Gary Ackerman @garyackerman@qoto.org

Can we agree to stop drawing unlabeled arrows between clumps of words and calling it a graphic?

In reality, lesson planning is one of the least certain tasks an educator undertakes. The lesson planner can be sure of what they intend to teach; it may even be articulated in measurable learning outcomes (the value of which is dubious). The teacher also believes they know how to present the material so that students achieve those outcomes. Further, they believe they know how students can best demonstrate what they learn. Other than the intended outcomes, planning is grounded in predicting (I think “guessing” is a more accurate verb) how students will be learning from the intended lessons and the degree to which the assessments will capture the intended learning.

I’ve always found those who truly “understand” concepts are not bothered by ambiguous definitions at any level. They know we make some progress, reach our limit, then dig in again.

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion.

No, I’m not obligated to take it seriously.

Some people weaponize email CC’s… they include everyone they can think of.

I’ve never seen that practice do anything but alienate those whose support they need.

I live in a state with town named Washington and Moscow. In the 1980’s it was common for groups to organize walks between the two.

Albert Schweitzer said, “Our age has discovered how to divorce knowledge from thought….”

He died in the year I was born; I haven’t grown a non-grey hair on my head for decades.

The ranting we are seeing is not new.

There is a sub population of educators who are content teaching and testing whatever they are directed to. There is another sub population that is critical of standard curriculum.

It’s interesting to me how each is unaware of the other.

To collect data without a clear question to be answered, appropriate analysis methods identified, and reporting plans in place (not to mention informed consent) is unethical.

I'm amazed at the number of "data-driven leaders" who do not understand this.

i've been in search of resources to update the collection of sites/ resources I use to share with those who ask. I do not include items with ads. Some otherwise excellent resources are excluded.

Educators’ technology needs tend to be different from those encountered in other businesses and industries. Educators generally value flexible systems that allow them to assess the usefulness of software, sites, and services; and to respond to new discoveries and changing expectations quickly. Students who are just learning to read and write often find complicated systems difficult to use. Technicians experienced in designing secure systems that provide predictable and stable access can find these needs of educational populations to be contrary to their expertise.

Daniel Dennett wrote, “We’d better see what can be done to help people get over their delusion.” He used it in a specific context, but it sure seems apt in many contexts today.

One reason educators are reluctant to change is they interpret change as “what I’ve been doing isn’t good.”

Real life is on-going, open ended, uncertain. Laboratories and classrooms are not.

It we could engineer schools that “work,” we already would have done it. The reality is that learning and being “smart” are multifaceted, complex, context-dependent, and changing. When we engineer for one part, everyone complains we’ve missed the others. #education #edutoot

After attending a seance, Charles Darwin said, “The Lord have mercy on us all, if we believe in such rubbish.”

Teachers complain. They complain a lot. No, really. You can’t imagine the things teachers say about students, colleagues, administrators, parents, and everyone else. When I hear their complaints now, I may nod, but it is like white noise to me; with one exception. When I hear, “I taught it, but they didn’t learn it” I pay attention. I want to know who said it; I want to remember that person and I accept the challenge they unknowingly made to me to help them better understand what it means to teach.
#edutoot

Blumenfield, Kempler, and Krajcik (2006) suggest engagement in grounded in four factors:

Value- Learners tend to be engaged with material and lessons they believe are important to them. Value is also closely related to motivation, interest, and goals, all of which are addressed in the next section.

Competence- Learners tend to engage in activities they believe are within their abilities. Competence is grounded in one’s knowledge, their metacognitive abilities and their self-efficacy.

Relatedness- Learners tend to be engaged when they feel positive social connection to their peers.

Autonomy- Learners tend to be engaged when they can exercise choice about what they will study and their plan of study.

Blumenfield, P., Kempler, T., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. Keith Sawyer (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Learning Science, (pp. 475-488). Cambridge University Press.

#edutoot