Space: How much do we need to learn and live

by Ed Latham

Stumbled on the following video this morning.


This got me thinking about the spaces we educate in and how wasteful so many of our buildings are. It is almost as if architects don't "get it" or can't offer it without breaking the public bank. Most new schools start with a plot of land and people figure out how to best fill that land up with facilities that convey messages. What message do you get when you go into your school? Look around you next time you enter a school. Look at the outside, as you enter look around you, and as you sit in a classroom share with us how you feel. Do you feel as if you are a part of nature or in fact a part of anything? Our institutional designs may claim "most efficient", "most ergonomic" and many other feel good titles, but they fall so far short. Consider the gentleman in the video. With just 300 sq feet (1/2 a classroom) he has built in every convenience he needs to live comfortably. A traditional classroom needs some place for the teacher to lecture from, a surface to write on or display images, and seating (often the oh so comfortable standard student special). I have seen some teachers go to great lengths to try to make these institutional boxes into more human friendly places and their efforts are super! There must be some great creative ways teachers and students can transform their class spaces into more efficient and comfortable spaces. Our society is touted as being one of the creative centers of the world, so there has to be some great ideas out there. If anyone has transformed their rooms into energy efficient, comfortable, and welcoming learning environments can you share pictures, descriptions of the transformation and what struggles were encountered along the way. Hopefully by sharing possibilities of space, as shown in the video, we call all be inspired to think out side the box to make our classroom boxes better places to spend a huge chunk of our first 18 years of life.

Featuring Henry Giroux

Wikipedia: Henry Giroux

Articles by Giroux

Henry Giroux: In Defense of Public School Teachers in a Time of Crisis

"There has been a long, though declining, tradition in the United States in which public school teaching was embraced as an important public service. It was assumed that teachers provided a crucial foundation for educating young people in the values, skills and knowledge that enabled them to be critical citizens capable of shaping and expanding democratic institutions. Since the 1980's, teachers have been under an unprecedented attack by those forces that view schools less as a public good than as a private right." ~Henry A. Giroux

Read more . . . .

@ The Friere Project

@ Truthout

@ OpEdNews

@ Common Man News

Important Things to Learn

Back in 2006, Stephen Downes wrote a post here and here that spoke to what was essential for everyone to learn. Today I just happened upon it again, and it sparked some more thinking about his suggestions. Here are Stephen's essentials linked to some resource pages here at LIM:

1. How to Predict Consequences
2. How to Read
3. How to Distinguish between Truth and Fiction
4. How to Empathize
5. How to be Creative
6. How to Communicate Clearly
7. How to Learn
8. How to Stay Healthy
9 How to Value Yourself
10. How to Live Meaningfully

History of American Education

Should students be servants of corporations?

"It would be a mistake to assume that the present-day educational system is unchanging. On the contrary, it is undergoing rapid change. But much of this change is no more than an attempt to refine the existent machinery, making it ever more efficient in pursuit of obsolete goals."
~ Alvin Toffler


Ravitch on Education - A Podcast Interview
The Underground History of American History: John Gatto
Wikipedia: History of Education in the United States
American Educational History: A Hypertext Timeline
The History of Education in America
A Short History of United States' History: 1900 - 2006

John Dewey's Democracy and Education

Assignment for Business Round Table, Governors, Obama Administration and State Education Officers: Read John Dewey's Democracy and Education and then compare and contrast with the goals of RttT and the Common Core State Standards.


Democracy and Education WikiSource
Amazon: Democracy and Education
World Wide School: D & E
Creating a National Culture of Learning: Education & Democracy
Wikipedia: D & E

Education as Commodity & Democracy

commodity [kəˈmɒdɪtɪ]n: an article of commerce

"This is a perilous moment. The individualist, greed-driven free-market ideology that both our major parties have pursued is at odds with what most Americans really care about....Working families and poor communities need and deserve help because the free market has failed to generate shared prosperity — its famous unseen hand has become a closed fist." Read More

"What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child, that must the
community want for all its children. Any other ideal for our schools is narrow and unlovely; acted upon it destroys our democracy." ~ John Dewey

Until We Take Democracy Serious . . .
Free Market Schooling: Deborah Meier
PowerPlay: A Journal of Educational Justice

Excellent SEEDLINGS Show with Wes Fryer

Link to Podcast





I just had the chance to listen to the April 1 podcast from Seedlings with Bob, Alice, and Cheryl. It features Wes Fryer, and I have to say, it is superb! I share his views and highly recommend listening to his wise words.

Moving at the Speed of Creativity

G.O.T. Farms at Telstar

Click here for wide screen version.

TMS Art

Online Privacy

Essential Question: With what should we be concerned regarding online privacy?

Privacy Resources at LIM

School Technology Assessment

Resources at LIM Wiki

RttT, Florida, and Diane Ravitch

I've been reading Diane Ravitch's new book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education, and been following both Deborah Meier and Diane on Education Week's Bridging Differences blog. This week she speaks on what is going on in Florida as a result of the RttT initiative. Is anyone listening? Scapegoating of teachers continues across the land. Standards are being written by corporations and testing companies in anticipation of huge profits. Does anyone really care? Is this what education should be about in a democracy?

Diane Ravitch: Outrage in Florida

Washington Post: Florida's Terrible Teachers Bill a Test for Duncan

Glories of Google

Richard Byrne, Oxford Hills teacher and Free Technology for Teachers author, continues to amaze me with his productivity. Check out his new publications titled Google for Teachers.

Find versions here and here.


Google for Teachers

Sid Fleischman Remembered

By Pam Kenney

When I was a novice teacher in the early 70s, my passion was instilling in my students a love for reading. I spent hours reading classic children's literature, certain I'd find an abundance of books that would transform my children - -boys, girls, good readers, so-so ones--into lifelong bibliophiles. A lofty goal, I thought at the time. So we read The Wind in the Willows, Amos Fortune, White Fang, and The Secret Garden. The students who loved to read, often the girls, loved my choices and thrived. Too often, though, the boys struggled through the antiquated prose and responded, basically, "Huh?," when I tried to engage them in discussions and literature projects.

In 1987 I read a new book by Sid Fleischman, The Whipping Boy. I adored it from the first page. It was a little short, and the language was sometimes arcane, but, oh, the story! What third grader could resist a tale about a naughtly prince nicknamed "Brat" who had a whipping boy to endure the punishments for his misdeeds. There were even dirty, smelly road bandits, a ransom note, a dancing bear, and sewer rats to titillate young imaginations. All my students loved the book, but my boys were over the moon. Now here was a story they could relate to. They wanted to talk about it, write about it, and learn more about the Middle Ages. They wrote plays and happily strung garlic around their necks in tribute to their revered Hold-Your-Nose Billy. What fun we had! And how much those kids learned!

The Whipping Boy, which won the Newbery Medal, became a children's classic, and a story I used with students year after year. It's a book that belongs still in every elementary classroom in the land. Sid Fleischman died two weeks ago at age 90. How lucky for our children that Prince Brat and his cohorts will continue to live in their minds and hearts forever.

Learning People

"The central task of education is to implant a will and a facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people. The truly human society is a learning society, where grandparents, parents, and children are students together.

In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists." ~Eric Hoffer

Corporate Control of Public Education Policy

Some have said that the Common Core State Standards have been driven primarily by corporate officials, politicians and testing companies.



If that is the case . . .

• Who stands to profit?

• Should Corporations control educational Policy in the United States?

Below are some links that reflect on the issue:

Education Reform is the Best Stock on the Market

Who Will Profit from the Standards?

Conflict of Interest Arises as Concern in Standards Push

Pearson Education Looks Within to Beat McGraw Hill

Pearson Education: World's Leading Education Business is Launched

Alfie Kohn: Debunking the Case for National Standards

Susan Ohanian: Stop National Standards

Data Warehousing Will Destroy Your Soul

Schools Matter: Stimulating Corporate Control of Education

Business Round Table: Education, Innovation and Workforce Initiative

Cyber Communication

by Bob Keteyian

Without fail, I am asked to comment on internet communication—whether it’s during a workshop, book talk, or other speaking venue. Because I am not tech savvy, I’ve been cautious about my entry points into the world of cyber communication, and like many I can sound old-fashioned, as in “What’s wrong with talking to someone face to face or picking up the phone and calling.” I don’t intend here to offer a comprehensive evaluation of internet communication, but I will tell you my personal experience and share stories that can help give perspective to this complex topic.

Recently National Public Radio had a story about a father and son (approximately age 13) who had typical communication patterns, especially with after-school conversation. “How was school today?” “Oh, fine.” End of conversation. The father, of course, tried to be more creative in his approach but with the same results. The boy would go to his room and get on the computer, and his dad (who worked at home) did the same.

Then one day, one of them sent an instant message (IM) to the other asking a simple question . . . and from that developed a pattern of communication. Each day, they would have a quiet ride home from school, go to their respective rooms, and begin an IM session—catching up on the day, getting organized for the evening and the next day, and sharing pleasantries. It became a ritual both looked forward to.

Some might grumble about this and insist that they find a way to talk face to face after school, but if you’ve ever had a thirteen-year-old boy and tried to have regular after-school discussions . . . well you know where I’m going with that comment. I was moved by this account. The connection, warmth, and continuity the father and son experienced were precious.

Here’s another story that came my way recently. A young couple who were struggling with their relationship began instant messaging after having a squabble earlier in the day. Frequently, I counsel people to be very cautious handling emotionally sensitive issues over the internet. I’ve seen too many examples of how badly this can go. In this situation, however, it was very effective because both people intuitively respected the limitations of the medium. Specifically, they recognized the need to define terms carefully, to not make any assumptions, and to keep it short. Also, they were not distracted by seeing each other’s reaction, which in this case helped them focus on the intended message. In short, they were able to communicate more effectively, which continued in their face-to-face follow-up.

The internet is a tool with many uses for communication. It is not inherently good or bad—it depends on the individuals involved and how they use it. Except for an occasional e-mail, for many it doesn’t work at all; for others it might be useful in certain situations. Remember, it is a choice and you are free to decide whether or not you wish to participate in any venue.

All of my nephews and nieces have Facebook pages and post pictures and announce events in their lives, both big and small. I can interact with them in this medium and maintain some continuity that I would not otherwise have. It is friendly, warm, mostly superficial, and it feels good. They all live at a great distance, so I have more contact with them now than I have for many years. Simply, we enjoy the connection.

I also have occasional e-mail correspondence with people who live at a distance and who I will likely never see in my lifetime. They are old friends who find it easy to write an e-mail letter once in a while. Mostly the messages are newsy, but sometimes there is something important to say to someone who has known you from childhood.

There’s no doubt that many people spend too much time on the internet in very superficial and unhealthy ways. That is unfortunate, but it has nothing inherently to do with e-mail, Facebook, or IM. It has to do with misusing the tools, not knowing how to develop other means of communication, or struggling with how to conduct relationships. Those are bigger problems.

I am very concerned that the average kid spends 7.5 hours daily using some kind of electronic device—that is up from 5.5 hours five years ago. It’s a very modern and difficult problem that I think is unhealthy and frequently work with parents to help them establish more balance in their kid’s lives. This lack of balance is also evident in the lives of many adults.

The telephone, radio, television, video game, internet, cell phone, MySpace, Twitter, and Facebook at one time have all been accused of undermining human contact and hurting family relationships. Each has its up and down sides, and of course excess use is unhealthy. These devices and formats are not going away and new ones will come along at a rapid clip. Rather than demonizing them, discover how to use the tools in a balanced and healthy way. They all have the potential to benefit connection and communication. Over the years, many have chosen not to have a telephone, television or computer. Similarly, just because the modern communication structures exist, they are not requirements in your relational world. There is nothing wrong with being old fashioned or simply deciding what works or doesn’t work for you.

Internet at 30,000 feet

Couldn't help myself: I put my money down (9 bucks) for inflight Internet today. I am writing this at 30,000 feet, flying from Chicago to Boston, and working on resources for the adult education persistence category. Earlier I surfed the Web, sent a couple of emails, and very successfully watched Office on Hulu and did a Skype video call. It all worked flawlessly. I suspect Netflix would work fine as well. Though I wished it had been free, not really a bad deal for 9 dollars. Technology continues to amaze this old man.

MARTI @ Chicago

Workshop Link

COABE/ProLiteracy Conference 2010:

Sure-Shot Recipe for Tech Integration Training - Mentoring with a Big Dose of PLC!

Common Core Math Standards and Everyday Mathematics

By Pam Kenney

I spent much of last weekend reading and critiquing the new Common Core Math Standards (K-6 only) for the National Coalition for World Class Math. I must say I was surprised at and pleased with their thoroughness and rigor. My primary assignment was to analyze the standards’ sequence of skills. I had several suggestions to facilitate learning (teaching students to count by 5s and 10s, for example, before requiring them to count money), but for the most part the standards are presented with their delineated skills building on each other from grade to grade in a logical progression. I love the standards that require children to use mental math, the kindergarten one that ensures students are able to begin counting in the middle of a number sequence instead of always starting at 1, and the strong emphasis on understanding the “whys” of math. They require the memorization of math facts (although I’d like to see mastery at earlier grade levels than these standards mandate) and the use of the standard algorithm (again my preference would be for its introduction more quickly after understanding is achieved than it is now). The timetable for the mastery of concepts isn’t as clear as it could be, and I hope that need will be addressed as the comment period continues this month.

As I read the standards, I made an unexpected discovery. From the outset, I began noticing something interesting: Many of the skills and their attendant requirements reflect those taught within the Everyday Mathematics curriculum. At the fourth grade level, for example, standard #6 under “Number – Operations and the Problems They Solve,” states, “Compute products and whole number quotients of two-, three- or four-digit numbers and one-digit numbers, using strategies based on place value, the properties of operations, and/or the inverse relationships between multiplication and division; explain the reasoning used.” EDM is famous for, and often criticized for, the many methods (lattice, partial products, and partial quotients, e.g.) it expects children to learn to facilitate a thorough understanding of the “whys” of multiplication and division. This standard and many others like it throughout the standards document continue that emphasis. The new standards differ from EDM, though, because they include basic fact fluency requirements, the use of the standard algorithm, and at least an attempt to set mastery levels. What is not clear is how much of the spiraling that is peculiar to EDM will be eliminated if they’re adopted, and that is an important facet of the standards that needs to be analyzed.

I have been a critic of the Everyday Mathematics curriculum for years and have written about its shortcomings on this blog several times. However, I’ve amended my position somewhat after working with a fourth grader on her EDM assignments throughout this school year. I’m finding it increasingly difficult to fault EDM’s basic goal, which is to help students understand what they are doing when they solve problems and why their answers to problems are reasonable or make sense mathematically. EDM is very good at helping children develop math reasoning skills. I still have problems with its de-emphasis on basic facts, its delayed use or elimination of the standard algorithm, and its spiraling of concepts that doesn’t pinpoint mastery expectation points. It appears that the Common Core standards have addressed fairly well these problems, as well as the vocal criticism that has stemmed from them from parents and teachers, and have provided a more balanced approach than EDM does.

Questions still linger, though. Here are two: Why are these national standards so reflective of Everyday Mathematics? What input into the development process, if any, did the University of Chicago Mathematics Project or the EDM publisher, Wright Group (a division of McGraw-Hill), have? I have read comments from a variety of sources stating that classroom teachers should have had more say than they did in the creation of the Common Core Standards. My hope is that their input didn’t get squeezed out by that of textbook publishers.

Coming soon: Part II – Common Core Elementary Math Standards and Teacher Competence