task three: Instruction

All students do have the capacity to learn. I believe there are a lot of factors that determine what and how much we learn but all have the capacity. There are so many different learning styles that a student who doesn't have the opportunity to learn "their way" may not learn as much or as quickly. Say for instance, as student is a hands-on, kinesthetic learner but the teacher is primarily a verbal instructor. That student will most likely not learn as much that year. That's where teachers really do influence how much a student learns and the importance of differentiating instruction. I need to take into account the different types of learners as I am planning instruction. I guess that's why I connected with the beginning of chapter three when it said that we are not only teachers but facilitators, providing opportunities for students to learn. We really can't make them learn. We have to provide the motivation and the opportunities. Sure, I'm a teacher when I directly instruct a new concept but after that, my job is to provide what the student needs to comprehend and apply the knowledge. This isn't easy and differentiating instruction is relatively new to me and my school so I have a long way to go. I'm the only second grade teacher at my school and am self contained with no assistance. Luckily, I've got parents who are happy to help out. I don't often differentiate content unless it is enrichment but I provide lots of choices for how students apply and present their learning for me to assess.
As far as the Socializing Intelligence paper, I honestly didn't get a lot out of it so I'm eager to read other posts about it. I find it difficult to determine how we acquire intelligence when we don't even really know how to define it. Some might think that knowing a lot about other cultures and being able to speak multiple languages is intelligent. Others believe being able to spout off (sometimes useless) information is intelligence but sometimes those people don't have enough common sense to boil water. Some believe that wise people are the mark of intelligence and others say it has to do with an IQ score even if the person is a deadbeat. I consider my parents very wise yet neither went to college. My father is a computer genius and excelled his field of computer banking despite failing geometry in high school. I'm not saying that researchers shouldn't continue to try to determine what is intelligence and how one acquires it but it does seem as if we are trying to look for something in the dark.

I like having standards that guide my instruction. My focus is on teaching my students. Determining what to teach would be a whole other job! I took Classroom Assessment (624) this summer and it spoke a great deal on the Backward Design of curriculum. It stated that one of the negative aspects of standards is what we've all agreed upon--there is unrealistically too much to teach. James Popham stated that national standards are developed by professionals in their fields, not by classroom teachers. Those that work for the National Council of Mathmatics think that everything mathmatical is important so too many standards are set for each subject because they all think their particular discipline is the most important. I'm not quite sure who develops state standards although one would hope that they have at one time been classroom teachers who have just turned their focus onto curriculum instead of instruction. And with high stakes testing, you can be sure that if the tests are based on national standards, I'm going to teach those standards.
The standards play a key role in the Backward Design. The standards tell us what the students need to know or be able to do so if we design our assessment to make sure that it assesses if they know or can do what the standard states, then we can design our instruction to meet those goals. We have the freedom to decide how to teach and that's so important. We have to be able to adjust our instruction to meet the needs of our students. Sometimes I'm disappointed that I don't get to spend as much time on a concept as I would like but it is in the best interests of my students that I reach as many standards as I can, not spend a month teaching what I want just because it interests me or my students. I could go so much more in depth about life and space science because they're so interesting but then I won't have the time to teach physical science. That happened to me last year. I used to look over the assessment a couple days before the test (after instruction had already started) to make sure I had hit everything but it really does make much more sense to look at the assessment first to make sure it really assesses the standard or I can develop my own. Then I can make sure the activities I use will help them to succeed on the assessment. Sometimes that invloves a textbook or my Smartboard, manipulatives, direct instruction, group work or individual work but that's all up to me and I love having that freedom. The best part of my master's program so far is learning new instructional techniques that I can use to meet those standards.

task one comments

A few thoughts about what I read. I agree with Wiggins in that it really is futile to try to teach everything of importance. In my mind, there really isn't such a thing because what is important will be different for every person depending upon their path of life, especially as an adult. Since the majority of our school education is before we are actually adults, its impossible to know at the time what is important for each person. Had I even had an inkling that I would become a teacher, I believe I might have viewed more of my education as important since I would be required to teach it to others. As a student, even I didn't really know what was important since I didn't know what I'd become and have to use. I still remember my geometry teacher trying to tell us the importance of learning geometry for our careers but that went by the wayside for me because I was still unclear on what I was to do with my life. Although I judge Applebee's article as complex and difficult to follow, I got the gist that instead of learning facts or bits of information, we need to engage students in inquiry and discussion to make them ready to participate in conversations (a.k.a. life) with others of the same culture.
I related best with Wraga's Connected Curriculum. When I was in undergrad, the emphasis was on an integrated curriculum. If the theme was spiders, all subjects were to revolve around spiders in some way. Perhaps that is why it makes so much sense to me but for me, it solves another problem--time to teach all the content. I'm required to teach Kentucky Core Content and the standards are numerous. Teaching each subject in isolation would be impossible, just as Wiggins said. I'm currently teaching life science, in particular, how animals change and grow in science and I'm excited by the fact that their reading theme is Nature Detective and the stories are all about plants and animals. Through their reading content, they'll also learn more about animals than I could possibly teach them in science. But I also agree that we can't just teach facts. The facts are important but they aren't the end result. Facts should lead towards questions that we can teach our students how to find the answers.
Since it is impossible to teach everything, I do believe that it is important for experts in the fields to clue teachers, parents, and students in to what would be most beneficial for us to know for life experiences so there is a need for curriculum standards. Teachers can then determine what materials and strategies will help their students meet those standards.
I guess I don't really buy into the idea that we once again need a new approach to curriculum because it seems that the only real trend in education is change. We never seem to stick long enough with anything to see if it is effective. Maybe the most effective one is the one we stick with! I've only been out of school for 15 years and I've already been through cycles of phonics vs. whole language, integrated and not, basals vs. trade books. Although I see value in research, it often seems as if even the research is contradictory or "depends on the circumstance." I'm not saying that we shouldn't keep trying to improve whether it is curriculum or methods. It just seems that oftentimes we move on to the next best thing before we've really given the first a shot.

I currently teach second grade at St. Cecilia Catholic School in Independence, Kentucky. I have seven children ages 14, 12, 9, 7, 5, 3, and 19mos. My awesome hubby and I have been married 15 years. We've lived in Northern Kentucky for 9 years and although I took several years off to stay home with the kids, I'm now back to teaching and this is my 10th year.

I, too, and totally new to blogging and it feels a little awkward but I'm sure we'll all get used to it. I only just discovered facebook this past summer so I'm a bit behind...lol. I got a smart board installed in my room this year so I'm enjoying playing with my new toy! Looking forward to blogging with all of you!