Informational Text vs Non-Fiction (Common Core)

I am reading the November 2013 issue of ASCD's Educational Leadership magazine. It is focusing on the Common Core expectations for reading. The Common Core is calling non-fiction works "informational text", which brings to mind all those manuals that come with items we buy, but we rarely read them unless we need to know something specific. That is where it is falling apart when trying to bring Common Core to the public. The language was changed to something that seems daunting to an adult, so why would we force the youngest of our students to read "informational text"?

So as I'm reading the articles in the magazine, I'm having flashbacks to a couple of weeks ago as I was on the treadmill, watching Fox News. I was reading subtitles, and only half paying attention but there was this one woman who did catch my attention so I read along as she talked. She is a mom and she does not agree with the Common Core, so much so, she has started a group to try to stop it from being taught in her district. She is encouraging parents to pull their kids out of school to home-school them until the Common Core is dropped. Why? Because what the Common Core is asking her elementary student to read is too hard.

In the magazine there is a Research Alert about this very issue. "Text complexity has decreased over the past 50 years - but at the middle and high school levels, not the primary grades./There's nothing in the research that supports the connection between 2nd and 3rd grade text levels and students' future performance in reading texts at the college and career levels."(pg 8) So does she have a valid argument that by upping expectations at the elementary level, are we setting up students to become frustrated with reading? And I think a more important question that those two bullets present is: why has the complexity decreased for our secondary level students over the past 50 years?

That made me think about my own students. A lot of what we do in my Computer Science classroom requires research. They need to research when designing Web pages, because those require accurate content. They may need to comb through coding language libraries to find out what certain code fragments do before using them. They will often have to visit forums and weed out the solution to a problem they have encountered. All good skills that require close reading. So where is the loss?

I asked my students where they do most of their reading, and the majority say "online". That is their preference for research and informational text. If I ask them what they read for fun, most say "I don't read for fun", and a few tell me about some series of books they love in the vein of fiction. None talk about non-fiction as fun reading. Few to almost none read magazine or newspapers anymore either.

When I was teaching Kindergarten, many of my students gravitated to fun-fact types of books. Usually centered around animals, these books have large colorful pictures with facts about how fast they can run or fly, the habitat they live in, what they eat (or what eats them), and other facts to hold their attention. Some of my students loved these books more than the fiction books. What happens between Kindergarten and High School to make non-fiction less appealing?

I think back to my High School students. They see non-fiction as go to material. It is for what they must know in the moment, and not something that will be entertaining or enriching, and for them, this information is more accessible online but not in books. Where as fiction is entertaining.

Now, personally I have found many non-fiction pieces to be entertaining as well as informative. Many times I stumbled on those pieces by accident, thinking it was fiction, only to find out it was non-fiction half way through the book. But the books were compelling, because they read like a story and not like a store of information.

So as educators heading into the Common Core, we'll need to find compelling non-fiction to hook them into the informational genre of non-fiction. It doesn't have to be dry or only online. I think the biggest mistake that was made was calling it informational text, when it should have been called non-fiction text all along. The former sounds like some kind of monster waiting under the bed, whereas, the latter is a familiar friend we may want to revisit.

My CSTA Convention Experience

This has been such a busy summer with lots of wonderful PD opportunities. One of them was the Computer Science Teacher's Convention (CSTA, #CSTA13) in Boston.

I work for a small high school, under 500 students. At the convention I discovered that for the size school that we have, we are unique in our Computer Science offerings. In fact, most schools our size do not have a teacher dedicated to Computer Sciences, and computer classes are often taught by business or math teachers. If I didn't already feel isolated enough as the only CS teacher in my school, that only made the isolation feel even larger. I often do not have others to bounce my ideas off of in my building related to my subject matter. That leaves me to read a lot of other people's blogs, articles, follow others on Twitter, etc.

So going to the convention allowed me to connect to others of my ilk and gather so many wonderful ideas to take back with me.

Back in March of 2012, I blogged about the new APCS course being offered. I only knew what I was reading about it, I didn't know anyone involved in it. At the convention I was able to get a great deal of information about it and I want to look into more PD so I can become certified to teach it. One of the things I like more about this course than the current APCS A offering is that it is not a multiple choice heavy exam. It is portfolio based.

I also like that the AP Principles course promotes critical and analytical thinking, much like the Exploring Computer Science (ECS) course, another area I'd like to get more PD in. I also think the ECS course is a wonderful feed in to the AP Principles course. The thinking skills in these course really serve the 21st century "just in time" skill set, versus the 20th century "just in case" skill set.

Another thing that I have always believed and was only confirmed at the convention is that there is a difference between COMPUTER LITERACY (CL) and COMPUTER SCIENCE (CS), but literacy is often what is taught under the name of science. CL is to CS as spelling & grammar skills are to writing a novel. Yes, one must be literate in the one to accomplish the other, but knowing how to spell and form grammatically correct sentences does not make me a novelist. Writing a novel is a craft that some are born to to naturally, and others have to train to do correctly. CS is like that too, and we see that in the classroom with the skill sets students come in with.

So what is CL? CL is the ability to use a computer, the tool, with confidence. Most of us are literate. Our phones function as small computers, anyone reading this can use a browser and find a blog, we check and answer emails, and can use most office software.

So what is CS? CS is the ability to make the computer do the things that a CL audience will use. The CL person may use Microsoft Word to create a brochure, whereas, the CS person will design the embedded spell check for Microsoft Word. So to be able to stand by your program of studies and say that you are teaching Computer Science, then you have to be careful that you are not really teaching Computer Literacy.

So where does the shift begin? Hadi Partovi was a keynote speaker at the convention. He has heard the call for action and started the code.org movement. This December during Computer Science Education Week (CSEd), Hadi has challenged us to introduce new people to programming for one hour that week. This can be done individually or as group instruction. The site says students, but he stressed that it can be anyone, not just the kids. This will help bring awareness to Computer Sciences as a platform for the creating of new products through critical and analytical thinking. If we reach 100,000 people, and 10% of those people get turned on to programming, that would be 10,000 people who would have never considered programming as a reality for them before the challenge. With 1.4 million jobs in Computer Science predicted for 2020, and only 400,000 students graduating with Computer Science degrees, those 10,000 newly prospective CS students just seems a whole lot smaller than we need to fill that gap. (code.org) Reaching 100,000 is the goal, but what if we could reach 500,000, or even 1 million! Our 10%+ pool of possible CS students grows expediently as well.

Attending this convention made me realize that it is important for me to do more outreach and advocate for CS as a consideration for our students. I want to promote it during CSEd week. I want to go spend a day with our middle school students and program with them so they'll be excited to take it here at the high school. I want to start a computer club so students can get hooked on programming through game design. I want to make CS seem like a no-brainer when they select what courses to take each year, because I want them to see an importance and a relevance in their lives and society. I want them to see CS as a possible career, not just a graduation requirement.

Most of all, I don't want them to be passive users of their devices, I want them to be passionate about all the possibilities their devices can provide. I want them to see the flaws or failings in these devices, and I want them to fix those. I want them to create the things that only exist currently in Science Fiction novels. I want them to take technology to the next step so our global society can thrive.

Time to Ditch The Textbooks

For many in education, the title of this entry is blasphamy. After all, if we do not have a text book for every student, how will they learn all this content we need to cover in less than 180 days?

My first year teaching (2006/2007), I walked in to my classroom and did not find a single text book that aligned with the classes I was going to start teaching in two short weeks. I panicked and pulled out the budget I that was designed by the previous teacher and quickly found that there was little money for text books. I started to dig in our book depository upstairs and found "Computer Literacy" text books, only to discover that they were from 1986. I was in 8th grade in 1986. I thought maybe there were some gems in the book I could use, but when I read the line "by the year 2000, computers will make us so productive that a full-time work week will only need to be 20 hours long." I laughed out loud, slammed it shut, and kept one copy as reference.

Image Source

All the programming books I found were for programming languages I wasn't slated to teach. In fact, they were for languages I didn't even know how to program in. Shelved those too. I ended up ordering books for my Web Design class. But then in under two years, I learned why my predecessor did not buy many text books.

Not only are text books expensive, but in my subject area, they are outdated almost as soon as I open the box they were mailed in. The software on the lab computers have been updated twice in the last 7 years, but the text books have not been updated at all.

I have gotten to a point now where I think this class would work best if I flipped it by making video tutorials this summer and putting links to the videos up as a part of a GoogleDoc.

I thought this was a problem that only I was facing in the building. So many teachers are isolated in the profession that we often think that we are the only one facing a problem, but this is not the case when it comes to text books.

At meetings I'm attending the subject of text books keep coming up. It is one of our biggest line items. Many are complaining about the new versions being bought to replace lost or damaged books do not match the old versions. If you keep a book long enough, its content won't match the world we live in. Jokes are made about text books talking about how the Vietnam War should be ended. Math books have word problems that students can't relate to. Science books have Pluto listed as a planet.

See where this is going? Information is not static, but text books are. Static, expensive, and seldom used by their intended audience .... the students. I watch the kids going down the hallway at the end of the day, and many of them are empty handed - without a backpack too. These same kids certainly have their phones out and punching away on the screen.

I've decided to ditch my text books and create a GoogleDoc for each of my classes instead. I plan on using this document to put in an outline of concepts, with a list of skills under each concept, connect the skills to the competency being covered, and eventually align it all to the common core. I'm ditching the text book and making an online living text book instead. In this outline, under each concept, will be links to online resources to help students along. I can include videos, websites, forums, etc. I plan on being the model of a digital citizen for my students by showing them how they can think outside the text book.

I often think of that viral video of the baby going from the iPad to the magazine. These are our future students, and I think they get frustrated with a static text book.

So why a GoogleDoc? Because everyone in our district has access to that technology without issues. We have lots of blocks on services I might have used instead for this type of hyperconnectiveness to online resources, such as Pinterest, but we don't have access to that in our district buildings.

So why not an eBook style instead? We're not there yet. Not enough to choose from yet. I am underwhelmed by what I've seen for my subject area.

I can make the GoogleDoc as interactive as I need it to be and I can invite my students to add to the outline as they find resources too. I could even make that a homework assignment as a part of the research competency. We can be a community of learners, collaborating online to build the resources that will help us toward our goal of learning the course content and meeting the expected competencies.

I hear that tiny voice saying, "but it isn't fair to those students who do not have access to technology outside of school." The technology inequality is quickly closing. Watch those kids walking in the halls with their cell phones, they can go to a GoogleDoc. Also, to do this you may need to survey your students on the first day of class. If a student states "no Internet at home", then find out if they have a DVD player. Videos can be put on a disk and sent home. GoogleDoc can be printed and put in a binder. So can websites. It is cheaper to maintain a binder for a couple of students in each class than it is to buy 30 text books for that class. And the information will be exactly what you want them to access, and as current as the last time it was updated online.

At this point you may have made up your mind to not give up your text book. But give it one more thought. When the idea of a text book was conceived, it was an ideal way to store important information in one place. The Internet did not exist yet, so it served us well for many many many years. But now, we have all kinds of information available to us, deposited on the World Wide Web, ready for us to tap in and share. We are not limited by what comes between the covers and a learning goal outline can be updated as needed at little to no cost. We will be fostering a community of learners who are more engaged because they created the "text book" together with their teacher.

What is 21st Century Learning?

The phrase is buzzing around: 21st Century Learning!

So I've been thinking about this and wondering what do people think it really is?

Instinctively I think we go to the idea of technology. What do we need to BUY to prepare our students for life in the 21st century? What do they need?

After all, every teacher I know was born in the 20th century. Even all the students I currently teach were born in the 20th century. But that changes next year with the incoming freshman class. Many of them were born in the year 2000, the 21st century.

So what do they need to survive in this constantly connected world they were born and raised in?

As a Computer Science teacher you would think my first response would be a computer, tablet, or similar device ... but I don't think that is the answer. I know, it's shocking, but there is something more important that they need.

I don't think we need to teach them the mechanics of technology. They have it in their pockets and know how to use it better than most adults. They are like the Borg, wired to each other in ways we would have never imagined 20 years ago, and resistance is futile. The devices aren't going away, even if we put signs on our wall forbidding them. Thou shalt not ..... oh never mind. It is one of those battles that teachers keep fighting, sometimes of their own accord, sometimes at the directive of administration.

It is exhausting, especially for those who want to let the kids embrace the very technological fabric of our 21st society. Having the devices locked away feels like locking the classroom door and making them try to learn from the hallway by peering through the shatterproof glass of the locked door. The technology we have to offer is so much older than what they carry around that it must feel like trying to connect to the Internet with a typewriter.

So if it isn't about the hardware, then what is it about? I believe we have to look past the hardware and into the human machine instead. I think we need to teach them how to be digital citizens. I'm not talking about the surface stuff, like cyberbullying & plagiarism. Those are important, but what I am talking about is ethical use of technology and information.

We need to train students to think critically about information: where they get it and how they use it. Digital citizens should be aware of copyright laws, fair use laws, public domain options, and creative commons. We should be teaching them how to collaborate across the room, across the building, and across the world. Instead of directing them on how to do something, we should be making them ask why they should do something. They are consumers of information, and very hungry consumers at that. That is why they Google everything!

image credit

We also need to teach them how to be flexible. Technology doesn't always work the way it is supposed to (really, you're surprised?) so they need to become troubleshooters. They need to be able to learn how to use forums to find answers. They need to participate in discussions about problem sets with people online, because the collective world mind can reach the solution faster than the collective few in the classroom.

We need to start connecting our classrooms with other classrooms throughout the world. We now have the ability to bring in a diversity that didn't even exist 10 years ago. Students in many rural areas may have never had a chance to meet someone from another culture, but now they can through conferencing software. A creative teacher with an eye on the 21st century will seek out that opportunity. It opens up the possibility of collaboration aligned with the skills they will need beyond school, preparing them for the world of higher education and/or work.

We need to break down the classroom walls and thread the use of everyday technology into our everyday curriculum, and be willing to change, learn, and grow as the available technology dictates. We need to be connected to our local and world communities at every possible level, so we can learn from each other. We, as the adults, need to model digital citizenship and tap in to our own virtual professional circles by becoming active participants in Professional Learning Networks (PLN's) in areas that are important to us with others who hold our passion. If we, the teachers have passion as digital citizens, so too will our students.

What Will Education Look Like in Ten Years?

I have been thinking a lot lately about what school will look like 10 years from now. I am finishing my 6th year of teaching right now and it has changed tremendously over those 6 years. Most of the changes are related to technology but I think the bulk of the changes are a reflection on how the world is changing around us.

The world is flat once more. We are able to connect in so many ways that we couldn't connect just a few years ago. Today at a PD presentation, another teacher told us about QuadBlogging. We can now enroll our student or classroom blogs into this blog exchange system with other schools throughout the world. We can get feedback from outside of our buildings. It is the digital version of our old penpal projects done when I was a student in the public school system.



So what will schools look like in 10 years?

I think school (the physical building) will be a place where students go when they are struggling, or need resources, or need to collaborate with people in person. School will provide offices for their teachers as a place where they develop curriculum or meet for professional development or to meet with students for individualized instruction. Schools could very well abolish their bells and become a place of computer labs and recording studios. Learning will become an anyplace/anytime venture. Students will be able to enroll in courses online from a menu of schools who employ highly skilled instructors. Students might be enrolled in multiple online schools so they can have their pick of classes as well as instructors. Their local institution may end up becoming a clearing house for their learning by tracking what students are required to do, testing their competency, setting them up with internships, referring them with online programs that meet their individual needs, tutoring services, learning portfolio and project presentations, etc. Texting their teachers might become as common to them as texting their friends. Accessing learning will be done on-the-go using cell phones and tablets with data plans.

This is just what has been rattling around in my mind. It makes me wonder as a professional instructor how I should prepare myself for this shift? I am currently developing my courses to be blended, requiring all my students to use an online component. I suspect that eventually I will have requests for my blended material be made available to students who cannot fit Computer Sciences into their regular schedule as a way to earn their credit in the subject area. They will become distant learners, but in the building with their online instructor.

An important aspect of this shift will live with the students. They will need to become managers of their own time. They will need to start planning so they can fit it all in. Right now we plan their time and direct that time with bells and a school year that ends on the 180th day. A student that has good time management skills can finish a course in half the time whereas a student that does not manage their time well could end up taking twice as long. Time to learn becomes rolling, and honestly, makes it necessary to have school year round. Learning could become what it should be, a natural process of curiosity and discovery.

Again, this is just what is rattling in my brain. In fact, 10 years from now, kids could still be required to enter the building, spend 6 hours a day there and go home at the end of the day. Maybe we will still have a bell system that moves them from one subject to the next throughout the day. But my gut tells me that the digital component that is entering our lives will force a change in the physical part of how we educate our students.

New AP Courses

Ed Week blogged about two new AP courses that will be offered in some pilot schools. One of the AP courses will focus on critical thinking skills and the other will focus on research skills. One of the things I thought was interesting in the blog is that it stated "The research courses are not designed to replicate a college course, but rather prepare students for college-level work and be an indication of readiness for elite college admission."

I agree that these are skills we do not focus on exclusively in a course designed for them (although it is my belief that we should) because most schools assume that these skills are being interwoven into the current curriculum. I think the assumption is there because they tell us that it is important. They tell us to ask questions that promote critical thinking skills. And if a student can produce the desired outcome at the end, then it is assumed that they had to think critically to do that.

I believe that instructors are trying their best to bring critical thinking to the classroom, but may lack the training to do so. But what is the real evidence that critical thinking is being evaluated properly in our secondary schools? The blog quoted Packer as saying "[college admissions officers] said U.S. students are not coming to college having developed research skills and the ability to integrate knowledge across a variety of academic disciplines". I have not sat on a college admission board but I can say from my experience in a classroom that many students do have difficulty pulling from one subject and applying it into another subject without a great deal of prompting and guiding.

Sometimes it is true within the same discipline!

In my programing class, which is a high level thinking and critical problem solving class by nature, I set up the formative assessments by levels (1-4). At level 1 there are fill in the blank questions, sometimes matching, sometimes multiple choice. I consider these warm up questions. Level 2 will usually ask a student to find erroneous code and fix the problem. Students can usually plug the code into the compiler, have the compiler find the problem and fix it until the code runs. Still a bit assisting. At level 3 is when I get the most questions. Level 3 usually presents code that they are told is broken, then they are asked "Why?"

It's giving the explanation as to why the code doesn't work that throws them. They often ask if they can just put it in the compiler and run it, fix it and give me the results. It is the knowing of, and explanation of why the code doesn't work that I can tell they have a deeper understanding of how the code is functioning. I explain to them that the compiler can't find everything wrong in the code and if you run bad code, you get bad output. Unless you can understand, just by looking at it, why code might not work, then you can become a better troubleshooter. Level 4 is the backwards engineering of the program. All they get is an output screen and a few guidelines on how input is expected to be gathered and they are released to create the program from scratch. Do they like this? NO. Do they do it? YES. How do they feel about it when it is done? Amazing! Their is so much joy in their face when they accomplish that level 4 task because it was not only a test of their doing, but of their thinking as well. Once a student starts a level 4 task, I have never had one give up. They become fully invested.

I applaud the idea of these AP classes but at the same time I feel that it would be more beneficial to do this type of work with students from when we get them as 9th graders until they walk across that stage 4 or 5 years later. Critical thinking, problem solving and research skills are needed at all levels in our adult life. Offering it as an AP class will only draw those kids who are college bound. Since it is such an integrated part of life, it should be just as integrated in our teaching and we need more creative professional development in the field to show us how we can integrate it into our curriculum without losing the time we need to cover all the important items in our curriculum.