ensure cultural values and heritage is transmitted
  • Formal education
    • “For while education all over the world has long featured the transmission of roles and values in appropriate setting, ‘decontextualized schools’ have been devised primarily for show more specify goals: the acquisition of literacy with notations and the mastery of disciplines.” (Gardner, 1999, p.29)
  • What should be taught? Many want culture and religion not to be taught in schools.
    • Breadth vs depth of content
    • Accumulation vs. construction of knowledge
    • Utilitarian vs. intellectual growth’s sake goals
    • Uniform vs. individualized education
    • Private vs public education
    • Multidisciplinary vs mastery of one
    • Assessments – all in or none at all
    • Relative or universal standards
    • Technocentric vs Homocentric
    • Student-centric vs teacher-centric approach

Brazilian Education – Week 3 – Reading Notes

Brazilian Education

This week’s readings were about Engineering education in Brazil. Main take-aways:

  • Poor STEM education in high-schools
  • Curriculum is too theoretical and lacks ‘soft-skills’ training
  • Job market complains about the quality of graduating engineers
  • Need more interaction between academia and industry
  • Dropout rates and enrolment rates are terrible when comparing to BRICS and OECD countries

CNI, 2014, Recursos humanos para inovação: engenheiros e tecnólogos.

  • Few patents, expensive process
  • Engineering education is outdated
  • Barriers in collaboration between universities, research centers and the market
  • Low tradition in multi-disciplinary research
  • Research financing does not demand financial or concrete results
  • PhDs are all in academia 98.3% (40% in the US)
  • Academic stricto sensu limits interactions with real world
  • Teach more creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship
  • Great problem with evasion – only 50% finish degree
  • Historic deficit of engineers, only 1% of graduates are engineers
  • Current teachers have no market experience

ITA/MEI, 2014, Fortalecimento das Engenharias no Brasil

  • Low salaries for engineers comparing internationally
  • Ill prepared and not innovative
  • Fields of study are too narrow – should offer a broader curriculum
  • Collaborate with international institutions

Relatório EngenhariaData 2015

  • See above… much of the same information but in quantitative terms

Strengthening Engineering Education in Brazil

  • See above… much of the same information but in quantitative terms  – report based on CNI’s report.

Beyond Bits and Atoms – Week 3 – SkyMall Prototype

SkyMall Prototype – Lucas & Omair, Jan 2016

Initial Brainstorm

  • Use iRobot-Create2 (Romba without cleaning stuff) to make a modern day LOGO Turtle
  • SkyMall product – add on for the Romba
    • Attach pen to draw on the floor.
    • Attach Tide Stick to clearn in up!
    • Attach a Pez Dispenser to attract your kids to the dinner table!

create-overview

Items:

  • Roomba
  • Arduino
  • Bluetooth module for Arduino
  • iPhone App with LOGO
  • iOS Bluetooth communication

IMG_1818.JPGIMG_1817.JPGIMG_1819.JPGIMG_1820.JPGIMG_1821.JPG

Initial division of Labor

Lucas

  • 3D Model
  • Initial prototyping

Omair

  • 2D layout for Laser Printer from 3D model
  • ‘Marketing’ for the SkyMall product (name & slides)

3D Model First Run

Prototype to show in class – final product would be 3D printed and fully automated by grabing pen and putting the pen up and down.

Screen Shot 2016-01-17 at 4.24.20 PM.png

Beyond Bits & Atoms – Week 3 – Reading Notes

Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference.Future of learning group publication, 5(3), 438. Chicago

  • “And if we believe, as Piaget and Papert do, that knowledge is actively constructed by the child in interaction with her world, then we are tempted to offer opportunities for kids to engage in hands-on explorations that fuel the constructive process. We may do so at the cost of letting them “rediscover the wheel” or drift away when shortcuts could be welcome.” (Ackerman, 2001, p.1)
  • “Because of its greater focus on learning through making rather than overall cognitive potentials, Papert’s approach helps us understand how ideas get formed and transformed when expressed through different media, when actualized in particular contexts, when worked out by individual minds. ” (Ackerman, 2001, p.4)
  • “In all cases, situated approaches to learning revalue the concrete, the local, and the personal! Such a shift has important implications in the fields of cognitive research and education.” (Ackerman, 2001, p.6)
  • “In reclaiming the deeply grounded, experience-based, and subjective nature of human cognition, Papert’s approach reminds us that alternative epitemologies are indeed possible, and that concrete thinking is no less important than figuring out things “in the head”. ” (Ackerman, 2001, p.7)
  • “Becoming one with the phenomenon under study is, in his view, a key to learning. (Papert)” (Ackerman, 2001, p.8)

Blikstein, P. & Worsley, M., Children are not Hackers: Building a Culture of Powerful Ideas, Deep Learning, and Equity in the Maker Movement

  • 4 cultures with diverging ideas
    • The hacker culture: extreme autodidactism
      • “The popular image of the hacker is that of a disheveled, unshaven white male in his twenties, doing all-nighters in a messy electronics lab, capable of learning anything by himself by scouring the web or doing late-night runs to the library.”
    • The publishers’ culture: product before process
      • MAKE magazine & Maker Fair
      • “Having spectacular projects is the natural path of evolution for an exhibition, but not very inviting for novices.” (Blikstein & Worsley, p.3)
    • The culture of informal educational spaces: the “keychain” syndrome
      • “This incentive helps the proliferation of the “30 minute” workshop model: fast, scripted, perpetually “introductory” workshops—what we called in previous work the “keychain syndrome”—children keep doing keychains and other trivial objects but never move on to more complex projects, which require more complex facilitation, curriculum design, and equipment (Blikstein, 2013).” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.4)
    • The “job market” culture:
      • “Despite the best of intentions, this Silicon-Valley-inspired fixation on K-12 education as STEM job market training has influenced the tools, goals, and pedagogies incentivized (or allowed) in schools.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.4)
  • Fun vs. Hard Fun
    • “In fact, early Constructionists were not interested in pitting serious against playful (Papert & Harel, 1991, p. 1), but instead finding ways to live at the intersection of the two. ” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.5)
  • Abstract versus concrete thinking
    • “In fact, the richness of makerspaces comes not from the fact that the abstract is left out, but that it is brought in together with new ways to build relationships with and between objects and concepts. ” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.5)
  • Research versus gut feeling
    • “The history of educational technologies and education reform (Collins & Halverson, 2009; Tyack & Cuban, 1995) has repeatedly demonstrated that the implementation of “revolutionary technologies” often leads to considering their benefits as self-evident. We see research (done together with teachers) as a tool for both measuring learning outcomes and as a way for teachers to reflect upon and optimize their own practice.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.6)
  • The need for on boarding in fab labs
    • “In our own research (Blikstein, 2013; Davis, Bumbacher, Bel, Sipitakiat, & Blikstein, 2015), novices coming into a maker lab need a considerable amount of onboarding and facilitation before they can start “hacking” and learning by themselves.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.6)
  • The job market’s needs effect
    • “Research suggests that the best predictor of STEM career choice is not a student’s K-12 math or science performance, but their self-reported love for science and if they see themselves as scientists in the future (Maltese & Tai, 2011).” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.8)
  • From a keychain culture to a culture of deep projects
    • The need for dedication and inspired curricula
    • “Allowing teachers to “pair up” and design curriculum together, even if they are from different areas, greatly expands the range of activities that can be done in the labs and makes it possible to attract students with a variety of different interests.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.9)
  • From a product culture to a process culture
    • “When we compared the efficacy of example-based and principle-based reasoning, we found that students consistently performed better when primed to use principles instead of just using examples from the real world.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.10)
    • “Learners should be aware that they will be evaluated not only by the quality of the final product, but also about their process–including, for example, how they collaborated with colleagues, how they managed the work, and how much they went outside of their intellectual comfort zone.” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.10)
  • Maker’s Pedagogy
    • “However, now, it is time for educators to take back the driver seat. The maker movement will only survive and fulfill its educational goals if the decisions are being made by teachers, education researchers, and education policy makers—professionals that really understand schools, teaching, and learning. ” (Blikstein & Worsley, 2001, p.12)

Papert, S. (1999). Papert on piaget. Time magazine’s special issue on” The Century’s Greatest Minds, 105.

  • “Piaget was launched on a path that would lead to his doctorate in evolutionary biology and a lifelong conviction that the way to understand anything was to understand how it evolves.” (Papert, 1999, p.2)
  • Ask a child – “What makes the wind?”
    • Answer might not be “true” but certainly “coherent” in the child’s mind

LDT Seminar – Week 2 – Class Notes

For next week: practice your 60 second pitch selling yourself and your project idea.

Karin – Foothill College center for innovation

Idea – assess what teachers already know before presenting tool – evaluate their PK

Talk to Lisa K. about what are the problems K-12 teachers have and what kind of a lesson planning tool, instructional design, curriculum construction, or PD they might need.

Beyond Bits and Atoms – Week 2 – Class Notes

IMG_1806.JPG

  • Education = QWERTY
  • Skinner’s Teaching Machine – first ed tech?
  • Monday – Someday : how does all this apply once Monday comes?
  • If a surgeon goes back 100 years he/she will not recognize a surgery room. If a teacher goes back 100 years, he/she will not see many differences.
  • Education: Driveresque & Latinesque
  • Final Project
    • Talked about the idea of creating an object that could teach aobut health – you’d need to feed it with the right stuff or it will get fat or sick for example.

Second half of the class we looked at the wood-working tools, the vinyl cutter (to make stickers), and how to make movable joints and gears with the laser cutter.

IMG_1808IMG_1809IMG_1810