"In most of these countries, few, if any, of the upper secondary school examinations are scored by computers and much of the examination is in the form of prompts requiring the student to work out complex problems or write short essays. They do this because the ministries in these countries have grave doubts about the ability of computers to properly assess the qualities they think most important in the education of their students."
~ Mark Tucker, Standing on the Shoulder of Giants: An American Agenda for
Education Reform
Here is what the PISA top performing countries are doing that the U.S. is not:
1. Incentives: Gateway exams from basic education to upper secondary education and/or from upper secondary education to university (designed & administered as explained above).
2. Cohesion: National standards aligned with the curriculum which is aligned with the instructional materials available to teachers. Gateway exams are also aligned with the curriculum as is the training of prospective teachers in teacher training programs.
3. Comprehensive, Coherent curriculum: National curriculum goes far beyond mathematics and the home language to include science, social sciences, arts, music morals, and in Finland, philosophy.
4. Teacher Quality: huge, long term work pieces:
a. Criteria for high quality teacher candidate selection
b. High Caliber Teacher Training at Tier I universities to develop strong content knowledge
c. Institutions with thorough pedagogical preparation following the medical doctor clinical training
d. Very Competitive compensation of teachers like other professions which also builds the career's importance
e. Accountability to colleagues which in turn establishes professional autonomy
5. School Finance: Most top performing countries have moved away from local control of school finance towards a system to differentiate funding to enable all students to achieve high standards
All of this work is monumental when we embrace any component to adjust. If you want to learn more about this report google "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: An American Agenda for Education Reform" by Marc Tucker. Mr. Tucker also presented at UIC's World Class Education Collogquium. Here is a link to his presentation (scroll down and watch both parts): http://worldclasseducationillinois.org/interviews/ (Pasi Sahlberg's presentation is also at the same place.
Where to begin? What to do -- let's look to Ontario, Canada next...
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Monday, June 11, 2012
U.S. Education Strategies Not Found in Top Performing Countries
"We conclude that the strategies driving the best performing systems are rarely found in the United States, and, conversely, that the education strategies now most popular in the United States are conspicuous by their absence in the countries with the most successful education systems."
~ Mark Tucker, Standing on the Shoulder of Giants: An American Agenda for Education Reform
There you have it. (Google the report to read more, if you would like.)
Have you heard of Mark Tucker? He is the president and CEO of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE). When U.S. Dept of Education Secretary Arne Duncan asked the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) for a report on what the top performing countries of PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) are doing, the OECD requested NCEE to write the report. Mark Tucker published the book Surpassing Shanghai this year of which the above-mentioned report is included.
So what do they identify that the U.S. is doing that the top performing countries are not?
1. Grade-by-grade national testing in English and mathematics.
2. Typically brief, unconnected practice teaching for pre-service teachers.
3. Assigning teachers to teach subjects that they have not been trained to teach.
4. Local control of school finance
5. Charter schools and voucher programs
6. Using student performance data on standardized tests to "reward" and "punish" teachers
There is much more -- but enough for now. Next post, I will talk about what Finland (& other top performers) have in place that the U.S. does not.
Why does our country, our states, & school districts continue with OPPOSITE policies & frameworks that are not working compared to the successful countries? We are wasting so much time of our kids' futures, not to mention money.
~ Mark Tucker, Standing on the Shoulder of Giants: An American Agenda for Education Reform
There you have it. (Google the report to read more, if you would like.)
Have you heard of Mark Tucker? He is the president and CEO of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE). When U.S. Dept of Education Secretary Arne Duncan asked the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) for a report on what the top performing countries of PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) are doing, the OECD requested NCEE to write the report. Mark Tucker published the book Surpassing Shanghai this year of which the above-mentioned report is included.
So what do they identify that the U.S. is doing that the top performing countries are not?
1. Grade-by-grade national testing in English and mathematics.
2. Typically brief, unconnected practice teaching for pre-service teachers.
3. Assigning teachers to teach subjects that they have not been trained to teach.
4. Local control of school finance
5. Charter schools and voucher programs
6. Using student performance data on standardized tests to "reward" and "punish" teachers
There is much more -- but enough for now. Next post, I will talk about what Finland (& other top performers) have in place that the U.S. does not.
Why does our country, our states, & school districts continue with OPPOSITE policies & frameworks that are not working compared to the successful countries? We are wasting so much time of our kids' futures, not to mention money.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Are CPS' New Approaches Best for Kids' Learning?
This is the original article/letter that I had to condense and was also edited... Thoughts?
CPS leadership plans to implement yet again many new frameworks for the new school year. Chicago should slow down, study top performing countries’ educational systems, test our students less, and trust our teachers more. Instead of advancing more policies opposite those of top performing countries, Chicago should follow these countries' lead, give back control over teaching and assessment to teachers and thus return the focus to our students’ learning.
Robert Reynolds, NBCT/Mathematics
For more information (links):
Time: Beyond the Classroom: An Analysis of a Chicago Public School Teacher's Actual Workday
Testing (please endorse): National Resolution Against Standards High-Stakes Testing
PISA: Finland's Slow and Steady Reform for Consistently High Results (Chpt 5)
Reform: What the U.S. Can Learn from Finland's School Reform
Dr. Pasi Sahlberg’s (Finnish educator & author) blog: Finnish Education Reform
Rob Reynolds’ blog: Mathematics the Finnish Way
I am a CPS teacher conducting Fulbright
research on the teaching and learning of mathematics in Finland. I have taught
middle school mathematics and science for sixteen years with CPS and I collaborated
with teachers as an instructional coach the last four years. Since 2000, Finland
has been among the world’s top achievers in literacy, mathematics, and science
on the Program for International
Student Assessment
(PISA). Since I left for sabbatical in January, CPS has decided to implement
several strategies that diametrically oppose both Finland’s successful
approaches, as I have observed them, as well as recognized international
research on the strategies that Finland uses to ensure that teaching and
learning of mathematics occurs at high levels. I am concerned that by moving
forward in the opposite direction of these successful approaches, CPS could do
more harm than good to the quality of mathematics education in Chicago. Proven
successful strategies include:
NO Standardized Testing
Finland
uses several methods to gauge how schools and students are performing. For
example, the National Board of Education checks learning periodically by
administering a test to a random sample of students. Students are not tested in every
subject, in every grade, every year. In addition, there are optional annual assessments that
teachers and schools can choose to administer anonymously to compare
their school to the national average. Students’ names with scores are not
reported, nor ranked. Finnish educators are responsible for assessing their own
students’ learning and do not understand why Chicago requires so many standardized tests that have been identified as narrowing the curriculum and
instruction. According
to the 2011-2012 CPS assessment calendar there are potentially over 30
instructional days for some form of standardized test at the 8th
grade level; whereas, Finland has none. Eliminating even half of these tests for the district would result in regained
instructional time for kids and substantial savings with less test administration.
Small Class Size
Based on classroom observations as
well as interviews with teachers and principals, I submit that one of the most
effective strategies that has contributed to Finland’s success is a smaller class
size compared to Chicago. Every middle school class I have visited has 18-24
students. Furthermore, I have observed that almost every mathematics teacher here
presents the day’s concept then touches base with each student 1, 2 or 3
times during class. Recently, in Chicago I have had classes of 33, 35 and even
37 students. With fewer
students in a class,
CPS teachers, like Finnish teachers, would be able to know their students better and support
their range of learning needs.
Trust Teachers
Finnish teachers are trusted to
create, instruct, and evaluate the teaching and learning. Both teachers and
principals say that they are successful because they are trusted as educators
to design lessons that work for their students. In addition to this respect and
autonomy, teachers and the teachers union are consulted by the National Board
of Education whenever reforms are designed. When I talk to Finnish teachers,
principals, and policy makers here, they have a difficult time comprehending
why CPS does not involve teachers more in deciding what is needed for kids to
be successful. As Chicago plans for a new school year, Central Office could
make steps towards demonstrating some trust by giving schools the autonomy to
design their instructional programs (including the length
of the day )
that will meet the needs of all learners.
Slow, Consistent
Approach
Forty
years ago, Finland was not performing at its
current level but they made equity of education a top priority, developed their
structures, and stayed the course. During my twenty years as a CPS teacher, I
have lost count of the annual initiatives that have come and gone. The next
school year, Chicago teachers will continue the monumental tasks of transitioning
to the national Common Core State Standards curriculum, following a comprehensive CPS Framework for
Teaching , effectively
implementing a longer school day, and learning a new CPS teacher evaluation system (that will include students' performance on
standardized tests). Recently, numerous local, national, and international educators stressed the
importance for districts to have both research and evidence-based decisions for
school reform initiatives.CPS leadership plans to implement yet again many new frameworks for the new school year. Chicago should slow down, study top performing countries’ educational systems, test our students less, and trust our teachers more. Instead of advancing more policies opposite those of top performing countries, Chicago should follow these countries' lead, give back control over teaching and assessment to teachers and thus return the focus to our students’ learning.
Robert Reynolds, NBCT/Mathematics
Distinguished Fulbright Teacher
Mary Gage Peterson Elementary
SchoolFor more information (links):
Time: Beyond the Classroom: An Analysis of a Chicago Public School Teacher's Actual Workday
Testing (please endorse): National Resolution Against Standards High-Stakes Testing
PISA: Finland's Slow and Steady Reform for Consistently High Results (Chpt 5)
Reform: What the U.S. Can Learn from Finland's School Reform
Dr. Pasi Sahlberg’s (Finnish educator & author) blog: Finnish Education Reform
Rob Reynolds’ blog: Mathematics the Finnish Way
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Finnish Success: Teachers-Time-Trust-(No)Tests-Class Size
As I try to capture my time and Fulbright experience, the hardest aspect to explain thoroughly and accurately is the trust of teachers. Many have written about it, but you just have to experience it. I am the fortunate one to experience the trust through Fulbright -- Thanks Senator Fulbright for envisioning these international partnerships and collaboration!
In Chicago and the U.S., we need to revisit, in the long term, our preparation and training of teachers. I will write more about that soon. Today, I want to write about more immediate issues that individual school districts have some control over: Time, Trust, Testing (none), & Class Size.
Time: There is plenty of research out there about the use of time -- more time in the school day (or year) does not necessarily equate to better achievement. It is the quality use of time, along with other factors that enable teachers to set up the opportunity for quality teaching & learning for kids. Look at Finland -- one of the shortest school days, but still among the top performers world wide. Why is that? Shorter school days, especially for younger kids, so that they maximize their attention span. Plenty of breaks built into the school day so kids are refreshed and attentive.
Trust: Teachers have more time built into their school days and weeks without kids in front of them so that they can (1) collaborate with colleagues, (2) prepare experiments and inquiry-based lessons, and (3) provide substantive written feedback to kids (Love this last one -- I spend so much of my personal time providing feedback to help kids with their misconceptions).
Tests - NO STANDARDIZED TESTS: OK, so we will not get rid of all of the tests in the U.S. any time soon, but couldn't we eliminate half?! If districts eliminated some of the tests they would: (1) demonstrate trust for teachers' work (google Assessment for Learning and find all the international research out there how top performing countries have given this trust to teachers with formative assesments and reduced/elminated standardized tests), (2) regain instructional time, (3) provide substantial financial savings (think of all the costs), and (4) relieve kids' stress, and much more...
Class Size: every middle school class I visited had 18-24 students. The teacher typically (almost always) presented the lesson or challenging problems then circulated the classroom and checked in with each student 1, 2, or 3 times. In this setting, it makes sense to all that these teachers know their students' strengths and needs better than I ever will. In recent years, I have had 33, 35, and even 37 kids in a class often with special ed and ELL kids included.
I want to shout from the roof tops one of the most obvious examples of trust here and lack of trust in the U.S. When teachers in Finland speak about what is best for kids' learning -- they are heard and even sought out by principals & policymakers. Usually when American teachers speak out, education officials, policymakers and even some parents perceive teachers to be advocating for themselves first and not what is best for kids to be successful. How can teachers' suggestions be more respected by the supervisors and policymakers in Chicago and the U.S.?
In Chicago and the U.S., we need to revisit, in the long term, our preparation and training of teachers. I will write more about that soon. Today, I want to write about more immediate issues that individual school districts have some control over: Time, Trust, Testing (none), & Class Size.
Time: There is plenty of research out there about the use of time -- more time in the school day (or year) does not necessarily equate to better achievement. It is the quality use of time, along with other factors that enable teachers to set up the opportunity for quality teaching & learning for kids. Look at Finland -- one of the shortest school days, but still among the top performers world wide. Why is that? Shorter school days, especially for younger kids, so that they maximize their attention span. Plenty of breaks built into the school day so kids are refreshed and attentive.
Trust: Teachers have more time built into their school days and weeks without kids in front of them so that they can (1) collaborate with colleagues, (2) prepare experiments and inquiry-based lessons, and (3) provide substantive written feedback to kids (Love this last one -- I spend so much of my personal time providing feedback to help kids with their misconceptions).
Tests - NO STANDARDIZED TESTS: OK, so we will not get rid of all of the tests in the U.S. any time soon, but couldn't we eliminate half?! If districts eliminated some of the tests they would: (1) demonstrate trust for teachers' work (google Assessment for Learning and find all the international research out there how top performing countries have given this trust to teachers with formative assesments and reduced/elminated standardized tests), (2) regain instructional time, (3) provide substantial financial savings (think of all the costs), and (4) relieve kids' stress, and much more...
Class Size: every middle school class I visited had 18-24 students. The teacher typically (almost always) presented the lesson or challenging problems then circulated the classroom and checked in with each student 1, 2, or 3 times. In this setting, it makes sense to all that these teachers know their students' strengths and needs better than I ever will. In recent years, I have had 33, 35, and even 37 kids in a class often with special ed and ELL kids included.
I want to shout from the roof tops one of the most obvious examples of trust here and lack of trust in the U.S. When teachers in Finland speak about what is best for kids' learning -- they are heard and even sought out by principals & policymakers. Usually when American teachers speak out, education officials, policymakers and even some parents perceive teachers to be advocating for themselves first and not what is best for kids to be successful. How can teachers' suggestions be more respected by the supervisors and policymakers in Chicago and the U.S.?
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Finnish Teacher Education in Action
As part of the celebration of Helsinki - World Design Capital for 2012, the University's Department of Teacher Education has produced a series of videos about teacher education (each subtitle is the link to YouTube). Which video clip highlights best the differences between Finland and U.S.A.'s teacher training?
Becoming aTeacher
This first video introduces the respect that the teaching profession has in Finland and why so many Finns are proud to pursue this calling.
Finnish Teacher Education
The teacher education approach emphasizes their training and preparation for the teaching to the whole child. Teachers are required to earn a master’s degree which usually takes five years.
TeachingPractice - Reflection in Action
This video clip is of two student teachers who are working together with a supervising master teacher in a sixth grade class at the practice teaching school. An instructor from the university (my advisor) also observes and facilitates reflection during the practice teaching. (We are in the back of the class observing this lesson.) As I stated in an earlier post, this practice teaching series happens three times during their training.
Tribute toDiversity
This segment provides background on the teacher’s code of ethics and among the techniques the supervising teacher models for the student teachers is differentiated instruction.
Smartphone inTeaching and Learning
Becoming aTeacher
This first video introduces the respect that the teaching profession has in Finland and why so many Finns are proud to pursue this calling.
Finnish Teacher Education
The teacher education approach emphasizes their training and preparation for the teaching to the whole child. Teachers are required to earn a master’s degree which usually takes five years.
TeachingPractice - Reflection in Action
This video clip is of two student teachers who are working together with a supervising master teacher in a sixth grade class at the practice teaching school. An instructor from the university (my advisor) also observes and facilitates reflection during the practice teaching. (We are in the back of the class observing this lesson.) As I stated in an earlier post, this practice teaching series happens three times during their training.
Tribute toDiversity
This segment provides background on the teacher’s code of ethics and among the techniques the supervising teacher models for the student teachers is differentiated instruction.
Smartphone inTeaching and Learning
This is a six minute video clip about using
Smartphones in class. I am not sure how
many teachers are using this technique, but it is great to see the productive use
of this technology.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Shame on Me!
Yesterday, quite a bit of the U.S. education news was the ranking of the Nation's Top High Schools by U.S. News and World Report.
AHH - Shame on Me! This is one of the most common criticisms Finland has of the United States -- the constant ranking of schools, cities, and states. Unfortunately, it is becoming more common to do the public ranking of teachers in some cities and states. What is the value of the ranking? How is it used? What is the criteria for the ranking? Often standardized, high-stakes tests, right? And what narrow focus do these tests have?! Hmm, looks like Step #1 used each state's high school proficiency tests...
Here is the methodology for U.S. News & World Report's ranking:
Step 1: The first step determined whether each school's students were performing better than statistically expected for the average student in the state. We started by looking at reading and math results for all students on each state's high school proficiency tests. We then factored in the percentage of economically disadvantaged students (who tend to score lower) enrolled at the school to identify the schools that were performing better than statistical expectations.
• Step 2: For those schools that made it past this first step, the second step determined whether the school's least-advantaged students (black, Hispanic, and low-income) were performing better than average for similar students in the state. We compared each school's math and reading proficiency rates for disadvantaged students with the statewide results for these student groups and then selected schools that were performing better than this state average.
• Step 3: Schools that made it through the first two steps became eligible to be judged nationally on the final step—college-readiness performance—using Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate test data as the benchmarks for success, depending on which program was largest at the school. AP is a College Board program that offers college-level courses at high schools across the country. The International Baccalaureate program also offers a college-level curriculum.
The important news -- the student/teacher ratio for a majority of these high performing high schools appears to be 16:1 or 17:1 (with some 7:1 or 14:1 or even 26:1 or 28:1). Let's be more critical of this simple ratio -- it reports the total number of students with the total number of teachers. In our schools, we have many teachers not in classrooms with students, but they are part of this statistic. Really a national average of 16:1? I do not know who is/is not counted, but I know our actual class size is considerably larger than 16:1. If we use this statistic at face value, seems the schools with this lower ratio typically rank higher. Once again -- I advocate that the less kids at a time we teach, the more effective we can meet their needs (whether remediation or acceleration).
Here is the link if you want to explore (shame on you too :D): U.S. News: Nation's Top High Schools
AHH - Shame on Me! This is one of the most common criticisms Finland has of the United States -- the constant ranking of schools, cities, and states. Unfortunately, it is becoming more common to do the public ranking of teachers in some cities and states. What is the value of the ranking? How is it used? What is the criteria for the ranking? Often standardized, high-stakes tests, right? And what narrow focus do these tests have?! Hmm, looks like Step #1 used each state's high school proficiency tests...
Here is the methodology for U.S. News & World Report's ranking:
Step 1: The first step determined whether each school's students were performing better than statistically expected for the average student in the state. We started by looking at reading and math results for all students on each state's high school proficiency tests. We then factored in the percentage of economically disadvantaged students (who tend to score lower) enrolled at the school to identify the schools that were performing better than statistical expectations.
• Step 2: For those schools that made it past this first step, the second step determined whether the school's least-advantaged students (black, Hispanic, and low-income) were performing better than average for similar students in the state. We compared each school's math and reading proficiency rates for disadvantaged students with the statewide results for these student groups and then selected schools that were performing better than this state average.
• Step 3: Schools that made it through the first two steps became eligible to be judged nationally on the final step—college-readiness performance—using Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate test data as the benchmarks for success, depending on which program was largest at the school. AP is a College Board program that offers college-level courses at high schools across the country. The International Baccalaureate program also offers a college-level curriculum.
The important news -- the student/teacher ratio for a majority of these high performing high schools appears to be 16:1 or 17:1 (with some 7:1 or 14:1 or even 26:1 or 28:1). Let's be more critical of this simple ratio -- it reports the total number of students with the total number of teachers. In our schools, we have many teachers not in classrooms with students, but they are part of this statistic. Really a national average of 16:1? I do not know who is/is not counted, but I know our actual class size is considerably larger than 16:1. If we use this statistic at face value, seems the schools with this lower ratio typically rank higher. Once again -- I advocate that the less kids at a time we teach, the more effective we can meet their needs (whether remediation or acceleration).
Here is the link if you want to explore (shame on you too :D): U.S. News: Nation's Top High Schools
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Strategies to Support Struggling Learners
One common strategy in Finland with the early grades, but not a requirement, is to divide the class into two groups: A and B. For example, one day a week, typically the first period of the day, group A would come to school for a mathematics lesson and group B would come to school one hour later. Then another day of the week, it flips with group B coming in early and group A one hour later. Seems simple? Can you imagine our schools in Chicago doing this?
Many people, especially my CPS teacher colleagues, would appreciate the effectiveness of this design. Please excuse me for reminding you that the average class size I have seen is 22 or 24 students so think of providing a mathematics lesson to 11 or 12 students one day a week... That is one way to meet kids' needs in the early years -- but it is a funding decision and school level priority.
Here are some common strategies (but not requirements) at the middle school grades: Typically there are 3 or 4 "lesson hours" a week for mathematics in grades 6, 7, 8, and 9. Depending on the struggling students' needs, the student attends class with a special education teacher for 1 or 2 of those lesson hours. It seems most often that they attend one hour a week with the special education teacher instead of the mathematics teacher. Both the mathematics and special education teachers routinely collaborate to ensure there is continuity of the content.
In addition, the national curriculum specifically explains that when remedial teaching needs are identified, that the school should develop a plan in cooperation with the parents or guardians to meet that student's need. As I understand it, it is not for special education but for a student currently struggling with a mathematics unit. The teacher and the school can meet this student's need during the mathematics lesson, during the school day, or after school. If it is after school, the small group may meet once a week for a few weeks or until the unit is done. "Depending" on the school or situation, another group could be organized or not. This is a school level decision and the principal sets aside funds to pay teachers for this type of flexible need. If I am not mistaken, in Chicago, after school academic help is typically done for most of the school year for the same students. While the intent makes sense for us in Chicago, it lacks the flexibility and versatility for the school and the teachers to meet their students' needs. The limited CPS funding for after school academic help "tied" to and audited for the attendance of the identified students for the whole school year. What do you think? Anything unclear?
Many people, especially my CPS teacher colleagues, would appreciate the effectiveness of this design. Please excuse me for reminding you that the average class size I have seen is 22 or 24 students so think of providing a mathematics lesson to 11 or 12 students one day a week... That is one way to meet kids' needs in the early years -- but it is a funding decision and school level priority.
Here are some common strategies (but not requirements) at the middle school grades: Typically there are 3 or 4 "lesson hours" a week for mathematics in grades 6, 7, 8, and 9. Depending on the struggling students' needs, the student attends class with a special education teacher for 1 or 2 of those lesson hours. It seems most often that they attend one hour a week with the special education teacher instead of the mathematics teacher. Both the mathematics and special education teachers routinely collaborate to ensure there is continuity of the content.
In addition, the national curriculum specifically explains that when remedial teaching needs are identified, that the school should develop a plan in cooperation with the parents or guardians to meet that student's need. As I understand it, it is not for special education but for a student currently struggling with a mathematics unit. The teacher and the school can meet this student's need during the mathematics lesson, during the school day, or after school. If it is after school, the small group may meet once a week for a few weeks or until the unit is done. "Depending" on the school or situation, another group could be organized or not. This is a school level decision and the principal sets aside funds to pay teachers for this type of flexible need. If I am not mistaken, in Chicago, after school academic help is typically done for most of the school year for the same students. While the intent makes sense for us in Chicago, it lacks the flexibility and versatility for the school and the teachers to meet their students' needs. The limited CPS funding for after school academic help "tied" to and audited for the attendance of the identified students for the whole school year. What do you think? Anything unclear?
Monday, May 7, 2012
Autonomy at all Levels
As my project winds down, I have the opportunity to reflect on what I have seen and heard. The biggest challenge for me is to articulate what I have learned concisely with accuracy.
So how to bring home the huge impact of autonomy?! As I listen to my recorded interviews of teachers and principals, the most common response is "It depends." Why is that phrase a common response you might ask. Often when I inquire about a particular strategy or framework, given the school and the teachers have autonomy, the teachers have the principals' support to design and implement what they determine to be the most effective approach to meet the identified need. While this may seem obvious, my experiences in Chicago have shown me that both schools within the district and teachers within the schools are extremely limited by all the education requirements and funding formulas.
Finland is open and deliberate about their national approach to present the National Board of Education curriculum (links to the right) and then make each city, each school, and each teacher self-sufficient with the power and the independence to self-govern. Isn't that what autonomy should truly be? My next post will be about how some schools use this autonomy to support struggling learners with mathematics.
So how to bring home the huge impact of autonomy?! As I listen to my recorded interviews of teachers and principals, the most common response is "It depends." Why is that phrase a common response you might ask. Often when I inquire about a particular strategy or framework, given the school and the teachers have autonomy, the teachers have the principals' support to design and implement what they determine to be the most effective approach to meet the identified need. While this may seem obvious, my experiences in Chicago have shown me that both schools within the district and teachers within the schools are extremely limited by all the education requirements and funding formulas.
Finland is open and deliberate about their national approach to present the National Board of Education curriculum (links to the right) and then make each city, each school, and each teacher self-sufficient with the power and the independence to self-govern. Isn't that what autonomy should truly be? My next post will be about how some schools use this autonomy to support struggling learners with mathematics.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Coherence - Big Pic & Day to Day
We often talk about coherence in teaching for several reasons. One is to ensure that kids are taught the same content within the same grade level and school to school. I think one could argue, one of the reasons for state standards would be for coherence district to district. Now with Common Core State Standards (CCSS) coming (link to the right), one of these goals would be coherence state to state.
I do not think that I posted previously -- that during one of my weeks in March visiting three different schools in three different cities (Kirkkonummi, Helsinki, & Vantaa), three different mathematics teachers were all teaching proportional reasoning. Coincidental? I doubt it. There are less instructional hours for mathematics weekly and overall in Finland than in Chicago; thus, I think the teachers need to strategically prioritize their lessons. The National Curriculum for Mathematics in Finland (link to the right) is more general than our national standards, but I also think it has less "requirements" at each grade level. (I need to do more analysis and comparison of both USA and Finland's national standards, but I doubt that will get done before I leave Finland.)
There are very consistent, coherent approaches to unit assessments which I suggest have several educational benefits. Typically mathematics teachers administer unit tests with 5-7 problems. Here is the interesting dynamic, it is very common (almost standard) that each problem is worth 6 points. Teachers consistently develop the rubric that the answer of each problem is worth 1 point and the process to get to the answer is worth 5 points. (Many Finnish teachers, when I asked, would say that maybe it is too traditional because it has been done for so long, but it seems to be working.) Now, I am not suggesting we should just do this in Chicago, but at least think about the implications. Would you agree? What could be some other benefits to both teaching and learning from this consistent practice?
There are many Chicago mathematics teachers who also expect and allocate more credit to the process than the answer, but I am sorry to say as an instructional coach I believe there are even more CPS teachers that do not. There is still too much emphasis on the answer and not on the process. We have been emphasizing the process to solve the mathematics for years (decades?) if you think about it. NCTM standards (link to the right) and now CCSS mathematics standards both expect it, but why don't many teachers build it into their year long instructional program? It is unfortunate that it is often taught to students that showing your work is "needed to get credit for the ISAT extended response" mathematics problems instead of just modeling and expecting it as best practices of problem solving all year long.
Something else to ponder with you -- teachers here give so, so many less mathematics quizzes and tests (not talking about standardized assessments here) during the course of the school year than I or most of my CPS colleagues do. Any thoughts? I need to talk about this idea further in a subsequent post.
I do not think that I posted previously -- that during one of my weeks in March visiting three different schools in three different cities (Kirkkonummi, Helsinki, & Vantaa), three different mathematics teachers were all teaching proportional reasoning. Coincidental? I doubt it. There are less instructional hours for mathematics weekly and overall in Finland than in Chicago; thus, I think the teachers need to strategically prioritize their lessons. The National Curriculum for Mathematics in Finland (link to the right) is more general than our national standards, but I also think it has less "requirements" at each grade level. (I need to do more analysis and comparison of both USA and Finland's national standards, but I doubt that will get done before I leave Finland.)
There are very consistent, coherent approaches to unit assessments which I suggest have several educational benefits. Typically mathematics teachers administer unit tests with 5-7 problems. Here is the interesting dynamic, it is very common (almost standard) that each problem is worth 6 points. Teachers consistently develop the rubric that the answer of each problem is worth 1 point and the process to get to the answer is worth 5 points. (Many Finnish teachers, when I asked, would say that maybe it is too traditional because it has been done for so long, but it seems to be working.) Now, I am not suggesting we should just do this in Chicago, but at least think about the implications. Would you agree? What could be some other benefits to both teaching and learning from this consistent practice?
There are many Chicago mathematics teachers who also expect and allocate more credit to the process than the answer, but I am sorry to say as an instructional coach I believe there are even more CPS teachers that do not. There is still too much emphasis on the answer and not on the process. We have been emphasizing the process to solve the mathematics for years (decades?) if you think about it. NCTM standards (link to the right) and now CCSS mathematics standards both expect it, but why don't many teachers build it into their year long instructional program? It is unfortunate that it is often taught to students that showing your work is "needed to get credit for the ISAT extended response" mathematics problems instead of just modeling and expecting it as best practices of problem solving all year long.
Something else to ponder with you -- teachers here give so, so many less mathematics quizzes and tests (not talking about standardized assessments here) during the course of the school year than I or most of my CPS colleagues do. Any thoughts? I need to talk about this idea further in a subsequent post.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Assessment Data - Where does it go?
So... there are some assessments that schools can "choose" to take to see how their students are doing in comparison to other schools in their city and the national average. These exams are optional at 6th and 9th grades. Many of the schools I have been visiting chose to give the 9th gr mathematics exam (along with some other exams) last week.
The ninth grade mathematics exam is written and distributed by MAOL (Matemaattisten Aineiden Opettajien Liitto MAOL). MAOL is the national mathematics, physics, and chemistry teachers organization (kind of like NCTM and NSTA combined). MAOL also writes a detailed rubric to ensure the tests are graded consistently.
Ready for this? The mathematics teachers (who choose to give the exam) grade their own students' exams and then enter the scores anonymously into a central database. Thus, there is a national database without student names so each student, teacher, school, and city knows how they are doing in comparison to the national average.
The benefit of anonymity? There is no ranking of students or schools or cities' performance - it is just a formative baseline.
Another educational benefit - think of the educational coherence and consistency that is established when all the teachers score and report their own assessments. In addition, everyone takes the mathematics test the same day; thus, afterwards the test becomes a public document.
At the end of secondary school, students who choose to pursue college take the required national matriculation exam. I will explain how that whole process works in a subsequent post.
The ninth grade mathematics exam is written and distributed by MAOL (Matemaattisten Aineiden Opettajien Liitto MAOL). MAOL is the national mathematics, physics, and chemistry teachers organization (kind of like NCTM and NSTA combined). MAOL also writes a detailed rubric to ensure the tests are graded consistently.
Ready for this? The mathematics teachers (who choose to give the exam) grade their own students' exams and then enter the scores anonymously into a central database. Thus, there is a national database without student names so each student, teacher, school, and city knows how they are doing in comparison to the national average.
The benefit of anonymity? There is no ranking of students or schools or cities' performance - it is just a formative baseline.
Another educational benefit - think of the educational coherence and consistency that is established when all the teachers score and report their own assessments. In addition, everyone takes the mathematics test the same day; thus, afterwards the test becomes a public document.
At the end of secondary school, students who choose to pursue college take the required national matriculation exam. I will explain how that whole process works in a subsequent post.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Teachers Weekly Instructional Responsibility
How can we organize our schools so that teachers have time to:
1. Plan and prepare inquiry-based, engaging lessons?
2. Collaborate with colleagues about students or subject matter?
3. Provide substantive feedback to students to accelerate their learning?
Teachers in Finland (my work has focused on grades 7-9) are paid a base salary of 21 weekly lesson hours. Allow me to elaborate... if you teach Finnish or Swedish or science, you are actually paid for 18 lesson hours of instruction and 3 hours to grade essays or prepare experiments. Isn't that pragmatic? If you teach more than the 21 lesson hours, you are paid a little extra. Most of the mathematics and science teachers I have met teach 24 lesson hours a week.
So if you teach 24 lesson hours, that is about 5 hours a day, but actually you might teach 6 hours one day and three hours another. Thus, there is flexibility in the schedule and work week for each teacher to manage the work -- at school and not in front of kids. Does that make sense? Does something need to be clarified?
In Chicago (and probably the U.S.) -- often, planning/preparing lessons is on the teacher's personal time. Collaboration with colleagues is during common preps (if you have them), but often teachers are given work to do during some of their collaboration time so they often choose their other free weekly prep periods to do their lesson preparation. With the nonstop instructional day, I believe, most CPS teachers either do quick grading at school OR because they are tired from nonstop day supervising kids, take their grading home. The disadvantages of this lack of time means either students do not receive substantive feedback to correct their misconceptions, or if they do, it probably is not returned timely and (as research shows) loses the instructional impact.
I have developed and advocated a variety of schedules over the years for schools and my grade level teams because the schedules provide the philosophical framework to enable (or prevent) instructional flexibility and professional collaboration. How about all of the schools in the district?
If the adminstration creates a schedule or if teachers do not advocate for themselves -- this minimal opportunity to prepare lessons and collaborate with colleagues is lost. How can our teachers have more time (not teaching) built into their school day?
1. Plan and prepare inquiry-based, engaging lessons?
2. Collaborate with colleagues about students or subject matter?
3. Provide substantive feedback to students to accelerate their learning?
Teachers in Finland (my work has focused on grades 7-9) are paid a base salary of 21 weekly lesson hours. Allow me to elaborate... if you teach Finnish or Swedish or science, you are actually paid for 18 lesson hours of instruction and 3 hours to grade essays or prepare experiments. Isn't that pragmatic? If you teach more than the 21 lesson hours, you are paid a little extra. Most of the mathematics and science teachers I have met teach 24 lesson hours a week.
So if you teach 24 lesson hours, that is about 5 hours a day, but actually you might teach 6 hours one day and three hours another. Thus, there is flexibility in the schedule and work week for each teacher to manage the work -- at school and not in front of kids. Does that make sense? Does something need to be clarified?
In Chicago (and probably the U.S.) -- often, planning/preparing lessons is on the teacher's personal time. Collaboration with colleagues is during common preps (if you have them), but often teachers are given work to do during some of their collaboration time so they often choose their other free weekly prep periods to do their lesson preparation. With the nonstop instructional day, I believe, most CPS teachers either do quick grading at school OR because they are tired from nonstop day supervising kids, take their grading home. The disadvantages of this lack of time means either students do not receive substantive feedback to correct their misconceptions, or if they do, it probably is not returned timely and (as research shows) loses the instructional impact.
I have developed and advocated a variety of schedules over the years for schools and my grade level teams because the schedules provide the philosophical framework to enable (or prevent) instructional flexibility and professional collaboration. How about all of the schools in the district?
If the adminstration creates a schedule or if teachers do not advocate for themselves -- this minimal opportunity to prepare lessons and collaborate with colleagues is lost. How can our teachers have more time (not teaching) built into their school day?
Monday, April 23, 2012
Built in Breaks for All Ages
Doubt you know this, but the most common instructional hour for students and teachers in Finland is to have 45 minutes of instruction followed by a 15 minute break -- for both the kids & teachers. This is at all grade levels: primary, lower secondary (middle school), and upper secondary. Everyone takes breaks. (Some of the schools I visited - especially middle school (gr 7-9) --- have adjusted the schedule to have 75 or 90 minute periods followed by 15 minute breaks.)
Teachers typically go to the teachers' lounge, share a cup of coffee, and return to their class refreshed. (Hmm - I am lucky to see many of my colleagues over a 45 minute lunch break and my preparation period, however, most of my CPS colleagues in 450 elementary schools have not seen or had a break with their colleagues once their school day started.) We could benefit from a few more breaks in our school day with colleagues and without students.
So our own kids who are in 2nd grade and 5th grade here in Helsinki typically have 3 to 5 fifteen minute recesses a day. In these grades, the students go outside year round (cold, snow, or light rain) for some fresh air and exercise. I believe many of the younger kids in Chicago have at least 1 break in the day, but all of our grades (primary, intermediate, and middle school) could benefit from a few more breaks.
All or most teachers take one turn a week supervising the kids during a recess or lunch.
Hmm, do you think Chicago teachers would supervise kids one day a week to build in more breaks to the instructional day?
Teachers typically go to the teachers' lounge, share a cup of coffee, and return to their class refreshed. (Hmm - I am lucky to see many of my colleagues over a 45 minute lunch break and my preparation period, however, most of my CPS colleagues in 450 elementary schools have not seen or had a break with their colleagues once their school day started.) We could benefit from a few more breaks in our school day with colleagues and without students.
So our own kids who are in 2nd grade and 5th grade here in Helsinki typically have 3 to 5 fifteen minute recesses a day. In these grades, the students go outside year round (cold, snow, or light rain) for some fresh air and exercise. I believe many of the younger kids in Chicago have at least 1 break in the day, but all of our grades (primary, intermediate, and middle school) could benefit from a few more breaks.
All or most teachers take one turn a week supervising the kids during a recess or lunch.
Hmm, do you think Chicago teachers would supervise kids one day a week to build in more breaks to the instructional day?
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Class Size - Does it matter? YES!
I do not get it. My Finnish colleagues do not get it.
Why can't U.S. policy makers and administrators understand the obvious challenges of larger classes and the educational impact of smaller classes?
Some people say there is no definitive data -- something else for me to research or to substantiate...
This past fall, I had four classes of 35 students in Chicago. The last year I was in the classroom, I had three classes of 37 students. How do we expect teachers to (1) know their students' strengths and needs well and (2) plan & teach engaging, inquiry-based lessons effectively?
Here, almost all of the classrooms I have visited have 18-22 students with a couple that had 24 students (There were also several classes with less than 18). Every mathematics lesson I have observed thus far, the teacher presents the theory and/or examples and then gives the students time to work. Then the teacher circulates the room checking-in with each student 2 and often 3 times to check for understanding and clarify misconceptions.
That is the most consistent practice and, I would argue, most effective formative assessment I have seen. As the teachers consistently shared in interviews and I witnessed in each classroom - the teachers know their students. No standardized assessment would ever give this timely, accurate information as the teacher assessing each student, each lesson.
So how about connecting some dots... standardized tests cost millions of dollars annually. Smaller class size means more teachers would need much more investment of funds. So why can't we reduce and prioritize all the required standardized tests and invest the savings in smaller class size? Am I mistaken? I have the impression that we talk about these issues separately and they are so interconnected -- testing, class size, & instructional time.
Why can't U.S. policy makers and administrators understand the obvious challenges of larger classes and the educational impact of smaller classes?
Some people say there is no definitive data -- something else for me to research or to substantiate...
This past fall, I had four classes of 35 students in Chicago. The last year I was in the classroom, I had three classes of 37 students. How do we expect teachers to (1) know their students' strengths and needs well and (2) plan & teach engaging, inquiry-based lessons effectively?
Here, almost all of the classrooms I have visited have 18-22 students with a couple that had 24 students (There were also several classes with less than 18). Every mathematics lesson I have observed thus far, the teacher presents the theory and/or examples and then gives the students time to work. Then the teacher circulates the room checking-in with each student 2 and often 3 times to check for understanding and clarify misconceptions.
That is the most consistent practice and, I would argue, most effective formative assessment I have seen. As the teachers consistently shared in interviews and I witnessed in each classroom - the teachers know their students. No standardized assessment would ever give this timely, accurate information as the teacher assessing each student, each lesson.
So how about connecting some dots... standardized tests cost millions of dollars annually. Smaller class size means more teachers would need much more investment of funds. So why can't we reduce and prioritize all the required standardized tests and invest the savings in smaller class size? Am I mistaken? I have the impression that we talk about these issues separately and they are so interconnected -- testing, class size, & instructional time.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Standardized Tests - Too many? Too much $?
For those checking in periodically -- SORRY that I have not posted for a month. I will try to do better. To date, I have visited 10 schools and about 50 classes and 24 teachers. I will visit less schools in the coming weeks and focus on data entry and analysis.
HERE is the question of the day, week, month, & decade -- Why does Chicago Public Schools and most U.S. school district impose so many standardized assessments? No one seems to be asking the questions about the instructional time and education funds devoted to these exercises. How do we expect teachers to use all these various measures? Did you know that, (if I calculate correctly and depending on how schools schedule it), CPS 8th graders could spend a portion of 35 instrutional days with one district required test or another (NWEA or Scantron, ISAT, Common Core quarterly tests, IL writing, and EXPLORE). No wonder CPS leadership wants to lengthen the school day and year -- look at how much instructional time is traded for testing. This is one of several points I want to raise in the coming weeks.
I remember being in my classroom this fall with my discouraged students after they had taken one of the district required Common Core State Standards (CCSS) assessments. For those reading, do you know what this means? Let me try to briefly explain... CCSS has been adopted by 46 (or so) states for 2014. Teachers are beginning to learn and implement the new standards. To understand this, at least from a mathematics perspective, this work takes time to transition mathematics concepts from one grade level to another. CPS in its infinite wisdom had students take reading and mathematics tests in the fall... The kids came out of those tests discouraged and lacking confidence because they were primarily tested on concepts that they have not studied nor have most teachers had an opportunity to teach.
So besides the time -- how much do all these tests cost the district? This is a question to put out there for teachers and parents to know. I predict it is in the millions of dollars for Chicago alone. I will try to find out. (Just looked for several hours -- found nothing -- looks like a Freedom of Information request...)
I doubt most parents, and for that matter, most citizens have any idea how many days students lose and how many standardized tests students take annually in school. I will need to discuss this in many more posts, but keep in mind the classroom teachers still need to conduct a variety of assessments of the lessons and units that they are actually teaching to check for student understanding and learning.
As you can imagine, Finland does not have standardized testing. This past week when I showed my list of Chicago assessments for an interview with a teacher, he said. "Seems they have real trust issues of teachers." Last week a principal's reaction to the same list was, "What is the reason for all of that testing?"
Given tight budget times everywhere, how much time and how much money should we dedicate to standardized testing? I doubt the U.S. will ever completely eliminate them, but I would suggest that policy makers are requiring way too many tests that reduce instructional time, add more teaching challenges, and suck out all the joy of learning.
HERE is the question of the day, week, month, & decade -- Why does Chicago Public Schools and most U.S. school district impose so many standardized assessments? No one seems to be asking the questions about the instructional time and education funds devoted to these exercises. How do we expect teachers to use all these various measures? Did you know that, (if I calculate correctly and depending on how schools schedule it), CPS 8th graders could spend a portion of 35 instrutional days with one district required test or another (NWEA or Scantron, ISAT, Common Core quarterly tests, IL writing, and EXPLORE). No wonder CPS leadership wants to lengthen the school day and year -- look at how much instructional time is traded for testing. This is one of several points I want to raise in the coming weeks.
I remember being in my classroom this fall with my discouraged students after they had taken one of the district required Common Core State Standards (CCSS) assessments. For those reading, do you know what this means? Let me try to briefly explain... CCSS has been adopted by 46 (or so) states for 2014. Teachers are beginning to learn and implement the new standards. To understand this, at least from a mathematics perspective, this work takes time to transition mathematics concepts from one grade level to another. CPS in its infinite wisdom had students take reading and mathematics tests in the fall... The kids came out of those tests discouraged and lacking confidence because they were primarily tested on concepts that they have not studied nor have most teachers had an opportunity to teach.
So besides the time -- how much do all these tests cost the district? This is a question to put out there for teachers and parents to know. I predict it is in the millions of dollars for Chicago alone. I will try to find out. (Just looked for several hours -- found nothing -- looks like a Freedom of Information request...)
I doubt most parents, and for that matter, most citizens have any idea how many days students lose and how many standardized tests students take annually in school. I will need to discuss this in many more posts, but keep in mind the classroom teachers still need to conduct a variety of assessments of the lessons and units that they are actually teaching to check for student understanding and learning.
As you can imagine, Finland does not have standardized testing. This past week when I showed my list of Chicago assessments for an interview with a teacher, he said. "Seems they have real trust issues of teachers." Last week a principal's reaction to the same list was, "What is the reason for all of that testing?"
Given tight budget times everywhere, how much time and how much money should we dedicate to standardized testing? I doubt the U.S. will ever completely eliminate them, but I would suggest that policy makers are requiring way too many tests that reduce instructional time, add more teaching challenges, and suck out all the joy of learning.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
I trust my teachers 110%
"We believe that the happier the teachers are the better learning and results we get from the students. This is why all the principals in Finland take care of their teachers. I trust my teachers 110%."
As you may know, in Finland teachers are trusted by principals and parents like I have not seen, read, or experienced in Chicago. Granted, it took time to get to this level (topic for future posts). The above quote is from a principal I inteviewed last week, Tommi, about his school's vision for teaching and learning.
This is another consistent thread I have seen in each school that I have visited. There is noticeable and understood trust of the teachers. Noticeable: collegial dialogue among principals and teachers, equipped work space, comfortable faculty lounge (which is often full of teachers during coffee breaks). Understood: flexibility to use free periods as teachers choose, meet with colleagues as teachers determine, completion of reports thoroughly & timely. I should note -- to my knowledge - teachers always get all of their work done.
So I ask myself, what small, sustainable steps could we implement at the district or school level to be transparent about this trust? Finland has not waivered from the main framework they identified some thirty / forty years ago. One of the challenges (frustrations?) in U.S. school districts is that we generally do not take the time to develop nor stay the course for an extended time to give the initiative a chance. Change takes time and patience.
As you may know, in Finland teachers are trusted by principals and parents like I have not seen, read, or experienced in Chicago. Granted, it took time to get to this level (topic for future posts). The above quote is from a principal I inteviewed last week, Tommi, about his school's vision for teaching and learning.
This is another consistent thread I have seen in each school that I have visited. There is noticeable and understood trust of the teachers. Noticeable: collegial dialogue among principals and teachers, equipped work space, comfortable faculty lounge (which is often full of teachers during coffee breaks). Understood: flexibility to use free periods as teachers choose, meet with colleagues as teachers determine, completion of reports thoroughly & timely. I should note -- to my knowledge - teachers always get all of their work done.
So I ask myself, what small, sustainable steps could we implement at the district or school level to be transparent about this trust? Finland has not waivered from the main framework they identified some thirty / forty years ago. One of the challenges (frustrations?) in U.S. school districts is that we generally do not take the time to develop nor stay the course for an extended time to give the initiative a chance. Change takes time and patience.
Friday, March 16, 2012
"Then I would have to teach like a college lecture..."
Here is one consistent practice I have seen in every classroom I have observed (28 so far). When the students are practicing the day's mathematics concept, the teacher circulates in the classroom and checks for understanding with each student at least 2 times, if not three times. Can you believe it?
All of the classrooms I have visited have ranged in size from 18 to 24 students, with 22 students probably being the average. So, I told one of the teachers I have been fortunate to get to know, Antti, that this past fall I taught three science classes with 35 students in each class. I asked Antti how his teaching, if at all, would change if he had 35 students. Antti's response "Then I would have to teach like a college lecture. I would not able to help each individual student as I do now."
As budgets get even tighter in the U.S., I predict class size will go up even more to save money. How can we convince educational leaders and decision-makers that class size does matter when teachers are trying to meet students' needs? With large heterogenous classes (which can have struggling, special ed., second language, and accelerated learners), how can committed, caring educators do their best work?
All of the classrooms I have visited have ranged in size from 18 to 24 students, with 22 students probably being the average. So, I told one of the teachers I have been fortunate to get to know, Antti, that this past fall I taught three science classes with 35 students in each class. I asked Antti how his teaching, if at all, would change if he had 35 students. Antti's response "Then I would have to teach like a college lecture. I would not able to help each individual student as I do now."
As budgets get even tighter in the U.S., I predict class size will go up even more to save money. How can we convince educational leaders and decision-makers that class size does matter when teachers are trying to meet students' needs? With large heterogenous classes (which can have struggling, special ed., second language, and accelerated learners), how can committed, caring educators do their best work?
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Trust & Respect for Teachers
You may have read about the respect and trust that teachers have in Finland. I am experiencing it in several ways including the teaching load, the school day schedule, and even the teachers' lounges.
The number of hours a middle school mathematics teacher has is 21 hours to teach. If they are needed to teach more than 21 hours, they are paid a little more for each hour accordingly. So if "you do the math" there often is a day during the week with only 1 or 2 classes to teach. Thus, the teacher can spend that time preparing lessons, grading papers with substantive feedback, or meeting with colleagues. Teachers also have the independence to leave during the time they are not teaching to get their work done at home.
It is common for mathematics classes to be 60 minutes with a 15 minute break built in or 75 minutes followed by 15 minute break. Some schools have shifted to 90 minute periods with a 15 minute break built in or followed by a 30 minute break. Each school designs their instructional schedule with frequent breaks built in for both students and teachers.
Teachers' Lounges: symbolic respect for teachers and the collaboration. These are comfortable, welcoming rooms where you often find teachers sharing a cup of coffee and talking. The school I visited yesterday -- many of the teachers have a coffee break at 10:15 while the students have their break. This structured time fosters that collaboration and networking.
I will focus on capturing more "doable" steps American schools can structure to foster more trust and respect for teachers.
The number of hours a middle school mathematics teacher has is 21 hours to teach. If they are needed to teach more than 21 hours, they are paid a little more for each hour accordingly. So if "you do the math" there often is a day during the week with only 1 or 2 classes to teach. Thus, the teacher can spend that time preparing lessons, grading papers with substantive feedback, or meeting with colleagues. Teachers also have the independence to leave during the time they are not teaching to get their work done at home.
It is common for mathematics classes to be 60 minutes with a 15 minute break built in or 75 minutes followed by 15 minute break. Some schools have shifted to 90 minute periods with a 15 minute break built in or followed by a 30 minute break. Each school designs their instructional schedule with frequent breaks built in for both students and teachers.
Teachers' Lounges: symbolic respect for teachers and the collaboration. These are comfortable, welcoming rooms where you often find teachers sharing a cup of coffee and talking. The school I visited yesterday -- many of the teachers have a coffee break at 10:15 while the students have their break. This structured time fosters that collaboration and networking.
I will focus on capturing more "doable" steps American schools can structure to foster more trust and respect for teachers.
Monday, March 5, 2012
School Administrators
This topic comes from a question Denise commented on in a previous post... Denise wondered if any of the schools in Finland had the business model for adminstrators without an education background...
My experience in all the schools that I have visited (7 so far) is that every administrator has an education degree and has taught. It is very common that the adminstrators (both principals and assistant principals) teach 1 or more classes during the week. In addition, if I have not said it yet, the school is much more autonomous from their city's department of education. Thus, they do not have all the mandates from the local government to do -- they focus on the national curriculum and what the team of teachers at the school identifies as best methods and strategies to teach it.
My experience in all the schools that I have visited (7 so far) is that every administrator has an education degree and has taught. It is very common that the adminstrators (both principals and assistant principals) teach 1 or more classes during the week. In addition, if I have not said it yet, the school is much more autonomous from their city's department of education. Thus, they do not have all the mandates from the local government to do -- they focus on the national curriculum and what the team of teachers at the school identifies as best methods and strategies to teach it.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Progress Scheduling School Visits
So my school visits are progressing... After next week's ski holiday winter break, I will have several more schools to visit coming on the radar:
I look forward to visiting a school in Kirkkonummi (about 40 kms away) where the principal has written a problem-based mathematics curriculum and she was a Fulbright teacher about five years ago. After the winter break, I will also have the opportunity to visit the English School in Helsinki and return to the Viikki Teacher Training School. My Fulbright buddy Eija has also suggested several schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area that I should pursue.
I am most excited about the ten schools that Kari Kinnunen (who is with the teachers union) has offered to coordinate for me. Kari will initiate the contact with 5 schools in Espoo and 5 schools in Vantaa which are both right outside Helsinki, but not visited near as much as the Helsinki schools. I continue to learn how small Finland is -- Kari had a Fulbright teacher colleague from Chicago at his school many years ago.
My preference for most of my schools will be to establish a relationship with some teachers and return to the school several times. Check back to see what I learn. Any questions you wonder about?
I look forward to visiting a school in Kirkkonummi (about 40 kms away) where the principal has written a problem-based mathematics curriculum and she was a Fulbright teacher about five years ago. After the winter break, I will also have the opportunity to visit the English School in Helsinki and return to the Viikki Teacher Training School. My Fulbright buddy Eija has also suggested several schools in the Helsinki metropolitan area that I should pursue.
I am most excited about the ten schools that Kari Kinnunen (who is with the teachers union) has offered to coordinate for me. Kari will initiate the contact with 5 schools in Espoo and 5 schools in Vantaa which are both right outside Helsinki, but not visited near as much as the Helsinki schools. I continue to learn how small Finland is -- Kari had a Fulbright teacher colleague from Chicago at his school many years ago.
My preference for most of my schools will be to establish a relationship with some teachers and return to the school several times. Check back to see what I learn. Any questions you wonder about?
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Teachers & Assessment in Finnish Education
OK... we need to start talking about assessment in an open, constructive way in Chicago and the U.S. Granted Finland implemented reforms 30+ years ago and teachers have more respect, trust, and autonomy, but we have to start somewhere, sometime (and not with the district leaders strategy of the year). We need a strategic, collaborative, comprehensive approach to assessment planned with educators for children in the U.S.
Today I attended a class about the training for "teacher-conducted" assessments in Finland for the University of Helsinki's STEP (Subject Teacher Education Programme in English) teacher prepartion program.
Most countries are doing less assessment -- not Chicago. This year, teachers are directed to administer and students are given more assessments -- using more instructional time -- than I have had in twenty years with CPS. In Finland -- there are NO standardized tests mandated by the country or the city for students to take. Each school and more specifically each teacher designs and implements the formative assessments and summative assessments to inform their instruction. The only national test is the matriculation exam at the end of upper secondary students for those students (about 2/3 of the students) that want to continue to college.
OK -- reality is with the national Common Core State Standards (CCSS) that national assessments are here to stay. How can we get back most of the instructional time we have lost to all the other mandated district, state, and national tests? How do we as teachers get more of an effective, respected voice as to the quantity and format of the assessments that students need to take? Is there a U.S. city or state doing this better than Chicago or the State of Illinois?
Today I attended a class about the training for "teacher-conducted" assessments in Finland for the University of Helsinki's STEP (Subject Teacher Education Programme in English) teacher prepartion program.
Most countries are doing less assessment -- not Chicago. This year, teachers are directed to administer and students are given more assessments -- using more instructional time -- than I have had in twenty years with CPS. In Finland -- there are NO standardized tests mandated by the country or the city for students to take. Each school and more specifically each teacher designs and implements the formative assessments and summative assessments to inform their instruction. The only national test is the matriculation exam at the end of upper secondary students for those students (about 2/3 of the students) that want to continue to college.
OK -- reality is with the national Common Core State Standards (CCSS) that national assessments are here to stay. How can we get back most of the instructional time we have lost to all the other mandated district, state, and national tests? How do we as teachers get more of an effective, respected voice as to the quantity and format of the assessments that students need to take? Is there a U.S. city or state doing this better than Chicago or the State of Illinois?
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Viikki Teacher Training School
Today I joined my advisor at the university teacher training school, Viikki Normaalikoulu, to observe three pairs of her students teach mathematics classes (two pairs in sixth grade, one in third grade). I also had the opportunity to observe a 2nd year upper secondary class solving derivatives (could not believe I actually remembered how to do it!)
Hmm - so I do not know how many of my colleagues, friends, and family members following this blog know - but this is already a HUGE difference with the United States for teacher preparation. The college students preparing to be teachers actually teach early in their college degree, half way through, and towards the end. Contrast this the student teaching we typically do in the U.S. at the end of our coursework. This is a completely different design that provides future teachers feedback on actual teaching practice throughout their studies.
At the conclusion of each lesson, the classroom teacher and my advisor (mathematics teacher educator) Heidi Krzywacki sat down and discussed the strengths and needs of each lesson. At a minimum, I suggest American college students (preparing to be teachers) could practice teach a lesson instead of completing their university-required "observation hours". I always put my visitors to work helping with the hands-on activity or tutoring a small group, but this could be even more productive practice. What do you think?
Hmm - so I do not know how many of my colleagues, friends, and family members following this blog know - but this is already a HUGE difference with the United States for teacher preparation. The college students preparing to be teachers actually teach early in their college degree, half way through, and towards the end. Contrast this the student teaching we typically do in the U.S. at the end of our coursework. This is a completely different design that provides future teachers feedback on actual teaching practice throughout their studies.
At the conclusion of each lesson, the classroom teacher and my advisor (mathematics teacher educator) Heidi Krzywacki sat down and discussed the strengths and needs of each lesson. At a minimum, I suggest American college students (preparing to be teachers) could practice teach a lesson instead of completing their university-required "observation hours". I always put my visitors to work helping with the hands-on activity or tutoring a small group, but this could be even more productive practice. What do you think?
Thursday, February 9, 2012
PhD Seminar - Mathematics Teacher Beliefs
I was invited to attend a seminar with a professor and about a dozen current teachers pursuing their 2nd master's degree or PhD in mathematics education. There were teachers in attendance from Finland, U.S., and Ghana.
The PhD research project that was presented and critiqued will research mathematics teacher beliefs -- whether their philosophy of instruction is more constructivist or more traditional. To my surprise, in the last couple of days, I have learned that there is already research here to show that many mathematics teachers here are more traditional than I thought. Hmm... another similarity between our teachers. Teachers realize or at least say that they believe in inquiry-based, constructivist learning, but it seems that many mathematics teachers prefer the textbook of problems. I look forward to learning how this project progresses and possibly being invited to a future PhD seminar...
I am pursuing avenues to share the MARS tasks from the Inside Mathematics website and the Connected Mathematics curriculum with both the mathematics professors with the university Department of Teacher Education and possibly these mathematics teachers pursuing their advanced degrees.
The PhD research project that was presented and critiqued will research mathematics teacher beliefs -- whether their philosophy of instruction is more constructivist or more traditional. To my surprise, in the last couple of days, I have learned that there is already research here to show that many mathematics teachers here are more traditional than I thought. Hmm... another similarity between our teachers. Teachers realize or at least say that they believe in inquiry-based, constructivist learning, but it seems that many mathematics teachers prefer the textbook of problems. I look forward to learning how this project progresses and possibly being invited to a future PhD seminar...
I am pursuing avenues to share the MARS tasks from the Inside Mathematics website and the Connected Mathematics curriculum with both the mathematics professors with the university Department of Teacher Education and possibly these mathematics teachers pursuing their advanced degrees.
Department Reception - Thanks Heidi!
My advisor Heidi organized a wine & cheese reception for the whole Department of Teacher Education to welcome all the new faces -- including mine -- and to enable us to plan future meetings and collaboration.
I had a chance to talk in more depth (and plan future 1:1 discussions) with professors about mathematics tasks, inquiry-based learning, assessment, special education, student discourse, teacher training, and Finnish public schools. In many ways, it reminded me of my "teacher therapy" sessions that I have (not often enough) with Chicago teacher friends over beer & pizza. So often these informal talks are more productive being insightful, helpful, and encouraging. For me today, I was able to start or build on relationships so that I can meet with educators, get their insights and advice, and use my time more efficiently.
Heidi, again, you have gone above & beyond -- Kiitos!
I had a chance to talk in more depth (and plan future 1:1 discussions) with professors about mathematics tasks, inquiry-based learning, assessment, special education, student discourse, teacher training, and Finnish public schools. In many ways, it reminded me of my "teacher therapy" sessions that I have (not often enough) with Chicago teacher friends over beer & pizza. So often these informal talks are more productive being insightful, helpful, and encouraging. For me today, I was able to start or build on relationships so that I can meet with educators, get their insights and advice, and use my time more efficiently.
Heidi, again, you have gone above & beyond -- Kiitos!
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Collaboration in Action
Today I was able to meet with an important official at the Trade Union of Education in Finland (OAJ). A couple weeks ago, I attended the teachers' national conference and pursued this avenue as another resource to identify mathematics teachers and schools to visit.
When I arrived at OAJ the receptionist asked if my whole group was here. I responded that it was just me, but I had a follow up question, "Does she usually have large groups?" and the reply was yes -- now I felt important and told her when we met. In the course of our two hour conversation, I learned that she organizes visits for delegations from various countries including last year's visit by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten (that had a lot of coverage).
The HUGE difference in Finland is the recognized, understood, and expected role the teachers union has in shaping education policy, working conditions, and teachers' salaries. Case in point, the country is currently planning revisions to the national curriclum and there are three stakeholders working closely on the process: the government, that National Board of Education, and the teachers' union. Teachers have a respected voice in planning what is best for kids and their learning. How can we work towards this level of collaboration and respect in the U.S.?
I apologize if I am getting repetitive with my posts, but the current state of education in Finland took time. In the 1970s, Finland implemented the requirement for all teachers to earn a master's degree and the teacher preparation through universities with teacher training schools. Besides investing and strengthening their teacher force, over time this established teachers with high status and respect.
In our U.S. history, teachers had a higher level of respect and were listened to by parents, administrators, and political leaders about what is best for kids. We need to gradually and assertively rebuild this level of respect and collaboration.
When I arrived at OAJ the receptionist asked if my whole group was here. I responded that it was just me, but I had a follow up question, "Does she usually have large groups?" and the reply was yes -- now I felt important and told her when we met. In the course of our two hour conversation, I learned that she organizes visits for delegations from various countries including last year's visit by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten (that had a lot of coverage).
The HUGE difference in Finland is the recognized, understood, and expected role the teachers union has in shaping education policy, working conditions, and teachers' salaries. Case in point, the country is currently planning revisions to the national curriclum and there are three stakeholders working closely on the process: the government, that National Board of Education, and the teachers' union. Teachers have a respected voice in planning what is best for kids and their learning. How can we work towards this level of collaboration and respect in the U.S.?
I apologize if I am getting repetitive with my posts, but the current state of education in Finland took time. In the 1970s, Finland implemented the requirement for all teachers to earn a master's degree and the teacher preparation through universities with teacher training schools. Besides investing and strengthening their teacher force, over time this established teachers with high status and respect.
In our U.S. history, teachers had a higher level of respect and were listened to by parents, administrators, and political leaders about what is best for kids. We need to gradually and assertively rebuild this level of respect and collaboration.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
One Month Completed
Four weeks ago today, I arrived in Helsinki -- time is just flying by.
Progress
We have all the logistics done and in place for the family (apt, schools, transport, etc). It is very impressive how expeditious registering with the city, opening bank account, getting IDs, and receiving mail are already in place. There are numerous educators I have already met at the University of Helsinki, the National Board of Education, Center for International Mobility, OAJ-National Teachers Union, and the Fulbright Center. There is a common thread with each educator that I meet: they are always interested in my project and they invite me to return to share what I learn from my school visits.
Next Steps
I am networking with my advisor Heidi, my Fulbright buddy Eija, American Fulbrighters, and the teacher's union to identify schools to visit. I continue to make my classroom observation lens and interview questions more concise. I should prepare potential presentations - both about me and some mathematics from Chicago - in case the opportunity presents itself for me to teach. In early March all the Fulbright participants will present their projects at the University of Tampere. Time to start to draft the outline for next month's session. I look forward to spending more time and exchanging ideas with the other 30+ Fulbrighters currently in Finland.
Progress
We have all the logistics done and in place for the family (apt, schools, transport, etc). It is very impressive how expeditious registering with the city, opening bank account, getting IDs, and receiving mail are already in place. There are numerous educators I have already met at the University of Helsinki, the National Board of Education, Center for International Mobility, OAJ-National Teachers Union, and the Fulbright Center. There is a common thread with each educator that I meet: they are always interested in my project and they invite me to return to share what I learn from my school visits.
Next Steps
I am networking with my advisor Heidi, my Fulbright buddy Eija, American Fulbrighters, and the teacher's union to identify schools to visit. I continue to make my classroom observation lens and interview questions more concise. I should prepare potential presentations - both about me and some mathematics from Chicago - in case the opportunity presents itself for me to teach. In early March all the Fulbright participants will present their projects at the University of Tampere. Time to start to draft the outline for next month's session. I look forward to spending more time and exchanging ideas with the other 30+ Fulbrighters currently in Finland.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Educa 2012 - National Training Conf for Teachers
I attended a national teachers' conference on Friday. There were numerous vendors represented and a variety of sessions for teachers to attend. There was even an "international strand" of sessions in English. One of the interesting sessions I attended was lead by Susan Hopgood, President of Education International.
Ms. Hopgood listed many industrialized nations' primary policies to address the concerns of education through privatization (voucher systems, charter schools, and the shift of funds from public schools to private schools). As she added, Finland probably has not heard of performance management, standardized testing, school ranking, ranking of students, incentivizing teachers with bonus (merit) pay, competition between schools, and restricting entry to some schools. This raised a red flag for me because Chicago has tried most of the strategies on her list. For those that do not know reading this...Finland has been deliberate, transparent, and successful implementing a system with policies to ensure quality education for all and thus, has not done the aforementioned policies.
Ironically, as Ms. Hopgood stated, the data shows internationally these referenced policies have actually resulted in the narrowing of the curriculum and less student learning. Countries need to take a closer look at how Finland has been able to provide a quality education for all and lift both the preparation and the prestige of teachers.
It seems to me that nations, including the U.S., choose these policies for either their perceived expediency or less use of public funds or both. We keep choosing these quick, sometimes radical approaches, that are not building the capacity of teachers nor the learning of kids.
Ms. Hopgood listed many industrialized nations' primary policies to address the concerns of education through privatization (voucher systems, charter schools, and the shift of funds from public schools to private schools). As she added, Finland probably has not heard of performance management, standardized testing, school ranking, ranking of students, incentivizing teachers with bonus (merit) pay, competition between schools, and restricting entry to some schools. This raised a red flag for me because Chicago has tried most of the strategies on her list. For those that do not know reading this...Finland has been deliberate, transparent, and successful implementing a system with policies to ensure quality education for all and thus, has not done the aforementioned policies.
Ironically, as Ms. Hopgood stated, the data shows internationally these referenced policies have actually resulted in the narrowing of the curriculum and less student learning. Countries need to take a closer look at how Finland has been able to provide a quality education for all and lift both the preparation and the prestige of teachers.
It seems to me that nations, including the U.S., choose these policies for either their perceived expediency or less use of public funds or both. We keep choosing these quick, sometimes radical approaches, that are not building the capacity of teachers nor the learning of kids.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Meeting author Pasi Sahlberg
Did not anticipate this, but following yesterday's CIMO presentation, I met Pasi Sahlberg, author of the recently released "Finnish Lesson: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland?"
I purchased this book shortly before leaving Chicago -- it is a concise read about the important levers schools and districts should consider (embrace?) moving forward: (1) Excellence by Equity (2) Teaching Less so Students Learn More, (3) Test Less so Students Learn More, (4) Trusting Teachers with Autonomy for Planning & Instruction.
Pasi shared with me that he is going to the U.S. monthly to help school districts and elaborate on the aspects of his book. He actually was in Chicago in December at UIC's World Class Education Colloquim series. After he signed my copy of his book, he offered to meet with me in a few months after my project has progressed.
Once again... Finland shows me it is a small place with welcoming access and dialogue opportunities with decision makers.
I purchased this book shortly before leaving Chicago -- it is a concise read about the important levers schools and districts should consider (embrace?) moving forward: (1) Excellence by Equity (2) Teaching Less so Students Learn More, (3) Test Less so Students Learn More, (4) Trusting Teachers with Autonomy for Planning & Instruction.
Pasi shared with me that he is going to the U.S. monthly to help school districts and elaborate on the aspects of his book. He actually was in Chicago in December at UIC's World Class Education Colloquim series. After he signed my copy of his book, he offered to meet with me in a few months after my project has progressed.
Once again... Finland shows me it is a small place with welcoming access and dialogue opportunities with decision makers.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Academic Bilingualism
Dr. Nancy Commins, Fulbright Scholar at Finland's University of Turku, presented at CIMO (Center for International Mobility) today about "Crafting a Comprehensive Response to Cultural and Linguistic Diversity: A Perspective from the U.S." Nancy provided some insights and recommendations (from her work the past 30 years) as Finland prepares to have a more comprehensive strategy to meet the needs of second language learners.
I was asking myself the whole time... hmm how could Nancy's insights help with teaching and learning at my CPS school with 40+ languages?! I am intrigued to get her book: "Restructuring Schools for Linguistic Diversity: Linking Decisions to Effective Programs." It provides individual schools with ways for teachers to collaborate (without the district) to meet second language learners' needs.
Following Nancy's presentation, a commentary, and Q & A, I joined Nancy, her husband Ken and Fulbright Grad Student Joan Lee for a drink to share our Fulbright experiences thus far... I plan to stay in touch with them during my time in Finland.
I was asking myself the whole time... hmm how could Nancy's insights help with teaching and learning at my CPS school with 40+ languages?! I am intrigued to get her book: "Restructuring Schools for Linguistic Diversity: Linking Decisions to Effective Programs." It provides individual schools with ways for teachers to collaborate (without the district) to meet second language learners' needs.
Following Nancy's presentation, a commentary, and Q & A, I joined Nancy, her husband Ken and Fulbright Grad Student Joan Lee for a drink to share our Fulbright experiences thus far... I plan to stay in touch with them during my time in Finland.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Narrowing Project Focus
Heidi, my advisor, took another chunk of time today to discuss the focus of my Fulbright project. The more narrow the focus, the more doable the school visit/data-collection, and thus, the more attainable the goals.
Two of the dilemmas for me as a Chicago Public School (CPS) teacher are the ever increasing number of assessments CPS district leaders have added to the instructional school year and, now, the amount of time that CPS plans to lengthen the school day in 2012-13 (7.5 hours!).
From the Finnish perspective, both of these decisions are the total opposite to the successful policies and frameworks Finland has thoughtfully and incrementally implemented over 20+ years. Finland has been deliberate not to impose frequent standardized tests and, thus, so much more time can be devoted to instruction. The classroom teacher has the responsibility (and support) to conduct diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments. The schools each design and implement their own comprehensive end-of-semester evaluation. The third type of assessment is a random sample assessment conducted annually by the National Board of Education. About one fifth of the students per grade level take the national exam to gauge learning in reading, mathematics, and science. (Instructional time & schedules for another day.)
So... this disparity with assessment... I am going to dive deeper into the Effective and Efficient use of Assessment to Inform Mathematics Instruction with my school visits. How are they doing so well internationally with so few assessments? (Hmm, for science fair project colleagues and students out there... my hypothesis is: More time for instruction. Now I need to fine tune "my procedure" for the experiment.) Among the elements I plan to include are various school types, classroom observations, principal interviews, teacher interviews (before & after a lesson), and student interviews (after lessons).
Any thoughts or suggestions?
Two of the dilemmas for me as a Chicago Public School (CPS) teacher are the ever increasing number of assessments CPS district leaders have added to the instructional school year and, now, the amount of time that CPS plans to lengthen the school day in 2012-13 (7.5 hours!).
From the Finnish perspective, both of these decisions are the total opposite to the successful policies and frameworks Finland has thoughtfully and incrementally implemented over 20+ years. Finland has been deliberate not to impose frequent standardized tests and, thus, so much more time can be devoted to instruction. The classroom teacher has the responsibility (and support) to conduct diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments. The schools each design and implement their own comprehensive end-of-semester evaluation. The third type of assessment is a random sample assessment conducted annually by the National Board of Education. About one fifth of the students per grade level take the national exam to gauge learning in reading, mathematics, and science. (Instructional time & schedules for another day.)
So... this disparity with assessment... I am going to dive deeper into the Effective and Efficient use of Assessment to Inform Mathematics Instruction with my school visits. How are they doing so well internationally with so few assessments? (Hmm, for science fair project colleagues and students out there... my hypothesis is: More time for instruction. Now I need to fine tune "my procedure" for the experiment.) Among the elements I plan to include are various school types, classroom observations, principal interviews, teacher interviews (before & after a lesson), and student interviews (after lessons).
Any thoughts or suggestions?
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Bureaucracy - here too, but LESS
So.. in just a few weeks... I have secured my bank account, my Finnish ID number, my public library card, my University ID, my University of Helsinki library card, my post office registration, but my university computer account... avades me... To expedite my work at the university I need an AD account, but the powers that be first required another form, then a return visit (when they were closed) and finally, I got it! I have taken bureaucracy for granted in Finaland because I have lost count with the numerous, welcoming & helpful friends who have expedited my requests and taught me in the process. I am not complaining, but starting to realize that there are some areas that could be improved in Finland too.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Fulbright Buddy: Eija
Today was a special day -- met "my buddy" Eija Kauppinen at the National Board of Education (NBE). Eija went to the U.S. last year with the Fulbright Distinguished Awards in Teaching program so she can understands better than most what I will try to accomplish. Eija is a counselor with music education with Finland's NBE. We had lunch at the NBE, Eija shared her experiences in the U.S. and I had a chance to explain my goals and plans for my project in Finland. After lunch, Eija took me upstairs to meet Leo Pahkin, Counsellor of Mathematics Education at the Finnish National Board of Education. Leo recommended some schools to visit and also welcomed me to return and discuss my experiences visiting mathematics teachers in Finland. Another great day with access to important, collaborative decision makers with education in Finland.
Friday, January 13, 2012
My Capstone Project
For the Distinguished Fulbright Award program, each teacher proposes an action-based research project known as the Capstone Project. My project (which could be tweaked moving forward) is: Building on Best Practices of Mathematics Teaching and Learning.
The three components of the project as I visit mathematics classes:
1. What type of mathematical task(s) does the teacher assign the students?
2. How do the students discuss the mathematics as they solve the problem(s)?
3. How do the students demonstrate or represent their conceptual understanding?
Any thoughts or suggestions from you?
The three components of the project as I visit mathematics classes:
1. What type of mathematical task(s) does the teacher assign the students?
2. How do the students discuss the mathematics as they solve the problem(s)?
3. How do the students demonstrate or represent their conceptual understanding?
Any thoughts or suggestions from you?
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Meet the Department
Today was my opportunity to meet all the lecturers of the department, introduce myself, provide background on the Fulbright Center, present my Fulbright Capstone Project, and propose collaboration opportunities. Since these are the lecturers who effectively prepare future teachers in both mathematics and science, I predict numerous partnerships and new friendships over the next six months...
Monday, January 9, 2012
Met My Advisor: Dr. Heidi Krzywacki
I must have the best advisor a Fulbrighter could have. From Day #1, Dr. Heidi Krzywacki (mathematics lecturer with the Department of Teacher Education at the University of Helsinki) has been helpful, insightful, and encouraging -- not to mention my teacher. She has already made it possible for me to meet professors, department heads, the dean, an assessment director, and numerous grad students. Heidi also offered to share her office space at the university and had already secured my own keys for the duration of my project. Kiitos Heidi!
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Fulbright Orientation
Met the Fulbright Center (FC) team and learned about both the project expectations and the available supports to have a productive, positive experience. I had forgotten about the extensive, collaborative Fulbright history that Finland and the U.S. have had -- 60 years and going strong. I was also reminded of the fact that 75-80% of the funding to support the American or Finnish Fulbrighters comes from Finland.
We were also welcomed to Finland and our Fulbright experience by the public affairs specialist for the U.S. Embassy. Thank you so much! There we were able to meet 6 Fulbrighters from various programs most of whom are in the greater Helsinki area.
NOW to get to work preparing our home for my family's arrival...
We were also welcomed to Finland and our Fulbright experience by the public affairs specialist for the U.S. Embassy. Thank you so much! There we were able to meet 6 Fulbrighters from various programs most of whom are in the greater Helsinki area.
NOW to get to work preparing our home for my family's arrival...
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Arrival in Helsinki, Finland!
I am here! My family follows me in one week which could work out to our advantage. I am able to attend the orientation at the Fulbright Center -- meet two fellow Fulbrighters (and their families) and also meet the Fulbright Center team! Each and every Finn I have met in Helsinki has been incredibly welcoming, helpful, and friendly. If this is any indication of the next 6+ months -- this will be an awesome sabbatical.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)