TE818 Final Post

Dear Mr. Pseudonym,

For the past year the teachers of Foundations of Science have been piloting a model of Standards Based Grading(SBG) and would strongly recommend that next year all 9th grade teachers move to a SBG system.  The SBG System is a much more realistic picture of a students knowledge, understanding and learning.  We have several reasons that we feel that SBG makes a large impact on students and the school.  

#1 - As a teacher there are many things in our classrooms that we can not control but grading and what students do in our presence we can control. It is frustrating that we are at the mercy of so many factors that we can not control, such as students socioeconomic levels, school funding, class sizes and many other issues but grading we can control.  With standards based grading we eliminate the useless averages that truly do not show what a student has actually learned.  

#2 - Homework presents a major issue in classrooms today.  Many of us who piloted the SBG program can tell you that we all started our careers believing that homework was essential and it was absolutely necessary to award points for homework.  It was a belief that students had to do homework and that if points were not awarded to the homework they wouldn’t do it. Yet in many classrooms students who were clearly learning sometimes earned low grades because of missing work. Conversely, some students actually learned very little but were good at “playing school” and turning in work and doing extra credit to get a passing grade.  Take these student examples.  (All names have been changed)

Grade Book
Name	Homework Average	Quiz 1	Chapter 1 Test
Frank	95	60	65
Brandie	50	75	80
Sherri - did extra credit	110	50	63

Students like Frank and Sherri do great on homework, but was this graded for just completion or actual content?  Was the work copied from someone else?  If they are scoring that high on the content of their homework, why do their quiz and test scores not align?  What was the extra credit? Crossword puzzles?  Sherri’s homework averaged with her quiz and test scores would make it look like she was proficient when in fact her assessments show she is not.

Many students today are too busy with extracurriculars or jobs to do homework and the homework turns out to be useless.  Times are different than 15-20 years ago when kids went home to the dining room table and did their homework and that was priority one.  So if homework just leads to grade inflation and is not a true reflection of learning in the gradebook then why assign it or count it?  We need to change the mindset of students that homework is done just to get points and instead get them to see it as practice that leads to learning.  I always discuss this with my students from the standpoint of homework and class activities as practice for the big game.  You have to practice the skills which you don’t get rewarded for but when you do well in the big game that is the reward.  Likewise with school work you have to practice the skills in order to be ready for the assessment so you can show what you have learned.    

#3 - If grades are inflated through extra credit and meaningless busy work it is not a true picture of what the student has learned or the skills they have acquired. Using SBG grades do have real meaning.

• An A means the student has completed proficient work on all learning targets and also has developed an advanced understanding of the material and skills.  
• A B means the student has completed proficient work on all learning targets.
• A C means the student has completed proficient work on most of the learning targets, although not on all learning targets. The student can continue to the next course.
• A Not Yet grade means the student has not completed proficient work on most of the learning targets and needs assistance through class interventions to still learn the necessary content.  
• An F means the student has completed proficient work on fewer than one-half of the learning targets and cannot successfully complete the next course in sequence.

The grading scale eliminates the D and essentially says you are either obtaining proficiency in almost all of the course content or you are not.  Some of us in the pilot program experimented with A,B,C or Not Yet.  While this worked well we ran into troubles with attendance issues.  The Not Yet grade was designed for those students who were there and just did not get it.  These students need extensive intervention time until they got it but the Not Yet grade doesn’t give students a defeated outlook, as it just tells them they don’t have it yet but there is still time to learn it.  The issue was with students who were habitually absent but not dropped according to the attendance policy and required the F in the grade book.   So therefore we propose the above grade scale.  

#4 - Since the adoption of standards-based grading, there has been a drastic reduction in meaningless paperwork which provides time for more important considerations such as teacher collaboration or work on the common core.  Many people may view that the fact our students do less paperwork as they are not learning as much but it is quantity not quality.   As a teacher I can focus my  feedback only on selected problems and give higher quality feedback.  When a teacher is trying to grade a lot of busy work and homework everyday the feedback is not constructive and ends up being a completion grade and busy work for the student.   By using fewer assessments, with better feedback, teachers can get a truer sense of where the class is an adjust instruction as needed.  

#5 - Through the implementation of SBG other reforms had to be implemented.  Implementing SBG required every class to have a clear set of learning targets.  This led to collaboration with colleagues about what the learning targets are and what proficiency of each of these learning targets would look like.  Since we were getting very concise about what we wanted students to learn we compared all of our learning targets to the common core.   So through SBG,  curriculum and collaboration were improved.   

The key for the implementation across all 9th grade courses will be education of students and parents.  Students and parents alike need to understand the rationale for the change so teachers must hold discussions with students and parents.  Students also need to understand their responsibilities in the SBG system.  Many students will not like SBG since it eliminates grade inflation and they can no longer do a bunch of homework or extra credit to raise their grade or get an A.   Some students will really like the ability to retest and intervention time built into class so that they can get extra help and revise or retake until they meet proficiency.  No matter what side of the coin they fall on parents and students will need to be educated.  

We feel that expanding the Standards BAsed Grading system to all 9th grade courses would be a step in the right direction for By The River School District and would like to see it expanded to all 9th grade courses and then possibly school wide.  

The Foundations of Science team would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss a plan to move forward.  

Thank you for your consideration.

Melissa Hocking

FOS Team Leader

Synthesis Theme 5: Standards, Measurement and Testing

The standardized testing debate has been going on for a long time and I don’t see it getting better anytime soon or any conclusion reached either.  Amanda, who commented on my blog post, made some really good points. It seems that the standardized test are just data collection tools that students do not see the importance of.  They are used as “weapons” against teachers so the teachers care more about the test that the students who do not seen any purpose for them unless they are motivated by their score.  Those students who are from certain family backgrounds or low socioeconomic status are not going to be motivated by their score as they are not motivated by grades so why should they do well on this test that means absolutely nothing to them. What if the test were used to identify the gaps and determine course placement for the coming year or who needed to be pulled out for additional assistance so they could make up the gaps.  In my former district we began using the Iowa Assessment Data to determine who would be placed in a Second Chance Reading course.  Students began to take the test very seriously rather than be put in a reading course.  More than anything it shows to the students that these test are important and we are using these to identify skills gaps and then helping those students close the gaps.  

I do believe that standardized testing can have a place I am just not sure we are using the testing correctly at this point.  

Theme 5: Standards, Measurement and Testing

I was enthused by this themes topic on standards, measurement and testing as this is an area I feel very passionate about have a deep interest in.  I was disappointed that some of the readings were not very current but the TED Talk by Ken Robinson was exactly what I was looking for.  Robinson argues that we have been educated to be “good workers rather than creative thinkers”.  "We are educating people out of their creativity," Robinson says.  Robinson outlines 3 principles that allow individuals to flourish and yet these principles can be a rare thing in public education.  Principle 1 talks about how people are naturally different and diverse yet it seems to me that we are delivering a one size fits all education.  Principle 2 talks about the people being curious and that makes people learn without assistance.  This is where the major change is taking place in education a teachers are not to teach but to facilitate learning so students can be curious and curious about different things.  When things I was not expecting was Robinson to say that standardized testing was acceptable as long as it did not interfere with learning.  Yes we are locked in a constant fight about standardized testing and the benefits and pitfalls but if standardized testing is done right it can be a useful tool to measure outcomes but it should not be used to measure the quality of the teacher or provide the only picture into what a students has learned.  Principle 3 says that people are naturally creative but we are so focused on teaching the standards that we do not allow students to be creative.  So what this means for classrooms is that me must make education more individualised to the interest and curiosity of the learner.  In the article Creative Thinking in the Classroom by Robert Sternberg, Sternberg says there are 3 main aspects for creative thinking, synthesis, analytical and practical.  Sternberg argues that most schooling is centered around the analytical and that in order for schools to allow for creative thinking they must find a healthy balance between the three, he refers to it as the “triarchic theory”.   Synthetic is where students can generate their own ideas and redefine problems.  Analytical allows for judgement of one's own ideas and identification of strengths and weaknesses.  Practical is the ability to apply intellectual skills in everyday settings.  These three things need to be balanced in order to have true creative thinking in education and can come from things like Project Based Learning.  I really believe that the lack of creativity in public education has what has led America to be passed up by other countries in the the areas of science and engineering.    

Ted Robinson also has a great TED Talk on killing creativity.

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html?qsha=1&utm_expid=166907-20&utm_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ted.com%2F

Synthesis Theme 4: Curriculum Creation

In my synthesis this week I want to respond to the questions that a couple people who commented presented me with.   What inspired me to develop a richer curriculum is when I looked at my classroom one day and realized they were all bored. Heck I was bored.  After I gave the same lecture for the 4th time in one day and watch students copy down the same notes so they could memorize the same boring facts I really wondered what kind of teacher I was.  When our school district embarked on a mission to compare opur curriculum against Daggott’s 4 quadrants or rigor, relevance and relationships I realized nothing I was doing in class we what Daggott referred to as Quadrant D work.  This Quadrant represented coursework that was done at the highest level of Bloom’s Taxonomy and applicable to real world unpredictable situations.  I think if someone wants to develop a deeper richer curriculum the place to start is with Daggott’s 4 Quadrant work.  While I embrace Doll’s 4 R’s I think to have something to measure your current curriculum and lessons against to actually see how rich they are you need a tool like Daggott’s 4 Quadrants in order to assess lessons.  I thinks Doll’s 4 R’s would be great conversation starters for interdisciplinary work.  Presently I am not involved in interdisciplinary work but a truly rich curriculum would have those connections between subject areas.  Where you have to start is a curriculum map so that each content area can see what is being taught when in each subject area.  There is some curriculum mapping software that each teacher enters what content they are teaching when, all in a large spreadsheet intended so that each principal knows what is being taught each month in the building.  What if this tool was also available for teachers to see opportunities for interdisciplinary work? What is besides subject alike professional learning community meetings they were cross content.  So PLC meetings with say 9th grade science, language arts,  social studies, math and art.  There goal was to create one project for the year or semester that was cross curricular.  The possibilities for cross content is endless if the right base is provided.  I do believe that before cross curricular can happen rich curriculum within the each individual content or teachers classroom must be developed first.  

Theme 4: Curriculum Creation

Much focus has been given over the past several years to the 3 R’s - Rigor, Relevance and Relationships -  created by William Daggett, but I was very unfamiliar with the 4 R’s.  These ideas are very progressive and could serve as a great model.  Tyler’s 4 principles has pre-set ideas goals and/or purpose, methods and then evaluation.  While not a wrong model Doll Jr. saw how the revision of Tyler’s principles would fit a more post-modern model of education.  The R that most grabbed my attention was the Richness.  As I look back on the curriculum that I taught 5 years ago this is what was missing.  I was teaching a curriculum with no depth.  It was meaningless to students and allowed for very little dialogue that Doll Jr. says is needed in a rich curriculum.  This is because there was too much on the “curriculum” plate so that the depth could not be there for fear we wouldn’t get it all covered.  I love that Doll Jr. places significance on richness as the deep rich conversations that my students have about things like stem cells, cancer and brain research as far more important than memorizing the parts of the cell.  So in preparing this blog post I googled “richness in curriculum” and actually found a university that has a Richness in Thought graduation requirement.  This is how they described it, “Through this component you’ll develop keen insights and a deep understanding of literary works, mathematical models and artistic vision. It will enable you to debate definitions and articulate differences in thought or action. As a result you’ll have a better understanding of the diversities of human experiences”, Susquehanna University .  I thought this was a great description of what exactly I am trying to do with my students when I try to make the curriculum richer.  Recursive also really grabbed my attention as I see more and more blogging and electronic portfolios as summative assessments.  I really like the idea of blogging and recently attended a conference where one school was having students start blogs at 2nd grade and keep the same blog through 12th grade.   Research shows that student reflection is a great tool for assessment of learning and learners can see their own strengths and weaknesses.  After students see their weaknesses they know what they need to improve on and can focus on that in their learning and relearning. In Daggetts model the relationship piece is about establishing relationships with students but Doll Jr. has a different perspective on relations as it pertains to curriculum.  I see how Relations directly relates to Richness.  As more connections are made between topics, the curriculum and conversations become deeper and richer.  I believe that the Rigor comes from the Richness, but also that the Richness provides the Rigor.  I think some teachers still define Rigor as how many difficult formulas or math problems they can make students do or memorize and it infuriates me.  To me the Rigor comes from the deep conversations where students must make arguments, connections, reflections and solve problems.  I was excited about the 4 R’s and instead of analyzing lessons by Daggett’s 3 R’s we need to have more lessons analyzed against the 4 R’s.  

http://www.learningnetwork.ac.nz/shared/professionalReading/WATTS1.pdf

http://education.apple.com/acot2/curriculum/

Synthesis Theme 3b: What Should Schools Teach? - "Controversial" Curriculum

While I realize there is a difference between book selection and book banning to me they are one in the same.  If you do not include the book in the options that is the same thing as saying you are not allowed to read it.  But this theme goes beyond book banning.  Book banning is just one price and what good does book banning really do with things like Kindles and iBooks students have access to those books in more than just the school library.  What we actually see in schools in controversial curriculum and material (books and otherwise) not being included in the curriculum and why is that? As our professor pointed out in her comment to me is this an issue where teachers are not trusted to talk with students about controversial issues and if they are not, why is it they are not trusted?  The role of the teacher is/has drastically changed and we need to stop being thought of as people who disseminate information as information is available everywhere they don’t need to get it from me or any teacher.  We have to teach students to think critically and maneuver the oceans of information available to them and some of that will be controversially.  So if the reason teachers are not allowed to include controversial material is because they are not trusted, how do we become trusted professionals to include this material in our courses?  Maybe this is an area where professional development needs to be included on how to engage students with this material, monitor their discussions and engage students while remaining impartial.  When I engage students in debates about Stem Cell research we have to talk about embryos and the point at which they become life.  The topic can be very controversial and some students will have very strong feelings.  It is my job to ask questions and let them formulate their own opinions and teach them to talk respectfully about their opinions maybe if we trained more teachers to handle these conversations others would be more open to including them in the curriculum.

Theme 3b: What Should Schools Teach? - "Controversial" Curriculum

Again this week the readings are rendering my speechless.  I really thought we were passed the days of book banning and book burning.  I thought we were passed the days were religious groups could tell schools what to teach and yet here in the year 2013 we are still “protecting” students by not letting them discuss controversial subjects and read materials associated with hot button topics.  As a school we are really going to be naive to think that students are not exposed to these things outside of the school walls?  This is the information age, the internet age.  Students are exposed to MANY topics and ideas outside of school that are controversial and I would rather see them brought into the school setting with adults who can teach them more about the topics and guide them through the information overload of this day and age?  It is like the age old controversy surrounding Huckleberry Finn because of the word “nigger”.  Maybe 30-40 years ago when no one heard the word or used it and it was consider to be a 4 letter swear word.  I remember growing up and hearing the word and understanding it was a very bad word that should never be spoken.  I was never taught the social context of this word, where it came from or why it was considered a bad word.  Today through movies, television and the internet students hear this work often and I believe as an educational institution we are better off to discuss the work and its meaning rather than hide it from students.  

When I read Curtis Acocta’s writing prompts I grinned from ear to ear.  This is the rigorous-critical thinking work we want students to be doing.  Students must learn to be analyzers of information and reflect upon the information they have consumed and this is what Acosta is trying to do.  Again students need to be able to read ALL information and formulate their own ideas and I would rather they did that with adult guidance than on their own.    

It infuriates me that people always think there is a hidden agenda in everything.  Bullying prevention is not about promoting any lifestyle it is about teaching children tolerance and acceptance so we don’t have young people taking their own lives for their choices they make.  It also seems that groups and leaders are always talking out of both sides of their mouths.  In one breath saying schools don’t do enough but then saying don’t teach it that way.  

There is always going to be controversy but for the sake of our students we need to take the controversy head on and do what is best for kids.

http://www.bannedbooksweek.org/

http://712educators.about.com/cs/bannedbooks/a/bookbanning.htm

Synthesis 3a: What Should Schools Teach? - "Unconventional" Curriculum and Schooling

I am still very excited about Mitra’s ideas of “school”.  When I envision this school of the future (and I hope not distant future) I think the school in the cloud model is one that could have great success.  As one person that commented on my reflection indicate she felt that young students still needed that interaction with adults and I agree.  Never in my mind do I see students sitting at home taking classes or courses or working on projects without in person interaction.  Students still need to come to school everyday.  They still need to be adult guidance on a daily basis, it just doesn’t need to be in a 6-8 period traditional setting.  I have this vision of a student interacting with “instructional coaches” throughout the day.  As high school students have projects that incorporate math, science, language arts and social studies these instructional coaches will guide them in their learning.  Life is not compartmentalized into subject areas so why should school? When I was younger I got to attend zoo school. I was chosen to attend school at the zoo for my entire 6th grade year. It was an amazing educational experience and nothing was compartmentalized. It was unique in that subjects was interwoven not taught separate and then we got to enjoy all of these life experiences. This is the school of the future but unfortunately these schools are few and far between - maybe that can change.

Theme 3a: What Should Schools Teach? - "Unconventional" Curriculum and Schooling

“It's quite fashionable to say that the educational system is broken. It's not broken. It's wonderfully constructed. It's just that we don't need it anymore.”  - Sugata Mitra

After listening to his Ted Talk I was really rendered speechless and yet thoroughly energized. Someone was speaking right to my heart and I loved it.   Many times I have this vision in my head about what education should look like and it is nothing like what education is now it is much more like the school in the cloud.  I once saw a presenter give a talk on the future of education in which he compared schools in 2000 to schools in 1950 and they were almost identical.  Still classrooms with desks in neat rows, teacher led with kids taking paper pencil tests regurgitating knowledge.  Now while some of this has begun to change in the last 5 years is it going to change fast enough or be big enough changes to bring about true educational reform that will make a difference?  That is why I love the quote from Mitra above.  The former education system we had worked wonderful for its time it produced my parents and grandparents and even me and they all did very well in that system but that system does not work for today's students and their futures.  As the 2013 Gallup Poll on what Americans Say U.S. Schools Should Teach indicated, Americans want students to learn skills like critical thinking, communication skills, how to set goals and collaboration.  If you read up on the Common Core you will see that the 4 C’s of the common core are “creativity, collaboration, critical thinking, and communication”, exactly what Americans think American schools should be teaching. Many people want to argue that the Common Core is just another program like No Child Left Behind that is doomed to failure but I disagree.  The Common Core is the push that American education needed to make effective change in schools.  But is it enough? Probably not.  I have implemented the last two years the common core, flipped my classroom, integrated technology and really focused on the 4 C’s and yes I believe it has had a large impact on my students.  More than anything it has changed their view of education and school. They stopped seeing my classroom as a place where I was out to get students with paper/pencil tests of memorization.  But many times I still don’t think I have gone far enough to reform my practice of education that is why I loved Mitra’s ideas. Children and all humans are naturally curious so why take that away from them? Could the 4C’s of the common core be learned in an environment where kids teach themselves?  I think that answer is yes.  I envision a school without compartmentalized subjects taught in periods throughout the day but rather a no wall school just as mitra suggests, “a school-in-the-cloud, a self styled, self-organized learning environment , to be structured and managed by cloud computing, and overseen by a global village of teachers and facilitators. A student-driven, technology-based, self-directed learning may work, and  it will have a profound impact on how we will re-engineer and drive schooling in the years to come.”

I truly hope that this is the future of education and I hope it is sooner rather than later.

Mitra's Hole in the Wall Project

School in Cloud Article

Genius Hour Video - Is this the first step toward Mira's Vision?

Synthesis: Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

In my final synthesis of Theme 2 I want to answer some questions that I was asked about my original post.  

Q: Do you feel that depending on the student’s culture, background, or environment in which they live is a factor or should determine what style of teaching or which theory should be implemented to assure student success?

A:  Absolutely!  Prior to this year I was teaching in a smaller school that was partial rural and suburban.  Now I am teaching in a inner city school with 1500 students.  I have had to change my approach and teaching style and it has been a big culture shift for me.  I still firmly believe that the best approach is the social behaviorist and experimental and that is the approach I tried to enter my new setting with.  Unfortunately students did not have the background to make those approaches successful enough so I have had to resort to being an intellectual traditionalist more than I like.  So yes I think the background and culture plays a big role in determining which teaching style can be used and will be successful.

Q: Or do you feel that all students no matter their background need the different levels of education that was introduced in “Perspectives on four curriculum traditions” by William Schubert?

A: Despite what I said above I still think students need the different levels for a well rounded education.  Even with the students I have this year I feel it is vital to provide them with all approaches to curriculum so that they get a variety of experiences.  So even though I may have to be an intellectual traditionalist until I have given them a solid knowledge base I will try to incorporate other styles as well.  

Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

I found this weeks readings to be very thought provoking.  I was initially only going to write about the History of Curriculum by Thomas Popkewitz but then I could just not comment on Perspectives of Four Curriculum Traditions by William Schubert as well and felt that they actually went well together.  Instantly a quote from Popkewitz jumped out at me.  “Schooling is designed to act on the spirit and the body of the children and the young.”  This quote spoke to me because I believe this is so much what school should be about but what has been lost somewhere about the time school being taught by subjects came to be. Take this in the context of the four curriculum traditions.  Intellectual traditionalist have sucked the ability to ignite the spark and spirit in children.  By focusing so much on reading, lecture and memorization of facts the ability of students to pursue their own interests, to experience things and develop lifelong skills they need has been taken away.    When I look at the 4 curriculum traditions I firmly believe they all have a place but some should take center stage more than others.  Social Behaviorist and Experimental Traditionalist need to be on that center stage.  The social behaviorist are needed to teach the behaviors that help students become more successful like problem solving.  To ignite a passion for learning students need to have some say in what they want to learn and this is why experimental traditionalist are important.  If students can have a say in what they want to learn and to actually gain experiences rather than be lectured at or memorizing facts they are more likely to retain and gain knowledge.  This is where teachers are instituting a genius hour component into their classrooms.  During genius hour students get to select a topic they want to study, explore it and design a project based upon those interests.  I do think there are times when the intellectual traditionalist is necessary but for many teachers this is their method of teaching which leads to low levels of rigor and disengaged students.  Critical re-constructionist is needed but not exactly like that mentioned.  All students in today's times need to go on for further education so education is not sorting them for that purpose but rather by ability and knowledge so that we can make sure they are prepared for the next level of educations and for also finding out their passions so the next step in their education journey is in the right directions.  Therefore I believe that all four traditions have a place in education.

Read about Genuis Hour - Click Here

Synthesis Theme 1: Conflicting Notions on the Purposes of Schooling

I do not believe that the purpose of education can be one thing or the other. If we are truly doing our job as educators then we have to produce citizens, human beings and workers. I also firmly don't believe there is anything wrong with pushing students to climb the so called "social ladder". We need to push students to strive for better paying jobs that require college education and beyond. We need to push them to want to go to college and get the education that can open more doors for them. There is not a future for those who don't go to college or at least get a trade school education in a specialty. I don't believe that one purpose is more important than the other, they are all equally important and for education to be successful it must serve more than one purpose. And while my statement below about single parent homes might have been a little stereotypical I was trying to make a point. Kids today due need character education at school, as they are not coming with it from home, whether it is a single parent home or two parents. That is the purpose of many programs like Character Counts and PBIS.  Schools must serve multiple purposes from feeding kids at least two meals a day to building character, to preparing workers and citizens.  

Theme 1: Conflicting Notions on the Purposes of Schooling

The readings for this theme are centered around What is the Purpose of American Education? and that is a question that has many answers.  The truth is the purpose of education has changed over the years as the economics of the country have changed.  In the 1950’s and 60’s the purpose of education were different.  Two parents home provided for the character education needed to produce the “right citizens”.  Schools didn’t need to focus on teaching respect and responsibility and citizenship those things were taught at home.  But that was then and this is now.  The family structure at home is different and for many, many students if they are not taught it at school they will not learn it.  Part of the education students receive at school has to be teaching students what it means to be the “right citizens” and the “right human beings”.  A few years ago our school tackled behavioral and discipline referrals by becoming a PBIS school.  Through the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports program  we adopted through school wide expectations - Respect, Responsibility and Caring.  The issue we ran into was students didn’t know what respect looked like. We had to actually teach students what respect was and how it would look in their everyday lives. Since the implementation of this program and the actually teaching of expectations the amount of discipline referrals dropped drastically and the culture and climate of our school changed as well.  So decades ago it might have not been the purpose of the school to create the “right citizens” and the “right human beings” but it has to be now because of how our country has changed.  The ultimate goal of schools should be “social efficiency” or preparing the “right workers”.  I see nothing wrong with this being the purpose of education.  In the 1950’s and 60’s the country needed factory workers and it was acceptable that students were tracked and prepared differently as that is what our country needed we needed all different types of workers for a multitude of different jobs.  Again that was then, this is now.  There is a small percentage of factory worker jobs left.  Decades ago if you didn’t succeed in school, there was a factory job waiting for you, but that is not the case anymore. (See graph below)  I can use my good friends as examples.  Neither wanted to go to college so upon high school graduation they got married and went to work at the local factory making refrigerators, washers and dryers.  Five years ago after working with the company for almost 30 years the company closed and moved to Mexico leaving them with no jobs and only a high school education.  Today's students have to succeed now more than ever and we have to prepare them so they can succeed.  It is educations #1 priority.  Therefor I do not believe there is any problem engraving in students that the paths they chose in education will determine where they go to college, what career they will pursue, what their income will be and thus what their lives will be like.  I would imagine if my friends had a crystal ball when they were 18 they might have chose a different path - rather than going back to school in their mid-40’s so they could get a job.  

So in education we do have to do it all.  We have to prepare, citizens, human beings and workers.  It is a tall order and that is why it takes special people to be educators.  

I recommend checking out the following resources.

PBS - The Story of American Public Education

Forbes Magazine - What is the Purpose of Education?

Introduction for TE 818

Hello Everyone!

My name is Melissa Hocking and I just started my 19th year of teaching.  Presently I am teaching high school science in Cedar Rapids, Iowa at Cedar Rapids Washington High School.  This is my first year in this school district as we moved this summer when my husband took a new job as superintendent of schools in Lisbon, IA.  While I am presently teaching science this is not where my journey began.

I was born and raised in rural Michigan and since I grew up in rural Michigan I had a love for agriculture and became extensively involved in FFA.  This drew me to a major in Agriculture Education wanting to stay connected to the two things that I was passionate about, agriculture and the FFA.  While I began my education at Michigan State University I then transferred to Iowa State University to finish my degree.  While I loved the FFA part of my job, teaching agriculture was really not my passion and being FFA advisor required a lot of time away from my family.  At the time a science position had become available in our district and since I had enough credits in the field to earn a science endorsement, I switched.  I now teach Foundations of Science and Pre-AP Biology.  Two years ago I wrote a grant for a classroom set of iPads and obtained 30 iPads for my classroom.  Since then I have flipped my classroom and put all my lectures on podcasts.  I knew that technology could be the gateway to a much more engaged classroom with better differentiated instruction which leads to my other passions of technology and curriculum and instruction. 

I have always wanted to obtain my graduate degree but I am glad I have waited until now when I really know what I want to do with my career. I didn't want to go back to school just to get a degree so I could move up the salary schedule, I wanted to earn a graduate degree based on my passions and how I wanted to advance my career.  In the future I see myself as a curriculum director or teaching on-line or face to face courses at a community college or working in some role with technology in public schools.  I am very passionate about the education system in the United States and how it is the backbone of the future of America.

I am excited to be back in school at Michigan State University.  Attending MSU has always been important to me as my grandfather graduated from MSU and always wanted me to attend school at MSU.  My grandfather passed away this summer at the age of 98 and when he died he was one of the oldest living graduates of MSU having graduated in 1939.

My husband Pat is the superintendent of schools, at a nearby district, and we have two children Ryan and Madison.  We love to travel, camp and boat and watching sports. Spartans all the way!