Mind Mapping Mark Twain

I recently had my first experience with Mind Mapping in my classroom; my son mentioned that he was doing it in his IB English class, so after looking into it, I decided to give it a try to see how my students did with it and whether or not they found it useful.

As a whole, the students and I were both pleased with the results. Various sources indicated that mind mapping is extremely effective with visual/spatial learners, a learning style that many of my students have as a strength, which is one of the reasons I opted to try it out in my classroom. After explaining the process to them and modeling my own, I turned them loose to try it out. As the lesson proceeded, I found myself re-creating my mind map since the one I had created as my exemplar was done with Free Mind.

Some thoughts on the tech version of mind mapping: as mentioned, my first example was created using the Free Mind software program, which I found semi-intuitive, yet rather limiting in many ways; I also tried using the Mind 42 website, but again, found it to be too limiting. There were a few links I wanted to make between "pods" on my map, but neither Free Mind nor Mind 42 would allow me to do so. I did like having the option of pasting in actual pictures and links, but since I had planned on having my students create their mind maps using markers/colored pencils and paper (the "bells and whistles" of the software programs would have proven too distracting for them first time out), the shortcomings of the tech version became readily apparent.

I'm also glad I opted out of the tech version simply because it did prove to be fairly distracting trying to figure out how it worked and what it all did while trying to finish my project. I knew if it was that bad for me, it'd be a lot tougher for my students to stay focused on the task at hand, so the high tech version was abandoned before the lesson was implemented.

Step two of the process involved turning the mind map into a more traditional, linear "outline" of sorts simply because it helped my brain move from a more amorphous thinking environment to one that I could recognize as being able to fit into a more recognizable, linearly formatted way of thought that would find itself transferred into an essay.

After that it was easy to move the students into the rough drafts of their essays. Based on the feedback I received from the students, this strategy was a huge success for them. I'm glad I implemented it, and I know I'll be using it again.

Fun with the classics and a few zombies

Today I hit upon an idea for my last unit of the year for my 6th and 7th grade honors English language arts class. I couldn't figure out which novels to choose for my final literature unit, then remembered a book review for Alice in Zombieland, due out in bookstores next month. Thought followed thought, and I came up with a unit I'm calling "Classics and Monsters" (yeah, I know...weak title; give me a break, I'm working on a better one).

At any rate, the idea behind it is to have the students break into literature circles/book groups, then choose from a selected list of classic novels: Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, Alice in Wonderland, Little Women, Anna Karenina. After the students finish reading their selected novel, they'll  read the modern, monster mash-up version of the same story: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters, Alice in Zombieland, Little Vampire Women (or Little Women and Werewolves), Android Karenina.

After reading the monster mash-up, the students will get to pick one of the various short stories we read at the beginning of the year to re-write, monster mash-up style. I pitched the idea to some of my students, who seized on the idea and are excited about it. Vonnegut, Doyle, Bierce, Hemingway, and a few others could be in big trouble. This is going to be fun.

The Digital Divide of Usage Instead of Access

About two weeks ago, I was working with my English language arts class on a literary analysis essay they were peer editing. One student's partner had to leave class early, so I encouraged the two of them to work together at home electronically via email or some other program; one of the students replied, "Yeah, no problem, we can just do it over Skype."

Right about that same time, this article appeared in the Denver Post in which it reported on the use of the internet by minority populations. Even though the article focused on race, I suspect there is a certain amount of socioeconomics that factors in as well, particularly since it refers to the use of smartphones and the like to access the internet which are much less expensive than a computer, particularly if given the choice between a phone with internet access included or a computer with internet access as a financial add-on. While a smartphone can get you online, you can still do more online with an actual computer, and that seemingly small difference is actually pretty huge.

I think part of the issue is also simply training and awareness of the potential represented by an online presence. The potentialities for the relay of information became incredibly apparent during the recent State of the Union speech by President Obama. As has been the case for many years now, there was a simple television broadcast carried by the various networks. However, for anyone with an online presence and who was interested, the experience became completely and totally different. The White House had a live streaming feed alongside of which was space alloted for graphs, images and so forth (The tag line: "Watch and Engage.") After the speech, various members of the White House staff took questions via Twitter and Facebook.

The Sunlight Foundation not only had a live stream of the speech via C-Span, but also had a live blog going on via Cover It Live with various journalists and others posting comments; questions; links to sites, files, and videos as a means to "fact check" the speech even as it was occurring as well as a live Twitter feed and posting of graphs and the like on the page as well. Anyone without internet access or who was busy watching cute kittens on YouTube was out of the conversation and denied the access to the information that was being shared. Now more than ever, it holds true that those without an online presence are simply not a part of the conversation.

It is not enough to teach our students how to use Power Point or how to use a word processing program. It is not enough to tell them about Facebook or Twitter. We must teach them how to use these (and other) tools to their advantage; we must show them the potentialities of the web beyond entertainment. We must close the new digital divide.

The tender heart of teaching

Well, it has been far too long since I've updated this for sure. I've certainly not been slacking; if anything, I've been learning more this year than I have in a long time. After 22 years of secondary level teaching (20 at the high school level, 2 at the middle school level) teaching (primarily) third and fourth grade is almost a complete career change. While I do have a sixth and seventh grade English language arts class (which I absolutely enjoy), I spend most of my day working with much younger students.

The biggest difference is in the day to day interaction with my students  (at both levels). One of the aspects I've developed over the years of working with high school students is a somewhat protective "shell" over my inner self, as have the students. Sincere glimpses into my inner life or that of my students at the high school level were rare; I mostly developed a rather facetious attitude in many ways, finding that a dose of flippancy was sufficient for many situations around that more vulnerable Self.

Not so with younger students. Elementary and most of my middle school students are much more open, much more honest, than my high school students were, and I am unable to fall back on my previous behaviors. I find myself opening myself up a bit more than I have in the past. An "I love having you as a teacher" at the high school level could be met with a "Yeah, yeah...thanks, but you still have to do your homework" or some other such remark (accompanied by a smile); the student would get the point that I appreciated the comment but I was still left somewhat "protected" as it were. With younger students, I find that a smile and thanks is far more appropriate; younger students tend to not pick up on some of the cues that older students are able to read.

I read The Book Thief with my middle school students recently. The end of the book is rather emotionally intense, and I have yet to make it through without some sort of visceral reaction. In previous readings with classes, I assign that section as homework then hold a completely academic discussion about the end, with a passing comment of "yeah, I cried" and leaving it at that. This year was different. The class opted to read the end together, and for the first time, students actually saw me experiencing a response to literature that extended beyond the typical pedantic English teacher response. It took some doing for me to do that as well as discussions with several of my colleagues, some of whom didn't understand my struggle...until placed into context of "oh yeah...you're used to working with high school students."

This year is the year I've exposed my tender heart of teaching. It's been one of the most intense and scary years I've had since I began teaching, and in many, many ways, one of the most rewarding. And yet I can't help but wonder in retrospect if perhaps my students at the high school level would have been better served by my allowing myself to be a bit more vulnerable. As teachers, especially at the high school level, we spend a great deal of time discussing compassion, empathy, and connecting with literature and literary characters while failing to extrapolate those skills into relationships with human beings. We assume that the students will do that  on their own by default yet fail to realize that unless students are encouraged and even shown by example, they are unlikely to move in that direction. And so for many students, literature remains dead; nice stories, some better than others, but for many, what they read is likely forgotten shortly after they have finished reading it precisely because they have failed to bring it into their lives. I do it, we think, so of course they do, right? Not necessarily. Not unless we are able to risk bringing what we are teaching alive for them. As teachers, it behooves us to allow ourselves to be openly touched by literature and to allow others to see it touch us.

As I read the end of The Book Thief with my students, I could feel the eyes of virtually every student in the room on me, especially the boys, watching my reactions and my struggles with the more intense sections. For those keeping track, engagement was at an extreme high, and not just because of the story itself, but because I was allowing myself to be exposed, I was letting students see that literature can cause a reaction, and perhaps that it should. We later discussed my reactions; some students said they didn't feel anywhere the same level that I did; we discussed why and how readers connect with characters, we discussed the tools authors use to develop those relationships with readers. We discussed literature as a warm, living, art form rather than as a cold, dead thing on a metallic laboratory table ready for dissection. No mere lifeless frog, literature for us breathed and bled; it beckoned us in and came alive. It was one of the more rewarding discussions I've had in my years of teaching.

And so now I begin the second half of my first year as a 23 year veteran first year teacher. I am looking forward to the continued growth; I am looking forward to returning to the roots and essence of being a teacher.

My top reads of 2010

Okay, yeah, I've been slacking on the update part of this here blog o'mine. I'll get it caught up soon, I swear. In fact, I have a LOT to talk about. It's been an amazing few months for me, and I've learned quite a bit. Now that I'm on my December break, I actually have some time to reflect on it, and I'll post up my thoughts here before 2011. I think.

 In the meantime, I've posted my favorite reads of 2010 on Elephant Journal. Check it out here.

In defense of charter schools

There is a frequent accusation leveled at charter schools that they tend to siphon off the best and the brightest in a given school population, that they can pick and choose who they serve, and that if the students there don't make it, they are sent back to their home school, all of which add up to an unfair advantage in favor of charters. I've been involved in the field of education for 23 years now, at traditional public schools, various types of private schools, and I'm currently working at a charter school. While I do think the idea of "free market choice" and "competition" between schools is a horrifically bad idea, there are very good reasons that charter schools exist, and it is not necessarily because of sub par local public schools, but that the current public school model has its origins in the 19th century and the Industrial Revolution; the problem is that while education and students have changed, the model has not. It is antiquated, and the politicians, administrators, school board members, and even parents in a position to initiate the necessary changes are too afraid to do it, and the taxpayers who constantly push for "better schools" are at the same time unwilling to step up and pay the taxes necessary to affect those very changes upon which they insist.

The charter school conundrum is an interesting one. On the one hand, I have certain philosophical difficulties with for-profit charter schools. But then, I have philosophical difficulties with any corporation that is set up directly and solely to work with schools and is a for-profit institution. It aggravates me to no end to see various companies charge schools double, triple, or more for things like books and videos that can be had for a fraction of the cost at a local store; it seems the philosophies of these companies is "hey, it's just taxpayers' dollars, so let's take all we can get." But I digress.

To be perfectly honest, public school education provides a more than adequate education for the vast majority of the school age population. The methods of delivery of the information and the like is in need of modification; I won't say "reform" because the politicians have nicely destroyed that word, especially within the context of education, thank you very much. However, there is a definite percentage of students at both ends of the population spectrum whose needs are not met by a traditional public school setting, no matter how progressive that school/district may be. If the parents of that child can afford it, that is often where private and/or parochial schools come in; charter schools provide yet another option, especially for the students whose parents are unable to afford a private school. Many, if not most, charter schools are independent entities though some are part of a national chain of schools.

I find it ironic that when a school district sets up a "magnet school," it is seen as a progressive step towards reform and is lauded by parents, politicians, and various and sundry others within the community. Yet if a charter is set up, that charter school is viewed with suspicion and distrust, yet I am not sure there is really that much of a difference between a magnet school and a charter school. Both are set up to work with specific, specialty populations; both are free to the public; both work "outside the norm" of their district; both are able to create their own set of expectations, both academic and behavioral, for its students.

Are charter schools the cure and panacea for all that ails a district? Not any more than a magnet school is. Yet neither are they the evil that so many make them out to be.

First day at the new job; first day as an old new teacher.

Today was day one at the new job; a charter school for gifted and talented kids where I will be teaching a mixed third and fourth grade class, with the exception of English Language Arts, which I will be teaching to a mixed sixth and seventh grade class because they read at a high school level or above, and I have so much high school experience.

The day was an incredibly invigorating one for me in many ways. Even though I have 22 years of teaching experience, I have never taught elementary education as a full-time educator; as a substitute, sure, and it was my experience as a substitute at the elementary level that planted the seed towards my pursuing my elementary endorsement in addition to already being secondary English Language Arts licensed. As a result, I truly felt like a brand new teacher today, which in many ways, I am. It's a bit odd, but in a good way. I spent my time planning out an elementary classroom instead of a high school or even a middle school classroom and was thoroughly excited to unpack supplies for projects, beanbag chairs for my reading corner...I probably had far more fun than I should have had. (heh)

To add to my excitement, I am working in a truly technologically equipped classroom: I have been given a laptop, projector, SMART board, document camera, and my room also has a laptop cart with enough laptops for 1:1 laptops in my room.

I'm also thrilled with the general attitude of the administration. First, we are absolutely treated as respected professionals, which completely creates an atmosphere that energized and validated everyone in the room. The Executive Director cares as much for her staff as she obviously does for the students. It was truly impressive.

One thing that was said today was "There's nothing elitist about what we're doing here, but it's different." And that's what it comes down to for so many charters, and it is why so many parents have gotten behind the charter movement. It's not that traditional public schools are bad, and in fact, the director made it a point to praise the job being done in and by traditional settings, noting that public schools are completely right and effective for 95% of the students enrolled in them, but made not that there are still 5% who need something different, and that is where charters come in. It's no secret that public schools just simply don't fit the needs of every student; regardless of what our politicians and business types think, children are not widgets...they are not all alike, and they all have their own individual needs, both academically and personally, and it is completely, totally, and absolutely unrealistic and unfair to expect them to fit the same mold.

I'm in a really, really good place, psychologically and professionally, in this school. I am looking forward to my "first" year of teaching.