School and Mental Health

The Connecticut Children's Medical Center reports on psychiatric emergencies, and psych prof Peter Gray adds up the data by month in The Danger of Back to School | Psychology Today

Just as I predicted, July and August are the months with, by far, the fewest children’s psychiatric ER visits. In fact, the average number of visits for those two months combined (70 per month) is less than half of the average during the full school months (142 visits per month for the nine months excluding June, July and August). June, which has some school days (a number that varies depending on the number of snow days to be made up), is also low, but not as low as July and August. Interestingly, and not predicted by my hypothesis, September is also relatively low, equivalent to June. It seems plausible that September is a relatively relaxed warm-up month in school; serious tests, heavy assignments, and report cards are yet to come. It may take a few weeks back in school before the stress really kicks in.

I would note that I'm not sure how much of the stress of school is from the sources he describes, i.e. interactions with adults. He has elsewhere written that kids in same-age groups seem to have a lot more negative interactions than kids in multi-age groups. It may also take a few weeks back in school before cliques have a chance to build up to full-strength mutual nastiness.

Or then again, maybe not.

Community

Lest it be thought that this blog is only about tech, here's a thought on community-building, specifically Breaking Down the Natural Isolation and Insulation of High School Teachers | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice

If you wanted to isolate teachers from one another, no better way is to organize the school by grades, have departments, and a daily schedule that leaves little time for teachers before, during, and after classes to work together in a community focused on better teaching and student learning. These structures left unattended insulate and isolate teachers from one another. The dilemma is plain: How to create a community of teachers working toward common goals within a structure and culture dedicated to keeping teachers apart from one another?

Here is a veteran teacher in the sunset of his career with “school smarts” and wisdom gained from decades of experience in a high school who knows that building community begins with knowing who sits next to you.

So every now and then groups of people (teachers, students, both) should have meals together where somebody gets a turn for a few minutes to do a self-introduction, covering specific things that might be a basis for future collaboration or simply friendship. Not complicated, not technical, but something for schools to keep in mind.
Or then again, maybe not.

Finland, India, Mexico

Wired Magazine reports on How a Radical New Teaching Method Could Unleash a Generation of Geniuses

he had happened on an emerging educational philosophy, one that applies the logic of the digital age to the classroom. That logic is inexorable: Access to a world of infinite information has changed how we communicate, process information, and think. Decentralized systems have proven to be more productive and agile than rigid, top-down ones. Innovation, creativity, and independent thinking are increasingly crucial to the global economy.

And yet the dominant model of public education is still fundamentally rooted in the industrial revolution that spawned it, when workplaces valued punctuality, regularity, attention, and silence above all else. (In 1899, William T. Harris, the US commissioner of education, celebrated the fact that US schools had developed the “appearance of a machine,” one that teaches the student “to behave in an orderly manner, to stay in his own place, and not get in the way of others.”) We don’t openly profess those values nowadays, but our educational system—which routinely tests kids on their ability to recall information and demonstrate mastery of a narrow set of skills—doubles down on the view that students are material to be processed, programmed, and quality-tested. School administrators prepare curriculum standards and “pacing guides” that tell teachers what to teach each day. ... ... ...

“In 1970 the top three skills required by the Fortune 500 were the three Rs: reading, writing, and arithmetic. In 1999 the top three skills in demand were teamwork, problem-solving, and interpersonal skills. We need schools that are developing these skills.”... ... ...

Some school systems have begun to adapt to this new philosophy—with outsize results. In the 1990s, Finland pared the country’s elementary math curriculum from about 25 pages to four, reduced the school day by an hour, and focused on independence and active learning. By 2003, Finnish students had climbed from the lower rungs of international performance rankings to first place among developed nations.

The moral drawn here is something like this: Even when the technology isn't working, as in the Mexican school most discussed here, and even when the final test is standardized, students excel with self-actuated group work where the teacher starts things going and gets out of the way except to serve as a consultant. And the additional note I'd make is simply that this is not a model wherein class size plays any fundamental role. Group size, probably yes, but that's not the same thing.

Flipped Classrooms and Class Size

The flipped classroom (Amazon link to cited book) doesn't depend on the Khan Academy. I note a New York Times op-ed on Turning Education Upside Down

Three years ago, Clintondale High School, just north of Detroit, became a “flipped school” — one where students watch teachers’ lectures at home and do what we’d otherwise call “homework” in class. Teachers record video lessons, which students watch on their smartphones, home computers or at lunch in the school’s tech lab. In class, they do projects, exercises or lab experiments in small groups while the teacher circulates....
Like everything disruptive, online education is highly controversial. But the flipped classroom is a strategy that nearly everyone agrees on. ... many people are holding it up as a potential model of how to use technology to humanize the classroom.

It is a strategy to maximize human contact by teachers. Interestingly, once we learn to use it effectively, there is really no such thing as "class size". Teachers spend their time interacting with small groups and individuals, no matter whether there are 20 students per grade or 2000.

Boys (mostly) Won't Be Girls

Everybody's different. Sometimes one group of individuals seems substantially different from another. Stop Penalizing Boys for Not Being Able to Sit Still at School - Jessica Lahey - The Atlantic

According to the book Reaching Boys, Teaching Boys: Strategies That Work and Why, boys are kept back in schools at twice the rate of girls. Boys get expelled from preschool nearly five times more often than girls. Boys are diagnosed with learning disorders and attention problems at nearly four times the rate of girls. They do less homework and get a greater proportion of the low grades. Boys are more likely to drop out of school, and make up only 43 percent of college students. Furthermore, boys are nearly three times as likely as girls to be diagnosed with Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Considering 11 percent of U.S. children--6.4 million in all--have been diagnosed with a ADHD, that's a lot of boys bouncing around U.S. classrooms....

Hmm....sounds like 4.8 million boys and 1.6 million girls. You wouldn't want to forget the 1.6 million by creating a boys v. girls division, but on the other hand even that might be better than what we have now. The book being described apparently sorts out results from a survey describing

eight categories of instruction that succeeded in teaching boys. The most effective lessons included more than one of these elements:

• Lessons that result in an end product--a booklet, a catapult, a poem, or a comic strip, for example.
• Lessons that are structured as competitive games.
• Lessons requiring motor activity.
• Lessons requiring boys to assume responsibility for the learning of others.
• Lessons that require boys to address open questions or unsolved problems.
• Lessons that require a combination of competition and teamwork.
• Lessons that focus on independent, personal discovery and realization.
• Lessons that introduce drama in the form of novelty or surprise.

I suspect that, in the end, we want all of those to be available -- not compulsory -- for kids and groups, some in formed in person and some by telepresence.

Or then again, maybe not.

"Inquiry-Based Learning"

A model which seems to be having some success for some students, reported at Hogwarts for Hackers: Inside the Science and Tech School of Tomorrow | Wired Enterprise | Wired.com

the school’s secret isn’t cash or high tech gimmicks like online classes. At the core of the school is the notion of “inquiry-based learning,” a concept that dates back to the 1960s and draws on earlier concepts from thinkers like Jean Piaget, John Dewey, and Maria Montessori.

“The math teachers don’t lecture. They give out worksheets, and we learn as we go,” explains Emma Sloan, a sophomore. These worksheets are basically problems that the students must solve, using their own wherewithal — and help from other students. In class, students will often gather in circles — or “hexagons” ...
The inquiry approach is then taken to extremes on IMSA Wednesdays. There are no classes held on this day. The entire day is devoted to completely freeform education. “You can go find a mentor — some bad-ass in the particular field you’re interested in. You can do your own research. Or you can play video games,” says Kador.

It's interesting that "freeform education" would be effective; apparently it is. One question would be: is all-Wednesday an optimum, or should it be only half of a day, or half of every day, or...? (Or different for different students at different ages?)

Pod People

Udacity announces Course Pods: A New Way to Connect With Classmates

Udacity! What do you love about online learning? Udacity students have gotten in touch with us to rave about two things: flexibility and community.
Our classes are awesome because you can learn at your own pace (we’re lookin’ at you, back button) and from anywhere you want (no one knows you took that quiz from the bathroom)!
Now, while learning at your own pace and from your own place, you might be wondering about your classmates. Our passionate students love connecting for study sessions, helping each other through tough spots in the course, collaborating on group projects, and having fun along the way.
Our study groups are a cornerstone of our student community, and they just got a little bigger! You can already start your own study group through the course forums and Meetup.com. We are delighted to introduce...Course Pods!

I don't know that "Course Pods" will prove successful in Udacity itself or in a K-12 context, but I do think that the only way to find out is to try.


Or then again, we may just end up with pod people.

Networks of Imagination

Ken Bausch mentioned this last December; The Global One-Room Schoolhouse: John Seely Brown | DMLcentral

In this video, which contains the highlights of his “Cultivating the Entrepreneurial Learner” keynote at the 2012 Digital Media and Learning conference in San Francisco, he introduces the fascinating notion of “a global one-room schoolhouse through networks of imagination.”

It seems to me that this is quite compatible with Sal Khan's vision (and book) that I've mentioned a few times, but it's an interestingly different point of view. I'm inclined to see it as a mix of Khan with some of Yong Zhao's World Class Learners, but that oversimplifies as usual. I do see him as detecting and approving a trend towards tools like Scoot & Doodle | Get Creative Together, which has just received fairly major support from Pearson among others.

Google+ Hangout App Scoot & Doodle Raises $2.25M Seed, From Valley Angels & Pearson, To Get More Kids Learning Through Play | TechCrunch

Well, maybe not just kids, or just play; I'll add some emphasis in a quote from the GeekDad report on Scoot & Doodle: Makes Google Hangouts a Collaborative Playspace | GeekDad | Wired.com

essentially, it is an app that works with Google+Hangouts and lets you type, draw and engage in a visual and tactile way – as well as through video and voice. In my use of it I have found it to be really stable and offer a fluid and worthwhile experience whether with my kids or with business colleagues. Like many startups there appears to be more potential applications than you can imagine; however, kudos for both the Scoot & Doodle team and Pearson for seeing the potential of this in the education and learning space.

And I certainly approve of the idea that education works off study groups that fit in a Google+ Hangout. That works.

Or then again, maybe not.

Other School Analogies: Day Jail?

School isn't just about learning; it's also about signaling that you've learned, of course. Beyond that, it's about making society work, in such a way that parents can do what they need to do all day. Arnold Kling, in The Dark View of Schooling, notes

Bryan Caplan thinks that schooling is not about education. He thinks instead it is about signaling.
Bryan’s view is benign compared with John Holt.

society demands of schools, among other things, that they be a place where, for many hours of the day, many days of the year, children or young people can be shut up and so got out of everyone else’s way. ... That is an important part of what schools are for. They are a kind of day jail for kids.

I do believe that technological improvements can make signaling a lot easier, in K-12 as much as in How testing could transform higher education:

having a well-calibrated measurement would put a lot more focus on learning the material and much less on how you learned it. No one will care too much which book you read, which online class you took, or what exercises you did. Those are all just ways to learn. Second, this would truly democratize education—the self taught Bangladeshi is on equal footing with the legacy Harvard admittee.

If you want to know if a kid has grasped 10th grade math, start him on the Khan Academy 11th grade sequence and see how quickly he reaches "mastery". Of course you probably need humans to rate English composition, if not reading comprehension, but you can go a long ways without adult humans involved -- let ten kids write short essays to summarize some information, each of them answers ten sets of multiple-choice questions, and they get comprehension scores based on how well they answered, but composition scores based on how well their readers answered. (Is this a bad idea? Probably; I just thought of it. There are lots of possibilities.) The testing tools for this probably won't come very quickly, and they won't come at the same pace in all subject/skill areas, but they're coming. I'm less confident that we'll get a substitute for the "day jail for kids." Many parents will want to know that their kids are somewhere being supervised -- the sort of "off in the woods, probably building a dam" that went over well enough in the late 50s (when I went along with my elder siblings) is probably gone forever.

Or on the other hand, maybe not.

On Learning to Think

I wonder if it's possible for an educational system to encourage actual thought (systematically). I'm thinking about partisanship, here; the way that so many members of a group interpret whatever they see in terms of, well, Who Represents?

most people can't even remember the idiotic things said by people they identify with. Liberals can instantly call to mind this infamous exchange between a Fox News host and Bill Nye, the science guy, about global warming and volcanoes. But how many of them remember the CNN host who asked whether the Russian meteorite had been caused by global warming? Conservatives, meanwhile, all know about the global warming meteorite, but have a much less encyclopedic command of stupid utterances by conservative types.
It isn't, I think, that they don't encounter these stupidities; in fact, whenever one of these stories goes viral, the folks who share a party ID with the speaker generally spend a couple of days getting mad at the other side for blowing this up all out of proportion to its actual relevance.
Rather, it's that we take the stupidity from the other side as representative, and the stupidities from our own side as sui generis.

Maybe education as such has nothing to do with it, or is even counter-productive in that it tends to reward the ability to echo.


Or then again, maybe not.

Incentives v. Grading

Academic grading is usually not questioned; it's the way we do things. When it is questioned, there are two common answers: grades as credentials for future work, and grades as incentives. A psychology professor (best known for self-experimentation) thinks about the way we depend on others in our groups to develop whatever expertise we lack, and asks What Happens If I Stop Grading?

My theory of human evolution says we changed in many ways to facilitate trading. ... The more diverse the expertise within a group, the more members of the group can benefit from trade. Following this logic, mechanisms evolved to increase diversity of expertise among people living in the same place with the same genes. ... The theory implies that there is something inside every student that pushes them toward expertise — they want to learn — but they are being pushed in many different directions — what they want to learn varies greatly. If you accommodate the latter (diversity in what students want to learn), you can take advantage of the former (an inner drive to learn).
... Human nature: People who are the same want to be different. Formal education: People who are different should be the same. At Berkeley, most professors appeared to have little idea of the diversity of their students. (At least I didn’t, until I gave assignments that revealed it.) Almost all classes treated all students in a class the same: same lectures, same assignments, same tests, same grading scheme. ... The more freedom I gave them, the more they learned. ...
The more freedom I gave my students, the more difficult it became to grade them.... I had an idea: no grading. Maybe other sources of motivation, would be enough.
... The students’s work was the highest quality I have ever seen...
I think several things caused students to learn a lot:

• 1. The material was interesting.
• 2. To some extent — far more than in other classes — they could choose what they wanted to learn, especially during the second half of the class.
• 3. Peer pressure. They wanted to look good in front of their peers. It would have been embarrassing to not be able to do a presentation when called upon.
• 4. The instinct of workmanship. Thorstein Veblen wrote a book called The Instinct of Workmanship. People inherently want to do a good job, said Veblen. I agree.
• 5. Doing is fun.

What did I learn? I learned that I can stop grading and things get much better, not worse. I learned that motivations other than grades are plenty powerful.

I'm inclined to focus on 3, peer pressure, but I'm not going to deny the value of the others. And my own experience tends to support his; I went to the Santa Fe campus of St. John's College (Annapolis/Santa Fe)

While traditional (A through F) grades are given, the culture of the school de-emphasizes their importance and grades are released only at the request of the student.

It seemed to me that we were working harder than any of the conventional classes I'd been in, or those I taught later, but I learned my grades when I needed them for graduate-school applications -- in effect, as credentials of my ability to do well with an academic workload. Incentives? We had plenty. I suspect that an online experience with student group structure, one which let peer pressure work (to a schedule), would also be fine in this particular regard.


Or then again, maybe not.

update: Of course K-12 is different in many ways, and some may think that younger-than-college kids are immune to peer pressure, don't feel any urge to please the teacher (or other adults), don't think "doing is fun", don't want to learn interesting stuff for its own sake... Hmm. Well, experiences vary.

Social Network and GPA

Science Daily reports that GPA may be contagious in high-school social networks

The researchers then mapped how students performed in school relative to their peer group, and correlated their social network with the change of their academic performance over time.
They found that students' whose friends were performing better academically were more likely to improve their own scores over time. The opposite effect was also seen: When their friends' GPA were lower, a given student's GPA was more likely to decrease as well.

Okay, so being exposed to success has a tendency to push you towards success. Sure. Common sense, in a way. More specifically it fits into the general framework of Harris' findings which I hereby oversimplify: peers are more important to kids than parents or teachers. It's an obvious support to all the parents who try to get their kids to disengage from bad influences, I suppose. It's not obvious that it can be used in a conventional school setting to raise academic performance: it tends to pull people towards the mean of some group, which may not be the whole school but each one who is pulled up is presumably exerting some slight downwards influence on the rest.

Still, I think that in the world of the Khan Academy and Salman Khan's Ideal Classroom, there may be a way to use this. Khan doesn't really have a notion of GPA: there are topics you've mastered, and others which you haven't. If each kid sees what his friends (online and offline, just nodes in his social network) have mastered, then he is being exposed to their successes. Accenting the positive, so to speak, is automatic; the negative is what isn't there. I don't know that this could be as simple as I'm now thinking, but it seems that it could help a lot.


(Or then again, maybe not.)

Smartphone education

Alex Tabarrok, co-creator of online Marginal Revolution University, reports on something that offline courses might consider using. New Teaching Tools

Instead of prohibiting smart phones in class, we require them …We then automatically deliver to their device a difficult conceptual question. We then give students a few minutes without discussion to reflect on the question and to indicate their answer on their device.
…Next, our system automatically puts students into groups of 2–5 [the system tells the students which other students to talk with and where to move in the classroom to find their group...

It's easy to think of lots of variations on the idea, but this is a version that does seem to be working. It appeals to me in part because it works via using new tech to facilitate a very very old tech: the study group, and I suspect that this is crucial; the teach-yourself books and teaching machines of decades past might have done much better if they hadn't focused so much on the (already) independent learner.
Or then again, maybe not.