Week 3 EDU695: MAED Capstone

225

5Dynamic Curriculum and Instruction in the 21st Century

Ulrich Baumgarten/Getty Images

Learning Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Identify elements of creativity in existing face-to-face and online learning curriculum.

2. Implement problem-based learning experiences with students that incorporate real-world audiences.

3. Prepare an argument to integrate the nine elements of digital citizenship in the curriculum for an audience of school and district leaders.

4. Assemble examples of teacherpreneurship from web-based networks, and share with profes- sional colleagues.

5. Prioritize Heidi Hayes Jacobs’ list of proposals for ensuring the success of technology integra- tion in a learning community with your local context in mind.

co-photo

co-cn

co-box

co-cr

co-ct

CO_CRD

CT

CN

H1

CO_TX

CO_NL

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 225 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Chapter Introduction

Chapter Introduction A 9th-grade team of history and social studies teachers is preparing to upgrade the curricu- lum to address Common Core writing standards as well as International Society for Technol- ogy in Education standards for the next five years. Two members of the team have attended Common Core workshops; two members use digital technology regularly in their classes; and two teachers have no experience with either but are considered subject-matter and assess- ment experts in the department. Curriculum planning must be completed in three months. Team members are wondering where to begin.

The title of this chapter uses the word dynamic to describe curriculum and instruction today. The field is shifting ground as new perspectives emerge on what constitutes knowledge, how curriculum is packaged, and where new information matters most. The opening vignette signals the varying types of knowledge and experience that teacher teams and departments face as they consider what curriculum for meaningful learning looks like in the 21st century.

The players are also changing. Experts are no longer based solely in laboratories or universi- ties; teachers are no longer housed solely in traditional classrooms; learners are evident across age spans and job descriptions. In curriculum and instruction, policy, practice, and research are increasingly intertwined, with the players crossing boundaries and contributing to multiple domains. Content cannot be separated from practice; educational research is subject to political and economic pressures; and ultimately, all of these facets are being radically transformed by the integration of technology.

At the same time, as we begin the 21st century, there has been an increasing dependence on standards and standardization of curriculum. The role of the federal government increased through the 2001 No Child Left Behind legislation and the 2011 Race to the Top initiative in the effort to provide benchmarks for addressing learning gaps for English learners, minorities, and students in poor, underserved communities.

The standards movement has evolved into the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in math- ematics and English language arts and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) standards. These new standards hold promise for ensuring that all students are ready for the challenges of the next century.

This chapter proposes four key concepts that inform this dynamic stance in curriculum and instruction:

1. Curriculum must engage students in creativity and making real-world products; such pro- cesses constitute purposeful work that involves learners in problem-based learning.

2. Authentic audience and student voice in local and global communities of practice are crucial to teaching and learning in the modern world. Such an approach to curriculum and instruction requires careful attention to digital-citizenship learning among teachers and students.

3. Deliberate practice and teachers’ intentional use of effective teaching strategies contribute to deep and flexible understanding of content.

4. Curriculum content is integrative and discipline-specific. As such, the process of backward curriculum design incorporates curriculum mapping standards in specific contexts for diverse learners.

photo-caption

photo-box-right-thin

photo

box-1

BX1_H1

BX_TX

sec_t

kt i

bi

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 226 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Chapter Introduction

These concepts are redefining what is taught and how it is taught. In this chapter, Alan Novem- ber tells stories of real students who embrace projects they have created because they see those projects as meaningful and purposeful work. Similarly, Nel Noddings’ article emphasizes the need for creativity and the opportunities for students to actively create in a standards-based era. Educational technologist Adam Bellow challenges educators to think about what it means to work in a start-up culture as a learning environment and how social networks and online access give students genuine collaborative space for what he calls the “maker movement.”

November and Bellow are part of the collective of educational technologists who are shaping and reshaping the dialogue about curriculum and instruction. The chapter furthers that conver- sation with work from Boss and Krauss, McGonigal, and Ribble, whose thinking informs the four concepts shaping a dynamic field in the 21st century.

The decades of work by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe continue to provide guidance for educa- tors as these two leaders conceptualize curriculum making as a process of backward design. Their most recent work links that notion to CCSS. Deliberate practice and the need for research- based, effective teaching strategies emerge from the influence of Robert Marzano, who has had enormous impact on teacher professional development, school leadership, and approaches to teacher evaluation. The applications of these pedagogical approaches are numerous; the specif- ics deserve critical and conscientious discussion. The chapter closes with a look at Heidi Hayes Jacobs’ grounded work on mapping as a means to address coherent, multidimensional, and technology-integrated curriculum.

Voices From the Field: Remembering the Power of the Arts in 21st Century Curriculum

Susan Hyatt is the Arts Integration Project Manager for the Palm Beach County School District in West Palm Beach, Florida. She provides professional development for teachers in the district related to arts embedded teaching that is consistent with Common Core Standards and conducts program evaluations for arts organizations in partnership with schools.

Multiliteracy, including visual literacy, keeps coming up in a lot of the work that we’re doing in arts integration, and it’s embedded in Common Core. They’re using all the strate- gies that we teach them, such as making inferences, predictions. That’s creativity. They’re wondering “what if,” they’re using their own judgment, their own logic to create an idea, to create a scenario. That’s all part of Common Core. Integrating technology just brings more possibilities into the classroom; you can find any work of art, music, performance in the world and make it accessible for critical response, enhancing multiliteracy.

The biggest thing that we find in the field is that teachers say that curriculum integration and using technology takes more time. Once you know what you’re doing, it actually takes less time. If you’re addressing a standard and you’re teaching a critical-thinking strategy or a problem-solving strategy and you’re using a work of art and you’re also teaching a skill in an academic content area, you’re also giving students an opportunity to use their own voice as part of the learning process. The students become colearners, coteachers; they take on part of the time management, because they make those connections for you.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 227 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.1 TED Talk

5.1 TED Talk, by Alan November

Introduction The first reading for this chapter is the partial transcript of a TED Talk given in 2011 by Alan November. November is a Harvard-University–trained educational technologist and consultant. He is best known for his two books, Empowering Students With Technology and Who Owns the Learning? Preparing Students for Success in the Digital Age.

In his TED talk, November tells stories about his former students and the evolution of his think- ing about learning that resulted in a course he called “Community Problem Solving With Tech- nology.” He explains how enthusiastic students become when they discern a problem and apply the appropriate tools to solve that problem for real audiences, rather than using tools in isola- tion and hoping to be able to apply them sometime later.

November’s experiences contribute to the larger discussion of the content of curriculum and what it takes to develop creative content with students, not for them, in order to purposefully work to make the world a better place. November calls this “leaving a legacy.”

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from November, A. [TED Talks]. (2011, March 5). TEDXNYED [Video file].

I’m going to tell a bunch of stories and I at first don’t expect that they’re going to have any connection at all and then in the end, I’m going to try to bring them together. First story is in 1975 and I am a teacher of biology and chemistry in Roxbury High School in Boston and I find out that the local subway line, which is elevated at the time, is going to be put underground, and the local, huge, subway terminal bus station, called Dudley Station, is auctioning off various storefronts to the community because over the next 10 years they’re going to dismantle it. No more investment. So I am probably one of the only teach- ers in the country who’s ever bid, and won, for a dollar—I got a barbershop. And the barbershop, I needed the barbershop because a couple of months before that, my roommate at medical school had one of my students arrive in an ambulance, who had never really had any medical care in his life. And he tells me this, and I’m teaching biology, and he says, “You know, you really ought to teach your kids some practical stuff, because too many of kids in your neighborhood—there where you are teaching—don’t have good medical care, but it’s free. And if they only knew about it, they could, they could have better wellness. So, see what you can do.” So the barbershop was this great loca- tion in the center of the community and I sent kids out to all the hospitals, all the health centers, they gathered information left and right, and we turned the barbershop into a health-information neighborhood center. After school, kids would sign up, march down, I marched with them three blocks from the school, and we had a blast handing out information to probably thousands of people from our barbershop. Played music, ran ads, and it was just an abso- lute blast. That was in 1975. And then I learned, from that, that if you give

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 228 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.1 TED Talk

kids involvement in a community along with their schooling, if it goes hand in hand, you can make meaning out of what they’re learning in class, if you have them involved in the community after class.

Years later I am teaching at Lexington High School, a phenomenally different environment than Roxbury High School, and designed a course called “Com- munity Problem Solving With Technology,” based after the barbershop. And so all my students were asked to go out in the world and find a real problem to solve first. Then we’ll figure out what technologies you need to learn later. The reverse basically of what we do today. And so one of my students—gotta tell you this one story—she had a disabled friend, and in a wheelchair, and she found out that there was no yellow pages for handicapped people in Greater Boston. So she decided her project was going to be similar to the barbershop, organize this massive amount of information. It turned out to be 97 agen- cies providing service to the disabled, across Greater Boston, and she built a database.

And in ‘94 I had some business connections and that went online in 1984. I get a call a couple weeks later from a professor at Boston University Medical School saying that one of his interns is working at an agency and my student’s database shows up linking all the agencies together online. They had never seen anything like this and, in fact, could he come and meet with my high school student who built the database. And I said, “Well I’m very busy, it’s the end of the school year.” And he said, “I don’t want to meet with you, I want to meet with your student.” And I, I kind of had to take a retake there; yeah, that was a moment. And, you know, how often does a professor call and ask to meet with one of your students? So the guy comes in, he brings a couple of his masters’ students in public health, one of them had experienced the database and they offer her a job. They want to know, if during the summer, this is spring time, during the summer, if she would run a seminar teaching his students how to design databases for the handicapped. And they want to take it across Massachusetts and into upstate New York. They want to greatly expand it.

They offer her a pretty good salary. She says she’ll take the job but not the salary, no money, and I’m saying, take the money, take the money. And she’s saying, no money. And afterwards, I talk to her and I said, “Why didn’t you take the money?” That was a lot of—and she needed the money. She said, “That’s my project, they’re helping me build on my project, I should be paying them.” So she taught me a lot about dignity and integrity of work. That if a kid is add- ing value to the world, using technology to make the world a better place, it’s absolutely fascinating what they’ll do without a grade, without money, just because they own the problem. They identified it, they own it, they built it; she felt responsible for it.

So what I want to do now is go further along in the stories. One of the ques- tions I think is really important is, Are your students leaving a legacy? Are they contributing to the world? Are they creating content, creative content, technical content, any kind of content that adds value? Helps other people

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 229 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.1 TED Talk

learn? Helps build a yellow pages for a database for the handicapped? There’s just unlimited numbers of real problems that connect all the way across the curriculum. There’s no limit but the imagination.

So another story. My daughter, about 2002, 2003, loves Harry Potter. And she’s the one who goes to the store at midnight, dressed up in character—I got to wait in line—and we buy the book. We come home, she’s reading the book in the car. By breakfast, the 750 pages is done and she wants another one. She came down and says “Daddy, when do you think J. K. Rowling is going to do another one?” I said, “Honey, I have no influence over J. K. Rowling, I just don’t know.” So she solves that problem by going on to fanfiction.net, she discovers fanfiction.net. Fanfiction.net, if you don’t know, is an early website where if you want to write in the style of any author, you go for it. And you publish it, and people around the world comment.

So she’s reading one chapter after another in the style of J. K. Rowling by kids around the world. Building network, this is before Facebook, this is before MySpace, before a whole bunch of stuff. My 13-year-old is busy doing all this. And then I said, “Honey, you should write one of these chapters, you’re a great writer.” She says, “No, Daddy, I’m a better critic than I am an original writer. I’m just criticizing.” That’s what she did; she just criticized other people. She loves that. And then one day she comes down and she says, “Dad, I have a great idea. I’m going to give the Golden Cauldron Award.” I said, “What’s the Golden Cauldron?” She said, “I made that up. I’m gonna put out on FanFiction that this award is up for the best absolute writer honoring the style of J. K. Rowling.” And I said, “Well who’s on your committee?” She said, “I’m the Golden Caul- dron; no one’s on the committee, just me.”

So she gives the award and I look at the finalists, and one of these is a 13-year- old girl who has 10 chapters. And I am fascinated by how she gets better and better and better, the writing just clearly progresses. So I start showing this in workshops (bet there’s some people in the room who’ve seen me do that). And one day I am giving a workshop to middle school kids and their teachers and you’re not going to believe this: As I’m showing the work of this chapter, there’s a buzz in the middle of the auditorium with these middle school kids and their teachers. The girl is sitting in the room and I don’t know it. I’m show- ing her work to her and the rest of the faculty. So that’s quite an embarrassing moment.

And I took advantage of it, and she came up and did a cameo and explained to the assembled how she gets an account, how she writes, how she builds networks of other writers, and how she promotes, and it was fantastic. After- wards, there was a line of kids wanting to talk to her about getting a free account in fanfiction.net. The most remarkable part of that story, though, is that the teacher, the English teacher’s waiting for me. And the English teacher says, “I just want you to know she’s not a great student.” I said, “What do you mean?” She said, “Well, she doesn’t get her homework in, she doesn’t partici- pate as much as she used to, it’s going down.”

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 230 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.1 TED Talk

And that was one of those schools where I had to stay overnight, so I found that girl later at dinner and I said, “What’s with your homework? You’re doing all this work on FanFiction, clearly you can get your homework done.” And she said, “Well, I decided that when I wake up I have to make a decision now. Do I write for my teachers or do I publish for the world? That’s a really important decision and more and more, the answer is, publish for the world.” And that was in 2003, again, before lots of kids had that kind of global capacity. But I realized, oh my gosh, what if all kids get a voice? What if all kids figure out they can do something like FanFiction? Now they are. Now I get it, that lots of kids want to have a global voice.

A lot of technology is about improving teaching, which is why so many teach- ers show up in staff development without kids. That has to change. We have to get a lot more kids into staff development. And teach them how to build that same capacity with whatever tools we are giving teachers, kids to kids.

In the United States, if you ask teachers, “Who works harder, students or teach- ers?” lots of teachers will tell you the teachers work harder than the kids. This has been the tipping point. I talked to Silvia this morning. The teacher in this class now understands that the kids work harder than she does for the first time in her career, because she shifted the ownership of learning to the kids. And every kid is making a contribution every day. That’s much better than the barbershop. You don’t need a barbershop anymore.

Give me more work. This is not like students asking for more homework; it’s more work to make a contribution. That’s when I think students will ask for a lot more work. And my time is up and I want to just point out none of this means that teachers are less important. What it really means is teachers are more important than ever, because this is a change in the culture, a change in the ecology of learning. This is not about adding technology; it’s a funda- mental shift in relationships and roles and the feeling of empowerment that students have when they create a legacy. Thanks for listening.

Source: November, A. (2011). TEDxNYED. March 5. Ted Talk given in 2011 by Alan November. Used with permission of Alan November.

Summary Alan November’s TED Talk is a chronological view of what he has learned from his students over the past 30 years. He proposes the idea that real work that is purposeful and creative results in authentic products that engage students in their learning, as well as with the technological tools required to solve problems. When students are engaged in this way, they work harder and ultimately leave a global legacy.

November provides examples of problem-based learning as a means to think about the evolving role for teachers as the culture of learning changes. He challenges educators to acknowledge the inevitable shifts in power, authority, and audience when students take responsibility for their own learning.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 231 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.2 Mapping the Journey: Seeing the Big Picture

Critical Thinking Questions 1. November describes classrooms in which students are actually asking for more work—not

homework specifically—but more work that “makes a contribution.” Teachers and school leaders might argue that the fast and sometimes standardized pacing that demands learn- ing basic skills precludes too much of this kind of curricular innovation. How might you argue for a curriculum that enables both skill building and making a contribution through creative problem solving?

2. One of the central tenets of November’s argument is that it is essential for schools and teachers to help students engage with their communities. How might teachers think about what constitutes a community in which students can find, name, and work on real problems in and through social networks? How might teachers assist students in exploring those communities?

3. November asserts that professional development for educators should include students. What would such professional development look like? What would be the goals of teacher/student professional development? What kinds of tasks and activities might occur?

5.2 Mapping the Journey: Seeing the Big Picture, by Suzie Boss and Jane Krauss

Introduction This excerpt is from the first chapter of Suzie Boss and Jane Krauss’ 2007 book, Reinventing Project-Based Learning: Your Field Guide to Real-World Projects in the Digital Age. Suzie Boss is a founding board member of the Learning Innovation and Technology Consortium. She is also a writer and editor at the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, for which she co- authored the book, Learners, Language, and Technology, which focuses on technology to sup- port early literacy (http://www.netc.org/earlyconnections/pub/llt.pdf ).

A former teacher in Oregon schools, Jane Krauss has long been an advocate for technology inte- gration practices in elementary education. As director of professional development services at the International Society for Technology in Education, Krauss has traveled internationally, deliv- ering professional development workshops and presentations focused on technology integration.

Boss and Krauss underscore the importance of real-world learning that engages students with their communities. They note the importance of such projects that are “powered by contempo- rary technologies.” The authors discuss how new generations of students are already “plugged in,” providing 21st century educators with new platforms for engaging with them and their worlds.

These approaches are not new in K–20 education. Projects and problem-based outcomes have been topics of curriculum designers and researchers for more than 100 years, beginning with the work of William H. Kilpatrick and the Project Method in 1918. These authors suggest that educators need to look more closely at how and when such projects occur, and how they are or are not integrated into the lived curriculum in classrooms. Projects are often relegated to culmi- nating activities or extra credit artistic products that are add-ons rather than integral elements in teaching and learning. Boss and Krauss recommend otherwise.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 232 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.2 Mapping the Journey: Seeing the Big Picture

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from Boss, S., & Krauss, J. (2007). Mapping the journey: Seeing the big picture. In Reinventing project-based learning: Your field guide to real-world projects in the digital age (pp. 11–24). Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.

Project-based learning—powered by contemporary technologies—is a strat- egy certain to turn traditional classrooms upside down. When students learn by engaging in real-world projects, nearly every aspect of their experience changes. The teacher’s role shifts. He or she is no longer the content expert, doling out information in bite-sized pieces. Student behavior also changes. Instead of following the teacher’s lead, learners pursue their own questions to create their own meaning. Even the boundaries of the classroom change. Teachers still design the project as the framework for learning, but students may wind up using technology to access and analyze information from all cor- ners of the globe. Connections among learners and experts can happen in real time. That means new kinds of learning communities can come together to discuss, debate, and exchange ideas.

The phrase “21st-century learning” slipped into use long before the calendar rolled over to 2000. A robust debate about the needs of digital-age learners and the workforce needs of the new century continues to engage a global audience. The business world demands employees who know how to work as a team, access and analyze information, and think creatively to solve prob- lems. In the academic world and the blogosphere, educators routinely call for new strategies to better connect with the plugged-in generation known as the millennials. But with the new century now well underway, the shift in teach- ing necessary to realize this vision is far from complete.

You may already be familiar with traditional project-based learning, which has been shown to be effective in increasing student motivation and improv- ing students’ problem-solving and higher-order thinking skills (Stites, 1998). In project-based learning, students investigate open-ended questions and apply their knowledge to produce authentic products. Projects typically allow for student choice, setting the stage for active learning and teamwork.

Reinventing the project approach doesn’t mean discarding this venerable model. Rather, we advocate building on what we already know is good about project-based learning. By maximizing the use of digital tools to reach essen- tial learning goals, teachers can overcome the boundaries and limitations of the traditional classroom. Some tools open new windows onto student think- ing, setting the stage for more productive classroom conversations. Others facilitate the process of drafting and refining, removing obstacles to improve- ment. Still others allow for instant global connections, redefining the meaning of a learning community. When teachers thoughtfully integrate these tools, the result is like a “turbo boost” that can take project-based learning into a new orbit.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 233 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.2 Mapping the Journey: Seeing the Big Picture

What are the hallmarks of this reinvigorated approach to projects?

• Projects form the centerpiece of the curriculum—they are not an add-on or extra at the end of a “real” unit.

• Students engage in real-world activities and practice the strategies of authentic disciplines.

• Students work collaboratively to solve problems that matter to them. • Technology is integrated as a tool for discovery, collaboration, and

communication, taking learners places they couldn’t otherwise go and helping teachers achieve essential learning goals in new ways.

• Increasingly, teachers collaborate to design and implement projects that cross geographic boundaries or even jump time zones.

Source: Boss, S. & Krauss, J. (2007). Mapping the journey: Seeing the big picture. In Reinventing project based learning: Your field guide to real-world projects in the digital age. Washington, DC: ISTE.

Summary Boss and Krauss present familiar elements of project-based learning while introducing new ele- ments engendered by the integration of technology into the process. They emphasize the impor- tance of relevance and collaboration among teachers as well as students. They claim that it is time for a more contemporary, cutting-edge perspective on project-based learning that extends the classroom parameters, noting the potential for project-based learning to involve students, teachers, and other experts from around the world.

The excerpt mentions technological tools that extend students’ thinking and can prepare stu- dents to engage in new types of conversations in classrooms, both virtually and face to face. Boss and Krauss propose that technology can remove obstacles that teachers and students face in project-based learning initiatives.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. Researchers have proposed that in order to fully understand the impact of collaborative

problem solving such as Boss and Krauss suggest, we need to assess participation, teacher support, and information search capability. In order to be successful in a project-based or problem-based learning curriculum, students need all three of these components. How would you collect evidence of these three characteristics in a project-based, technology-rich learning environment? How would you use the results of such evidence to improve the expe- rience for and with students?

2. One of the key concepts for this chapter is the increasing need for authentic audiences in the 21st century curriculum. Imagine that you are presenting to a school board or board of trustees about problem-solving approaches in a technologically supported learning class- room. How would you describe who such authentic audiences might be for students’ work?

3. What portion of curriculum that you currently teach or have taught is problem- or project- based, using technological tools in the way that Boss and Krauss describe? What would be required to increase the time and attention to such approaches in your curriculum?

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 234 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.3 Power Up Their Imaginations

5.3 Power Up Their Imaginations, by Jane McGonigal

Introduction Jane McGonigal is a world-renowned game developer for organizations such as the World Bank, the New York Public Library, the American Heart Association, and the International Olympics Committee. As a future forecaster, she advises companies such as Microsoft, Disney, Activision, and Wells Fargo.

In this excerpt, she describes the Quest to Learn charter school in Chicago, Illinois, which opened its doors in 2009 after two years of curriculum design and strategic planning, directed by a joint team of educators and professional game developers, and made possible by funding from the MacArthur Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. At this school, for half of the school day, students receive points instead of letter grades and conduct missions, reaching levels of success and exchanging expertise with other players. In short, part of the school’s curriculum is based on game theory. McGonigal contends that schools in the 21st century would benefit from paying attention to the video games that so many young people and children play.

This article builds on the November and Boss and Krauss pieces in that it supports the notion of problem-based learning in which students pace themselves and seek out the tools and skills that they need in order to achieve their own levels of success. The focus for McGonigal remains on real-world situations and issues, but she addresses them specifically through the lens of gaming. Game theory is beginning to influence curriculum in the 21st century; just how much teachers and school leaders are able to learn and integrate into teaching and learning remains to be seen.

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from McGonigal, J. (2011). Power up their imaginations. Times Edu- cational Supplement, (4966), 4.

Quest to Learn is a public charter school in New York City for students in Grades 6–12 (equivalent to years 7–13). It’s the first game-based school in the world—but its founders hope it will serve as a model for schools worldwide.

* * *

It’s run by principal Aaron B. Schwartz, a graduate of Yale University and a 10-year veteran teacher and administrator in the New York City Department of Education. Meanwhile, the development of the school’s curriculum and schedule has been led by Katie Salen, a 10-year veteran of the game industry and a leading researcher of how kids learn by playing games.

In many ways, the college-preparatory curriculum is like any other school’s— the students learn math, science, geography, English, history, foreign lan- guages, computers and arts in different blocks throughout the day. But it’s how they learn that’s different: students are engaged in gameful activities from the moment they wake up in the morning to the moment they finish up their final homework assignment at night. The schedule of a sixth-grader named Rai can help us better understand a day in the life of a Quest student.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 235 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.3 Power Up Their Imaginations

7.15 a.m. Rai is “questing” before she even gets to school. She’s working on a secret mission, a math assignment that she discovered hidden in one of the books in the school library yesterday. She exchanges text messages with her friends, Joe and Celia, as soon as she gets up, in order to make plans to meet at school early. Their goal: break the mathematical code before any of the other students discover it.

This isn’t a mandatory assignment—it’s a secret assignment, an opt-in learn- ing quest. Not only do they not have to complete it, they actually have to earn the right to complete it, by discovering its secret location. Having a secret mis- sion means you’re not learning and practicing fractions because you have to do it. You’re working toward a self-chosen goal, and an exciting one at that: decoding a secret message before anyone else. Obviously, not all schoolwork can be special, secret missions. But when every book could contain a secret code, every room a clue, every handout a puzzle, who wouldn’t show up to school more likely to fully participate, in the hopes of being the first to find the secret challenges?

9.00 a.m. In English class, Rai isn’t trying to earn a good grade today. Instead, she’s trying to level up. She’s working her way through a storytelling unit and she already has five points. That makes her just seven points shy of a “mas- ter” storyteller status. She’s hoping to add another point to her total today by completing a creative writing mission. She might not be the first student in her class to become a storytelling master, but she doesn’t have to worry about missing her opportunity. As long as she’s willing to tackle more quests, she can work her way up to the top level and earn her equivalent of an A grade.

Levelling up is a much more egalitarian model of success than a traditional letter-grading system based on the bell curve. Everyone can level up, as long as they keep working hard. Levelling up can replace or complement tradi- tional letter grades that students have just one shot at earning. And if you fail a quest, there is no permanent damage done to your report card. You just have to try more quests to earn enough points to get the score you want. This system of “grading” replaces negative stress with positive stress, helping stu- dents focus more on learning and less on performing.

11.45 a.m. Rai logs on to a school computer to update her profile in the “exper- tise exchange,” where all the students advertise their learning superpowers. She’s going to declare herself a master at mapmaking. She didn’t even realize mapmaking could count as an area of expertise. She does it for fun, outside of school, making maps of her favorite 3D virtual worlds to help other players navigate them better.

Her geography teacher, Mr. Smiley, saw one of her maps and told her that eighth-graders were just about to start a group quest to locate “hidden histo- ries” of Africa: they would look for clues about the past in everyday objects like trade beads, tapestries and pots. They would need a good digital mapmaker to help them plot the stories about the objects according to where they were found, and to design a map that would be fun for other students to explore.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 236 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.3 Power Up Their Imaginations

The expertise exchange works just like video-game social-network profiles that advertise what games you’re good at and like to play, as well as the online matchmaking systems that help players find new teammates. These systems are designed to encourage and facilitate collaboration. By identifying your strengths and interests publicly, you increase the chances that you will be called on to do work that you’re good at. In the classroom, this means students are more likely to find ways to contribute successfully to team projects. And the chance to do something you’re good at as part of a larger project helps students build real esteem among their peers—not empty self-esteem based on nothing other than wanting to feel good about yourself, but actual respect and high regard based on contributions you have made.

2.15 p.m. On Fridays, the school always has a guest speaker, or “secret ally.” Today, the secret ally is a musician named Jason, who uses computer pro- grams to make music. After giving a live demonstration with his laptop, he announces that he’ll be back in a few weeks to help the students as a coach on their upcoming “boss level.”

For the boss level, students will form teams and compose their own music. Every team will have a different part to play—and rumor has it that several mathematical specialists will be needed to work on the computer code. Rai really wants to qualify for one of those spots, so she plans to spend extra time over the next two weeks working harder on her math assignments.

As the Quest website explains, boss levels are “two-week ‘intensive’ (units) where students apply knowledge and skills to date to propose solutions to complex problems.”

“Boss level” is a term taken directly from video games. In a boss level, you face a boss monster, or some equivalent thereof—a monster so intimidating it requires you to draw on everything you have learned and mastered in the game so far. It’s the equivalent of a mid-term or final exam. Boss levels are notoriously hard but immensely satisfying to beat. Quest schedules boss lev- els at various points in the school year, in order to fire students up about put- ting their lessons into action. Students get to tackle an epic challenge—and there’s no shame in failing. It’s a boss level, and so, just like any good game, it’s meant to whet your appetite to try harder and practice more.

Like collaborative quests, the boss levels are tackled in teams, and each stu- dent must qualify to play a particular role—”mathematical specialist,” for example. Just as in a big World of Warcraft raid, each participant is expected to play to his or her strengths. This is one of Quest’s key strategies for giving students better hopes of success. Beyond the basic core curriculum, students spend most of their time getting better at subjects and activities—ones they have a natural talent for or already know how to do well. This strategy means every student is set up to truly excel at something, and to focus attention on the areas in which he or she is most likely to one day become extraordinary.

6.00 p.m. Rai is at home, interacting with a virtual character named Betty. Rai’s goal is to teach Betty how to divide mixed numbers. Betty is what Quest calls

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 237 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.3 Power Up Their Imaginations

a “teachable agent”—”an assessment tool where kids teach a digital character how to solve a particular problem.” In other words, Betty is a software pro- gram designed to know less than Rai. And it’s Rai’s job to “teach” the program by demonstrating solutions and working patiently with Betty until she gets it.

At Quest, these teachable agents replace quizzes, easing the anxiety associ- ated with having to perform under pressure. With a teachable agent, you’re not being tested to see if you have really learnt something. Instead, you’re mentoring someone because you really have learned something and this is your chance to show it. There’s a powerful element of naches—vicarious pride—involved here: the more a student learns, the more he or she can pass it on. This is a core dynamic of how learning works in good video games and, at Quest, it’s perfectly translated into a scalable assessment system.

Secret missions, boss levels, expertise exchanges, special agents, points, and levels instead of letter grades—there’s no doubt that Quest to Learn is a differ- ent kind of learning environment, about as radically different a mission as any charter school has set out in recent memory. It’s an unprecedented infusion of gamefulness into the state school system. And the result is a learning envi- ronment where students get to share secret knowledge, turn their intellectual strengths into superpowers, tackle epic challenges and fail without fear.

Source: McGonigal, J. (2011). Power up their imaginations. Times Educational Supplement, 4966 (Nov. 4, 2011): 4. © 2011 Jane McGonigal. Reproduced by the kind permission of the author and TES.

Summary McGonigal describes a typical day in the life of a student named Rai at the Quest to Learn school in Chicago. As she does so, she introduces the key practices in game-based learning: (a) secret missions with student-driven goals; (b) leveling up, a self-assessment tool for students to gauge their progress; (c) expertise exchange through which students “advertise their superpowers,” thereby building capacity for all to learn from each other; and (d) boss levels in which students “get to tackle an epic challenge—and there’s no shame in failing. It’s a boss level, and so, just like any good game, it’s meant to whet your appetite to try harder and practice more.” For Rai, learning continues beyond the school day as she becomes the teacher for her virtual student who must also solve a problem.

All of these practices reflect a philosophy for curriculum and instruction in which students par- ticipate fully and collaboratively in traditional curriculum design components—quite simply, why (goals) what (content), how (instruction), and how well (assessment). But in this school, these components are structured in the context of games. This shift necessitates changes in lan- guage as well as substance. Futurist Jane McGonigal writes that this approach is unprecedented in a public school system.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. McGonigal is a futurist who looks forward in order to promote educative practices that

can be implemented in the present. On her website, she recommends Superstruct, a 10-year

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 238 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

forecast tool to help leaders, designers and innovators stay ahead of current trends and prepare for the future. How can educators prepare themselves as instructors, mentors, and researchers for the next decade? How might schools and universities embed futurist dia- logue, led by thinkers such as McGonigal, into their strategic planning?

2. Charter schools are designed to be sites in which innovative educators can test ideas to reach students. Sometimes those ideas work well in the charter school context but do not seem to adapt well to scaling up to a large number of schools or an entire school district. Why might that be the case with a school based on a game theory such as Quest to Learn? Further, what resources (people, time, space, materials) would be necessary to scale up a game-oriented approach to 21st century curriculum?

3. One theme in McGonigal’s text is the necessity and value of failing. Schools have tradition- ally had specific approaches and interventions to address failure that often involve remedia- tion, retention, suspension, and dismissal. What does gaming teach the educational com- munity about the nature, impact, and positive outcomes related to failure that is intentional and part of a learning environment culture?

4. Imaginative approaches to curriculum and instruction, such as the approach at Quest to Learn charter school require new skills, language, and dispositions for educators, particu- larly those who have not been raised in a video game household. If you were a team leader or district curriculum coordinator, how would you approach professional development to seek and support teachers as they take risks and learn to teach using gaming approaches?

5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change, by Mike Ribble

Introduction In this article, Mike Ribble explicitly relates the expertise and commitment to digital technology with educational change. He names the specific components of digital citizenship that we must focus on in order to move toward a more broadly defined educational change. Ribble reminds readers that students are increasingly savvy with digital tools, including smart phone, tablets, and social networking applications. He asserts that teachers and school leaders must catch up with their own students.

Ribble’s argument in the ongoing discussion of the curriculum for the 21st century is that the elements of digital citizenship, including digital access, commerce, communication, literacy, eti- quette, law, rights and responsibilities, health and wellness, and security are all skills that must be addressed by adults both in and outside the traditional classroom.

Ribble’s article articulates why digital citizenship is important for this century. He responds to objections by describing students who are excessively immersed in media and Internet consump- tion as sometimes failing in school because digital citizenship has not been explicitly addressed as part of the curriculum. He claims that many school leaders are unwilling to construct curricu- lum related to digital citizenship because of their own lack of familiarity with these elements, and thus business continues as usual.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 239 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

A familiar response to the call for digital citizenship is that technology is changing so fast that curriculum design cannot keep pace. Ribble maintains that a careful integration of digital citi- zenship within and across disciplines can meet the needs of students and teachers as a focus of ongoing, dynamic study in which everyone learns.

Finally, Ribble emphasizes that, “Digital citizenship is not a topic separate from the rest of the curriculum, but spans across all areas of education.” If one of the concepts driving 21st century curriculum is that content is both integrative as well as discipline-specific, Ribble’s comments deserve thoughtful consideration for schooling.

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from Ribble, M. (2012). Digital citizenship for educational change. Kappa Delta Pi, 48: 148–151.

Students are coming to school with more and more exposure to digital tools, such as smartphones, tablets, and social networking apps (Rideout, Foehr, and Roberts 2010). Though teachers are trying to “catch up” with their students, many were not provided instruction in these skills during their preservice training, and technology is only one among many topics in competition for district in-service time. Schools have an increasing need to provide not only the tools, but also the training for technology in the classroom. As technology changes the foundation of education, new issues emerge. Among these is the appropriate and responsible use of technology in the educational field-digital citizenship.

In 2008, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) updated its National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for teachers. In that revision, ISTE (2008, 2) identified “Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility” among five technology standards. For many educators, digital citizenship is not a familiar term. Most are not trained on this topic and are unprepared to teach it to their students. Yet, they should be.

So why are educators encouraged to understand and teach digital citizenship? First, as more schools move to 1:1 initiatives, it has become clear that educa- tors and-in extension? their students must understand digital citizenship and the issues it entails (Kiker 2011). In addition, the changes that are occurring at the governmental level are now beginning to require that schools address the issues of digital citizenship or risk loss of funding. On June 4, 2010, the Online Safety and Technology Working Group (OSTWG) released its report titled Youth Safety on a Living Internet (2010). That group submitted its rec- ommendations to the National Telecommunications and Information Admin- istration (NTIA), which in turn identified the promotion of digital citizenship in P–12 education as a national priority. The OSTWG (2010, 20) report advo- cated that educators “in the process of teaching regular subjects, teach the constructive, mindful use of social media enabled by digital citizenship and new-media-literacy training.”

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 240 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

Moreover, with new recommendations being submitted to Congress, edu- cators need to help their students become more technologically literate. As organizations such as the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21) begin to look at addressing skills for 21st century citizenship, schools and districts will need to focus on these needs (P21 2012). Teachers, therefore, must acquire and learn to teach the skills to be applied in their classrooms.

New Technology Skills

What basic proficiencies in digital citizenship do teachers need? Because the scope of digital citizenship is wide-ranging, educators may be hesitant to attempt teaching digital-age skills in their classrooms. This breadth of knowl- edge, as well as the sensitivity of the subject matter, concerns teachers, who may view digital citizenship as a technology problem rather than a societal issue that affects everyone. Indeed, the subject matter is sensitive, with con- cerns ranging from cell phone etiquette to cyberbullying and sexting. Further, these topics often become sensationalized in the popular press and confused with other technological topics affecting students, such as identity protection, online theft, and information privacy—all of which are concerns for users of digital technology.

What educators need to recognize are the concerns that are affecting their school and students, whether these are technology related or not. Too often schools hide behind their Acceptable Use Policies (AUP) in an attempt to address technology problems of a few students without identifying the under- lying needs. Teachers are using these tools, but also must understand how students are affected by these technologies over time. Districts must begin a process of educating students as OSTWG has recommended. A process needs to be in place so that all teachers can learn and understand the skills and con- cepts involved in digital citizenship.

Though the issues are broad, various groups and organizations have attempted to give the topic of digital citizenship clearer definition. The prior NETS for teachers defined this area as “social, ethical, legal, and human issues sur- rounding the use of technology” (ISTE 2000, 9). In its update, ISTE (2008, 2) recognized the importance of addressing this issue on an even larger scale. In the background of this goal, NETS states, “Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical behavior in their professional practices.” In another far-reaching definition, Collier (2009) expressed digital citizenship as “critical thinking and ethical choices about the content and impact on oneself, oth- ers, and one’s community of what one sees, says, and produces with media, devices, and technologies.”

One of the most encompassing and succinct definitions comes from Digital Citizenship in Schools, in which Ribble and Bailey (2007, 10) described digital citizenship as the “norms of appropriate, responsible behavior with regard to technology use.” While this definition is broad, it covers many aspects of technology and the people that use it. To help focus the conversation, this

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 241 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

definition also includes a framework of nine elements that help to define and organize the topics being addressed with regard to technology. The nine ele- ments of digital citizenship (Ribble and Bailey 2007) are outlined here.

Digital Access: full electronic participation in society—allowing all technol- ogy users to participate fully in a digital society if they choose. Educators can help students understand this topic by identifying what technology tools are available at school as well as in the student’s home. Then discuss how these tools can help students in the classroom.

Digital Commerce: electronic buying and selling of goods—providing the knowledge and protection to buy and sell in a digital world. Help students identify safe websites when providing sensitive information, such as credit card numbers, by looking for https: or a lock on the URL bar or in the bottom corner of a webpage. Have students talk with their parents to identify safe sites if they purchase items online.

Digital Communication: electronic exchange of information—understanding the options of the digital communication methods and when they are appro- priate. Help students understand when different tools might be most effec- tive, such as using e-mail for more formal communication and tweeting for casual conversations with friends.

Digital Literacy: process of teaching and learning about technology and the use of technology—learning about and teaching others how to use digital tech- nologies appropriately. Provide explanations on how to use the technology tools in the classroom. Do not assume that all students are familiar with them or know how to use them appropriately. Also, take advantage of any opportu- nity for a “flipped classroom” moment, where students may be able to support the teacher as well as other students in the classroom.

Digital Etiquette: electronic standards of conduct or procedure—being con- siderate of others when using digital technologies. Explain that technology use is often personal, but its use can affect others (e.g., talking loudly on a cell phone around others). Allow students to provide experiences they have had with technology and discuss how situations might have been handled better.

Digital Law: electronic responsibility for actions and deeds—having an aware- ness of laws (rules, policies) that govern the use of digital technologies. Dis- cuss with students the technology rules that are in the school as well as in their homes. Have them explain why these rules are necessary.

Digital Rights and Responsibilities: those requirements and freedoms extended to everyone in a digital world—protecting the digital rights of others while defending individual rights. Help students to see that technology pro- vides many privileges; and to keep those privileges, students need to facilitate their own and others’ use of technology in an appropriate manner.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 242 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

Digital Health and Wellness: physical and psychological well-being in a digi- tal technology world—understanding the risks (both physically and psycho- logically) that may accompany the use of digital technologies. Identify with students how much technology may be too much (e.g., sitting for long periods of time, eye strain) and how they can balance its use with other activities.

Digital Security (self-protection): electronic precautions to guarantee safety—protecting personal information while taking precautions to protect others’ data as well. Provide examples of not sharing and protecting informa- tion online; define how much information may be too much.

These nine elements provide a scaffold for addressing the needs that are aris- ing with respect to technology in schools. These elements also identify skill areas that can be addressed in the classroom. By breaking this topic into these nine areas, educators can begin to discuss the information in an organized way. Also, teachers can talk about digital communication on topics such as when and where to send a text message and the perception of others when texting is being used.

Too often educators do not want to begin discussing these issues because they themselves are not well-informed of the recent developments and events related to technology. But parsing the discussion into manageable topics can allow one idea to build on another over time. While identifying these elements is important, it is not enough. Educators need to provide resources to stu- dents (and sometimes to parents) that build understanding of what would be considered appropriate to a digital citizen. Using examples from the nine ele- ments of digital citizenship helps define the types of inappropriate activities that might occur.

Skills for the Future

Why is the topic of digital citizenship important to students and their future? This is the world that these students are growing up in, and schools need to be a part of this process. In a Kaiser Family Foundation study (Rideout et al., 2010) of students that were heavy users of media (more than 16 hours a day), nearly half earned only fair to poor grades. Students need to understand the long-term impact of excessive media consumption.

Perhaps not all of these topics dealing with appropriate technology use will fit within the curriculum, but educators need to be aware that their students are coming to school with these questions and concerns. There may be situations where students use their technology inappropriately outside of school, which become issues for the teacher and school community. Now that Internet and social networking applications can be used on a cell phone, these events can occur at any time, both in school and out. While the technologies may change, the concepts of using these tools appropriately will remain the same. This is why teaching these skills to students (even as young as prekindergarten) may become a priority for schools.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 243 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

Technology Skills Development

Teachers must learn more about digital citizenship. There are a growing num- ber of resources that are being made available on this topic. The book Digital Citizenship in Schools (Ribble and Bailey 2007) and its companion book for parents, Raising a Digital Child (Ribble, 2009), cover the concepts of the nine elements in much more detail. The website http://www.digitalcitizenship .org also has some basic information.

Common Sense Media has updated its website to include topics and informa- tion related to digital citizenship. This site provides information and activities for educators and students to better understand the topics surrounding tech- nology. Another site launched more recently by the U.S. government is http:// www.admongo.gov. That website helps students discern the information of digital commerce and decide what information is true and what is not. Other resources provide educators with a wealth of information. Most of the content on these pages is free and available to educators.

Once the information about digital citizenship has been identified, the con- cepts and ideas can be integrated into the classroom and discussed in an orga- nized fashion. By understanding the elements of digital citizenship, teachers will be able to address the issues that students are having with technology both in the classroom and at home. Connecting with other teachers to discuss the problems they may be having in the classroom can help to find strate- gies that work in other schools or districts. Digital citizenship is not a topic separate from the rest of the curriculum, but spans across all areas of educa- tion. Today, more than any time in history, students need to become global citizens, and the use of technology provides a conduit for those connections. The themes within digital citizenship help educators to explain these ideas to students.

Closing Thoughts

Now is the time to begin making changes in the classroom. Students already are coming to school with this knowledge, and now teachers need to catch up. Educators need to look to the tools that are available and work with their technology personnel to set a path for where and what they want to do to ensure digital citizenship in their schools. It is true that technology continues to change, but schools and districts need to begin setting a direction for how to use the tools of technology and provide the best education for students. The technology is only part of the equation; it needs to be coupled with solid, tested educational curriculum.

Ideally, the focus on areas such as digital citizenship in schools will begin the process of creating an organized plan for how to integrate these ideas into les- sons. As the impact of technology continues to grow, both inside schools and out, the skills needed to become effective digital citizens will be ever increas- ing. Educators can no longer wait for the next digital tool or federal mandate to be released. Digital citizenship education is needed today.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 244 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.4 Digital Citizenship for Educational Change

References Collier, A. (2009). A definition of digital literacy & citizenship. NetFamily News, September 15.

Available at: http://www.netfamilynews.org/2009/09/definition-of-digital -literacy.html

Common Sense Media. (2010). Digital citizenship. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media. Available at: http://www.commonsensemedia.org/educators/curriculum/k-5

International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National education standards. Washington, DC: ISTE. Available at: www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-teachers.aspx

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards. Washington, DC: ISTE. Available at: www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-teachers.aspx

Kiker, R. 2011. 5 strategies for 1 to 1 classroom management. 1 to 1 Schools website, March 18 post. Available at: http://1to1schools.net/2011/03/5-strategies-for-1-to-1-class room-management/

Online Safety and Technology Working Group. 2010. Youth safety on a living Internet. Wash- ington, DC. OSTWG. Available at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/reports/2010/ OSTWG_Final_Report_060410.pdf

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. 2012. Website home page. Washington, DC: P21. Available at: www.p21.org

Ribble, M. 2009. Raising a digital child. Eugene, OR: HomePage Books/International Society for Technology in Education.

Ribble, M., and G. Bailey. 2007. Digital citizenship in schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

Rideout, V., U. G. Foehr, and D. F. Roberts. 2010. Generation M2: Media in the fives of 8- to 18-year-olds. Menlo Park, CA: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Source: Ribble, M. (2012). Digital citizenship for educational changes. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48(4), 148–151. Routledge Informa Ltd.

Summary Ribble’s article defines digital citizenship in several ways, using the language from ISTE, NETS, and his own book, Digital Citizenship in Schools. He then names nine general elements that constitute digital citizenship for most in these domains.

Ribble notes that Congress continues to examine skills needed more generally for students in the 21st century, and technology skills remain central to that dialogue. Because students need digital citizenship skills, teachers obviously do too. The author writes that the subject is over- whelming to many educators; thus there is a need to break the topic down into essential ele- ments, which he briefly reviews in this excerpt. The nine elements are relevant at the school, district, and classroom level, suggesting the need for an organized plan to address them at both the macro- and microlevel.

The attention to digital citizenship underscores the responsibility of educators to allow access for all in the 21st century world. Ribble concludes by noting that educators cannot or perhaps should not wait for a mandate; these skills need to be integrated now.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. What are the challenges for integrating the elements of digital citizenship in your particu-

lar state or local area?

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 245 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.5 Teacherpreneur Spotlight: Adam Bellow

2. Design a 5-minute proposal for a school board or board of trustees outlining an action plan for a professional learning community process devoted to the elements of digital citizenship. What would be the incentives for membership? What would the benefits be for the board to approve such an action plan? How would the board know that the plan was successful?

3. How could students play an active role in designing integrative curriculum for the 21st century in which the digital citizenship elements were evident?

4. Develop, with colleagues, a best practice bullet list that demonstrates how digital citizenship contributes to a 21st-century curriculum in a particular content area.

5.5 Teacherpreneur Spotlight: Adam Bellow, by Jessie Arora

Introduction Adam Bellow is a former teacher and the founder of eduClipper, a website that has become a source of material and ideas for innovative teachers around the world. He designed the site originally as a place where teachers could share their innovative ideas and cull ideas from oth- ers teaching in the online environment. Such sites are necessary as teachers develop pedago- gies that are particularly tailored to digital tools. Many technology sites offer links, tools, apps, and lessons for teachers, but few provide the kind of “visual curation” or the visual representa- tion and dissemination of work that eduClipper provides. Bellow deems this public exhibition of inherently visual work essential to the most imaginative and innovative teaching and learning.

He also argues that it is not enough to make and produce; it is also important to share imme- diately and as widely as possible. Teachers who are also entrepreneurs embrace innovation and consider themselves innovators in their field. They learn more about their teaching as they showcase tools and approaches to using those tools with students. Learning how to actually doc- ument and visually represent teaching and learning is also a crucial aspect of evidence-based practice, which is more and more demanding in contemporary schools. Supporting these sites in which teachers share, view, critique, and contribute visual representations of their work is an innovative and essential part of professional development in the digital environment. This is part of Bellow’s vision for the dynamic curriculum in the 21st century.

Bellow affirms the importance of community and of envisioning learning that is not bound by the traditional discipline of education, but rather taps expertise that can help educators focus on a problem and address it, not just for teachers and students in classrooms, but for a larger net- work of participants. He reminds potential teacherpreneurs that it is crucial to embrace failure, see mistakes, and then move ahead quickly. Bellow exemplifies an emerging role for teacher– entrepreneurs who break new ground without waiting for new standards, new mandates, or new policies.

The term teacherpreneur provides a compelling opportunity for discussion about the rela- tionship between the roles of teacher and entrepreneur, not just for Bellow, but for other 21st- century educators.

The following interview with Bellow provides some biographical information and culminates in his current role as speaker, advocate, and educational technologist.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 246 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.5 Teacherpreneur Spotlight: Adam Bellow

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from Arora, J. (2013, April 9). Teacherpreneur spotlight: Adam Bel- low, former teacher, eduClipper founder [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge .com/n/2013-04-09-teacherpreneur-spotlight-adam-bellow-former-teacher-current-founder

Adam Bellow decided early on in life that he wasn’t going to be a teacher, even though both his parents were respected educators. As a self-proclaimed ‘nerd,’ Adam started programming BASIC when he was 7 years old on an Apple IIe.

But life plans aren’t set in stone. After completing film school with a minor in sociology in 2003 he was an assistant teacher at The Churchill School (a school in Manhattan for students with language-based learning disabilities). In 2005, Adam took over teaching a class, “Technology in the Special Ed Class- room,” to 22 eager graduate students at Hunter College. Over the next couple of years, he started to piece together a “terrible catalogue of sites using iWeb,” in his words, and in 2007 the first version of eduTeacher was born. “I thought of it simply as a place to organize resources for my class,” Bellow remembers, “and then when I eventually saw hits coming in from Australia and China I realized was meeting a need for a larger community.” His entrepreneurial spirit began to blossom.

Evolution of eduClipper

The countless positive testimonials motivated Bellow to continue eduTecher as a side project while he worked full time with a series of teaching jobs, technology training positions, and as Director of Technology for the College Board Schools. In 2009 Bellow launched one of the first edtech iPhone apps, eduTecher Backpack, and the momentum continued. “I was curating the web for educators and it was cool to see the community organically grow.”

In 2011 he added a custom social network component and began spending more and more time building in new features. “I thought about what it would mean to work on this full time. I put out a survey to my edtech friends to get their input on what aspects of eduTecher I should rebuild and possibly even build a business around.”

The feedback was overwhelming and he learned that what educators valued most was the simple, visual curation element that eduTecher had offered. Around this time, Pinterest was gaining popularity, which led him to think about how he could optimize the “clipboard” experience specifically for educators.

Bellow built initial mockups for the rechristened eduClipper in Keynote and in early 2012 outsourced the project to developers in India through Elance. He convinced his wife to let them put some money into this project, and worked night owl hours to test out his idea. “It was rough. . . . On a typical day, I’d wake up around 3 a.m. to work on my startup until 5 a.m., before I left for a full day of work. Then once I’d tucked the kids in at night I’d jump back online. I was sleeping around 3 hours a night and it was not sustainable.”

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 247 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.5 Teacherpreneur Spotlight: Adam Bellow

However, all that hustling paid off by June 2012. He had hoped that the first iteration of the site, intended to be a proof of concept, would attract 200 users. Instead, he got 20,000 a month. He realized he was onto something and decided to pursue the project full time.

He was blown away. “The number of accounts created and positive buzz around the potential was a clear indication that I had to explore the possibili- ties. I made the transition from educator to entrepreneur. However I had no knowledge of startups beyond watching The Social Network and religiously reading TechCrunch and other related blogs.” Connecting with the growing ed tech community was a significant driver in his success and after a seren- dipitous encounter with Jeff O’Hara, co-founder of Edmodo, during a trip to Chicago, Bellow was more motivated than ever to build his own product and company. Bellow is currently gearing up for a major re-launch of eduClipper, slated for June 2013, and expand his user base beyond the 25,000 that he cur- rently supports. At last count, there were 16,000 on the waitlist.

* * *

Lessons Learned

Consistent with the Valley’s spirit to embrace failure, Bellow is quick to admit that he made a ton of mistakes along the way. “The trick is to learn quickly and keep going.”

In thinking back on what helped eduClipper come to life, Bellow offers these few bits of advice:

• Focus on real pain points. “Don’t just set out to build something cool. If I set out to build Pinterest for educators that would suck. Start with a real problem and understand that pain point that you’re trying to resolve.”

• Community is at the core of everything. “Even before there was a real product, I focused on talking to people and being accessible. Growing my network in the startup space, especially around ed tech, has been invaluable especially fumbling through our failures.”

• Education is about people. “Our core values, as you can see from the sign on our door, is that teachers and students come first. If we started from the perspective of trying to make a ton of money it would never work.”

Source: Teacherpreneur Spotlight: Adam Bellow, Former Teacher, eduClipper Founder, by Jessie Arora, for EdSurge. Copyright © 2013 Jessie Arora; reprint courtesy of EdSurge (April 9, 2013). Image © eduClipper and used by permission of Adam Bellow. https://www.edsurge.com/n/2013-04-09-teacherpreneur-spotlight-adam-bellow-former-teacher-current-founder

Summary Adam Bellow discusses his own biography, from his classroom teaching and working with spe- cial needs children to his prominence as an educational technologist and founder of the web- site eduClipper, a resource for teachers around the world. The article focuses on three pieces of

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 248 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.6 Curriculum Data Mapping: 21st Century Education

advice for teachers, entrepreneurs, or, as this article calls Bellow, “teacherpreneurs”: (a) find the problem to be solved, (b) seek out community, and (c) start with people, not money.

Bellow argues that creative thinking is never static, but rather responds to and works with trends, changes, and responses in order to improve, which is why teachers need websites such as eduClipper in which they can see what other teachers are doing. Bellow notes that much of inno- vation is about trial and error; repeated failures serve to achieve success. EduClipper is a model of “visual curation,” specifically for educators, meaning that it is an explicit demonstration of the power of sharing practice, innovation, and approaches to enhance teaching and learning beyond an individual classroom.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. What are some other examples of teacherpreneurship that are accessible through web-

based networks? 2. How could local, global, and online communities foster more teacherpreneurship, as Bellow

describes it, and support teacher creativity explicitly? 3. How does “visual curation,” that is, the visual representation and dissemination of work,

shape and reshape curriculum for the 21st century? 4. Some have argued that there are already so many tools, applications, and approaches avail-

able for teachers on the Internet that it is difficult to ascertain what is effective and high quality and what is not. How can individual teachers and communities of teachers weigh the effectiveness of what is available on the Internet in order to determine how it might affect student learning?

5.6 Curriculum Data Mapping: 21st Century Education, by Heidi Hayes Jacobs

Introduction Heidi Hayes Jacobs is a veteran educator and professional designer. She is most well-known for her work in curriculum integration and curriculum mapping.

One of the core concepts for curriculum in the 21st century underscores the importance of both integration and mapping as processes for revisioning and rethinking curriculum that is dynamic and responsive to diverse learners. Jacobs’ website is www.Curriculum21.com; the title itself demonstrates her commitment to curriculum for a new age. This excerpt offers Jacobs’ advice for leading 21st century technology-integrated educational practices.

The author recounts specific components necessary in schools if technology is to play a central role. She notes the importance of mapping curriculum for a school with obvious and explicit technology applications. She emphasizes the need for flexibility, ongoing professional develop- ment, and intensive collaboration among teacher colleagues.

For Jacobs, 21st century education extends learning and teaching beyond school walls and incor- porates curriculum that is both content-area specific and integrative. She relates the effective

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 249 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.6 Curriculum Data Mapping: 21st Century Education

use of teaching strategies with skill-based, problem- and project-based learning approaches. Finally, she supports common assessments that encourage a demonstration of skills as well as higher order thinking. In this Wikispace, Jacobs provides a succinct and thoughtful, though per- haps ambitious and daunting, overview of the future for curriculum and instructional planners.

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from H. H. Jacobs’ Curriculum Data Mapping [Website]. Retrieved from http://curriculummaps.wikispaces.com/Heidi+Hays+Jacobs

• Create time during the school day for teachers to collaborate around 21st century curriculum and instruction. Partner reluctant teach- ers with trailblazers. Make technology integration a priority in the professional development budget.

• Help teachers make the connections between best-practice teaching (including project- and problem-based learning) and the potential for web tools and other digital technologies to magnify the effects of teaching strategies that emphasis 21st century skills and “learning by doing.”

• Develop strategies, based on district and school size, that ensure every teacher has engaged in a deep conversation about the need to prepare students for life and work in the 21st century.

• Ask each teacher to complete at least one highly engaging technology-infused project with his or her students during a speci- fied time period.

• Sponsor a substantive day-long technology conference for teachers at least once a year. Include a blend of thoughtful conversation about the rationale behind 21st century learning, presentations by real teachers of successful 21st century projects, and opportunities for hands-on experimentation with at least one collaborative web tool (blog, wiki, social network, podcast, etc.). Build a follow-up plan that helps ensure teachers will go back to their own classrooms and try some of what they’ve learned.

• Kids also must learn to think across disciplines, since that’s where most new breakthroughs are made. It’s interdisciplinary combina- tions—design and technology, mathematics and art—”that produce YouTube and Google,” says Thomas Friedman, the best-selling author of The World Is Flat.

• Without mastering the fundamental building blocks of math, science or history, complex concepts are impossible.

• Teachers need not fear that they will be made obsolete. They will, however, feel increasing pressure to bring their methods—along with the curriculum—into line with the way the modern world works. That means putting a greater emphasis on teaching kids to collaborate and solve problems in small groups and apply what they’ve learned in the real world. Besides, research shows that kids learn better that way than with the old chalk-and-talk approach.

• Teach 21st century skills discretely in the context of core subjects and 21st century interdisciplinary themes.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 250 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.6 Curriculum Data Mapping: 21st Century Education

• Focus on providing opportunities for applying 21st century skills across content areas and for a competency-based approach to learning.

• Enable innovative learning methods that integrate the use of sup- portive technologies, inquiry- and problem-based approaches and higher order thinking skills.

• Encourage the integration of community resources beyond school walls.

• How do we do this when so many of our colleagues are so resistant to change? Is it fair to our students to have one teacher that allows natural and authentic use of technology in their classroom and 7 others that do not? How do we implement this change when we are so entrenched in our system of standards and standardized assess- ments. It’s just so much easier to keep doing things the way we’ve always done them.

For technology integration to be a success:

• A clearly articulated, documented mandate for teacher expectations. • Understanding what IT integration is (and isn’t) and how the Facilita-

tor can be utilized to enhance the teaching and learning experience. • Ability to flexibly utilize technology tools and infrastructure to meet

the needs of global 21st century teaching strategies. • Transparent curriculum infrastructure (wiki)—clear, easy to access

documentation for the entire school curriculum. • Clearly articulated Year at a Glance maps from teachers and the estab-

lishment of static units, building on experiences from past years. • Understanding that collaboratively planned units with authentic

learning experiences that embed the backward design process result in higher achievement of the Standards & Benchmarks.

• Flexibility with the classroom dynamic and teaching is an essential component of 21st century teaching and learning.

• Creating, documenting and sharing common assessment practices. • Sharing successes with technology, both internally and through

external visionaries on site • Common planning time with IT Facilitator—grade level teams

(framework requires grade level planning time) • Classroom technology support • Revision of curriculum map format to embed IT integration. • Equitable access to technology resources. • Professional Development to increase teacher comfort level with

technology • Purchase of peripherals and software to enhance the teaching and

learning experience

Source: Hayes-Jacobs, H. (2008). Curriculum data mapping. Permission granted by Curriculum Designers, Inc. www.curriculum21.com

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 251 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.7 Standardized Curriculum and Loss of Creativity

Summary Heidi Hayes Jacobs proposes a succinct approach to planning for curriculum and instruction in the 21st century that integrates technology into planning, professional development, teach- ing, and assessment. In doing so, she promotes key principles of curriculum for the modern age, including the need for students to have experiences that cross disciplines as well as deep-skill and problem-solving activities that enhance core-knowledge disciplines specifically. Her approach is both student and teacher focused, demonstrating her awareness that attending to the skills and capacities of teachers will inevitably enhance the abilities of students to become independent learners.

Jacobs maintains that technology integration, as well as standards and benchmarks for student academic achievement, must be mandated and not optional. This does not mean that the design of curriculum for the 21st century will be standardized. On the contrary, in order to respond to global and student-specific needs and demands, the process in this century’s educational environments must be flexible, adaptive, and collaborative. She affirms the basics of backward design to plan learning experiences with the end goals in mind. Finally, the author affirms the importance of documentation, from mapping the design of the curriculum content and sequence to multiple levels of assessments that reflect and also transcend disciplinary boundaries.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. Propose a set of assessments for a specific concept or question that both addresses one or

more specific disciplines and also encourages students to think across those disciplines. What would the visual organizer or map look like to demonstrate the assessment activities and the standards that either one is intended to reflect?

2. What is new and original about Jacobs’ proposal for 21st century education, if anything? If nothing is new, what is perhaps a new approach to something that is familiar in education?

3. Name three objections to Jacobs’ notion that technology integration should be mandated. Respond to each objection with clarity, coherence, and specifics.

4. Jacobs writes: “Teachers need not feel they will become obsolete.” How would you speak to a teacher who has exactly that fear and is years from retirement?

5. The title of this Wikispace is “Curriculum Data Mapping.” What does Jacobs mean by curricu- lum data and why is it important?

5.7 Standardized Curriculum and Loss of Creativity, by Nel Noddings

Introduction Nel Noddings is a well-known scholar, philosopher, and researcher in the field of education. She is best known for her work on the ethics of caring and the necessity of fostering caring in schools and classrooms. In this excerpt, Noddings raises important issues with respect to national stan- dards and the potential negative impact on creativity.

Her cautions are important to include in a chapter focused on contemporary curriculum and instruction. Teachers and school leaders continue to work under pressure to make curriculum

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 252 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.7 Standardized Curriculum and Loss of Creativity

decisions to address accountability and standardized testing goals. In doing so, teaching for cre- ativity is easily lost. The first concept she proposes for guiding a dynamic approach in the 21st century suggests the critical role of creating and making in an environment that fosters problem solving and critical thinking. Some of the most innovative transformations in early 21st-century schooling involve democratic, collaborative practices that redefine what it means to work in a community of learners.

Noddings’ concerns are that national standards, that is, the CCSS, represent a risk of standard- ization of content that would ultimately result in less creativity, less problem solving, and less meaningful and critical thinking. In this excerpt, Noddings reminds readers that in order to fos- ter such creative thinking in students, teachers and school leaders need to have experience and repeated practice in creativity.

Readers might consider whether standards themselves represent a risk of standardization and, if not, how policy makers can use standards to meet the needs of all learners without losing teacher and student innovation and imagination in designing learning and learning environ- ments for the future. It is not a matter of abolishing standards, as Noddings says. Rather, it is a question of acknowledging the need for quality teachers who consistently interrogate content, process, and the standards themselves.

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from Noddings, N. (2013). Standardized curriculum and loss of cre- ativity. Theory Into Practice, 52, 210–215.

The current emphasis on national standards in core content areas works against three laudable goals of 21st-century education: cooperation, critical thinking, and creativity. I focus on creativity as a critical 21st-century skill and argue that the preoccupation with curriculum standards that are overly pre- scriptive undermines efforts at facilitating creative processes and outcomes. I propose that, rather than abandoning standards, policy makers must embrace their role and purposes in more creative ways. I also argue that to inspire creativity in curriculum, it is important that society foster creativity among teachers and their teaching practice. Teachers do not need to find a method or theory that they will follow slavishly. Rather, they need to analyze a multiplic- ity of ideas and put their creative powers to work in answering questions such as: Where could I use this? For what purpose? With whom? In what context? If people want to promote creativity in students, they should also encourage it in teachers.

* * *

Creativity

When he was asked what national standards should look like—if schools were forced to have them—Harold Howe, former commissioner of education, responded that “they should be as vague as possible” (quoted in Kohn, 1999, p. 48). He wanted schools and teachers to have the freedom to use professional judgment in responding to differences in abilities, interests, and needs. I add that the standards should be consonant with standards already established in

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 253 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.7 Standardized Curriculum and Loss of Creativity

the various disciplines. At the most general level, they should be vague enough to address the needs of all students. The current core standards in mathemat- ics do this quite nicely, e.g., “Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.” (One notes, however, that there is nothing new here; such statements appeared in math education articles back in the 1930s.) At the next level, one needs something like a textbook’s table of contents for each subject, and one already has that for each subject in the college preparatory curriculum. At the classroom level, teachers need room for the exercise of professional judg- ment. At this level, the idea of one set of standards for all is patently ridiculous and irresponsible. Probably the best idea is to reject national content stan- dards entirely and concentrate on opportunity-to-learn standards that will encourage states to provide adequate resources for vocational education and other forms of education designed to prepare students for the workplace or alternative forms of postsecondary education.

At the state, local, and classroom levels, there should be a facilitative vague- ness in the establishment of content. Needs vary. But also, the methods chosen by teachers may suggest different content to provide motivation, to broaden interest, to offer possible topics and projects. The best teachers, at least occa- sionally, offer material from which students create their own learning objec- tives. When content is narrowly specified, this mode of teaching is severely handicapped.

Being Creative With Standards

E. D. Hirsch is a strong advocate of content specificity. He expresses admira- tion for the specificity in a sixth-grade curriculum that requires students:

to identify the Hwang, Yangtze, and Hsi rivers; the Himalaya Moun- tains, the Tlin Ling Mountains, the Central Mountains of Japan, and Mount Fuji; the Gobi Desert, the East China Plains, and the Manchu- rian Plain; Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Yokohama; the Pacific Ocean, the Sea of Japan, and the Yellow Sea. (Hirsch, 1996, p. 31)

He then exclaims admiringly of the same curriculum: “There are similarly explicit geographical specifications for Southeast Asia, India, and Africa!” (p. 31).

What would motivate children to learn these things? The answer is probably a test. But when the test has been successfully completed, it would be logical to forget this material. Students need not only a purpose for learning but, even more, a reason for remembering, building, using. Further, in an era of high technology, information in the form of facts is easily obtained, but one needs a reason for seeking it.

The Harvard biologist, E. O. Wilson, recommended organizing instruction from the top down; that is, detailed instruction should be preceded by an intriguing outline of a big idea or problem—”show why it matters to them and will matter for a lifetime” (Wilson, 2006, p. 131). Wilson directed his advice

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 254 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.7 Standardized Curriculum and Loss of Creativity

to the teachers of undergraduate and graduate students, but I have used the approach successfully with high school students in mathematics. The teacher starts with a significant, challenging problem and invites the class to explore ways of tackling it. Usually, because they lack the knowledge and skills soon to be taught, they are unable to solve the problem, but the attempt gets their creative juices flowing, and the challenge motivates them to learn the neces- sary details.

When the unit is well underway, a creative teacher will “proceed laterally . . . into the consequences of the phenomenon to history, religion, ethics, and the creative arts” (Wilson, 2006, p. 131). Always? Of course not, but as often as the teacher’s resources and the students’ interests allow. How do teachers evalu- ate such lessons? They do not often use a test. They watch for engagement, for expressions of interest.

If some students show interest in one of these lateral excursions, the teacher must be prepared to offer further guidance. For many, these opportunities generate the great joy of teaching—the excitement of continued learning, of building a repertoire, of sharing elements of that repertoire with students. The material thus shared is, again, not subjected to formal testing. It is a free gift that some students will use creatively to further their own learning. All of this is put at risk when the curriculum is narrowly prescribed and teachers are held tightly to a specific learning objective for every lesson.

References Hirsch, E. D. (1996). The schools we need: And why we don’t have them. New York: Doubleday.

Kohn, A. (1999). The schools our children deserve. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Wilson, E. O. (2006). The creation: An appeal to save life on earth. New York: Norton. Source: Noddings, N. (2013). Standardized curriculum and loss of creativity. Theory into Practice, 52(3): 210–215. © 2013 Routledge.

Summary Nel Noddings raises issues related to cooperation, critical thinking, and creativity in view of the advent of national standards in the 21st century. She advocates for vague standards that afford teachers the opportunities to tailor learning for individual students’ interests and needs. Although this excerpt does not fully address assessment, Noddings objects to designing curricu- lar content that is overly specific and is assessed only on traditional tests. She suggests that the repertoire that is built when students and teachers engage creatively and collaboratively need not be formally tested in order to be absorbed and used by participants.

Noddings cites examples from biology and mathematics to suggest how curriculum might be organized sequentially and hierarchically, beginning with a major problem. She claims that the students in such a setting will realize the skills and facts that they need to know in order to solve the problem. Vaguely worded standards, rather than specific behavioral objectives, are best suited to this approach in which learners and teachers can explore and find the tools and approaches necessary to address the issue or problem.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 255 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas

Critical Thinking Questions 1. When asked about standards for curriculum, Harold Howe asserted that they should be “as

vague as possible.” What might happen when teachers “are tightly held to a specific learn- ing objective for every lesson”? Conversely, what happens when standards are not specified in specific lesson objectives but are open to interpretation by individual teachers, school systems, and content disciplines? How do you and your peers view this dichotomy?

2. Noddings addresses the effect of students’ learning very specific facts in order to do well on tests. She proposes that students typically soon forget such specificity but would not do so if they had a true and larger purpose for learning from the outset. Now frame the coun- terargument. Is there justification for learning facts and being tested on them, even if the ultimate purpose is not clear to the learner? Finally, is there a balance between these two positions?

3. Noddings is critical of unilateral testing in this excerpt. Can testing ever be creative? 4. Creativity is not a term that is used often to describe learning goals. Noddings contends that

a creative teacher watches for interest and engagement and then seeks to integrate content with other disciplines accordingly. This is of course just one aspect of creativity. What are some other indicators of creative teaching? How do creative teachers address standards to meet the needs of all students?

5. This excerpt proposes designing curriculum “from the top down,” beginning with a big idea or central program. Is such a design discipline specific or can such an approach be used regardless of the topic, theme, or subject area?

5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas, by Jay McTighe and Grant Wiggins

Introduction The 21st-century dynamic stance for curriculum and instruction is integrally related to the con- temporary commitment-to-learning standards in the United States. These standards have tra- ditionally been developed by each state board of education in the country. With the passing of the No Child Left Behind legislation in 2001, all 50 states adopted curriculum standards. These standards and the requisite state tests were unique to the individual states. The impetus had already been established to consider a national framework for student learning, in part due to the increasing focus on graduation rates across the country. A 2004 American Diploma Project report titled “Ready or Not: Creating a High School Diploma That Counts” (http://www.achieve .org/ReadyorNot) and the yearly reports on graduation rates from Education Week known as “Diploma Counts” (http://www.edweek.org/ew/dc/) both focused on the need for states to form further initiatives to address high school dropout rates and inform policy decisions across states. Some consistency in curriculum standards is the logical next step.

The CCSS emerged from the initiative of the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers. They have been adopted by more than 40 states and are intended to prepare high school graduates for college and careers regardless of where they have been educated. The CCSS is also intended to afford all students the opportunity to be successful, literate and competitive internationally. Because these national standards are

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 256 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas

central to what schools will address in the 21st century, it is important for educators to explore exactly how they function and inform curriculum and instruction.

Jay McTighe and Grant Wiggins are accomplished writers, speakers, and scholars in curriculum and assessment. They are best known for the approach to curriculum development known as backward design, which is referenced in this excerpt. The authors first assert that these stan- dards are in many ways new and distinctly different from previous sets of standards adopted in the United States, particularly because they are grounded in long-term outcomes rather than short-term objectives. They remind readers that standards are not the same thing as curriculum and further discuss the relationship between these two terms.

McTighe and Wiggins also affirm that these standards need careful deliberation or “unpacking” in order to be fully understood. Finally, the authors suggest that Common Core is best utilized in a backward mapping design for learning coupled with meaningful and authentic assessments practices.

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2012). From common core stan- dards to curriculum: Five big ideas. . 2012 Jay McTighe and Grant Wiggins. Reprinted with permission.

In this article, we explore five big ideas about the Common Core State Stan- dards and their translation into a curriculum. As with most big ideas, these Standards are in some ways obvious, but may also be counter-intuitive and prone to misunderstanding. We highlight potential misconceptions in work- ing with the Standards, and offer recommendations for designing a coherent curriculum and assessment system for realizing their promise.

Big Idea # 1—The Common Core Standards Have New Emphases and Require a Careful Reading

In our travels around the country since the Common Core Standards were released, we sometimes hear comments such as, “Oh, here we go again”; “Same old wine in a new bottle”; or “We already do all of this.” Such reactions are not surprising given the fact that we have been here before. A focus on Stan- dards is not new. However, it a misconception to assume that these Standards merely require minor tweaks to our curriculum and instructional practices. In fact, the authors of the Mathematics Standards anticipated this reaction and caution against it: “These Standards are not intended to be new names for old ways of doing business” (p 5). Merely trying to retrofit the Standards to typi- cal teaching and testing practices will undermine the effort.

* * *

The Common Core Standards have been developed with long-term outcomes in mind (e.g., College and Career Anchor Standards in English Language Arts), and their components are intended to work together (e.g., Content and Prac- tice Standards in mathematics). It is imperative that educators understand

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 257 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas

the intent and structure of the Standards in order to work with them most effectively. Accordingly, we recommend that schools set the expectation and schedule the time for staff to read and discuss the Standards, beginning with the “front matter,” not the grade-level Standards. We also recommend that staff reading and discussion be guided by an essential question: What are the new distinctions in these Standards and what do they mean for our practice? Since the Standards are complex texts and demand a “close” reading, we rec- ommend that staff carefully examine the table of contents and the organiza- tional structure; the headers (e.g., Design Considerations; What is Not Cov- ered, etc.), the components (e.g., Anchor Standards and Foundational Skills for ELA; Standards for Mathematical Practice), and the Appendices (ELA).

* * *

We cannot overemphasize the value of taking the time to collaboratively examine the Standards in this way. Failure to understand the Standards and adjust practices accordingly will likely result in “same old, same old” teaching with only superficial connections to the grade level Standards. In that case, their promise to enhance student performance will not be realized.

Big Idea # 2—Standards Are Not Curriculum

A Standard is an outcome, not a claim about how to achieve an outcome (i.e. a curriculum). Thus, the Introduction to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for Mathematics states: “These Standards do not dictate curriculum or teaching methods” (p 5). A similar reminder is found in the ELA Standards:

The Standards define what all students are expected to know and be able to do, not how teachers should teach. For instance, the use of play with young children is not specified by the Standards, but it is wel- come as a valuable activity in its own right and as a way to help stu- dents meet the expectations in this document. . . . The Standards must therefore be complemented by a well-developed, content-rich curric- ulum consistent with the expectations laid out in this document. (p 6)

Indeed, these statements highlight the intent of any set of Standards; i.e., they focus on outcomes, not curriculum or instruction. The implication is clear— educators must translate the Standards into an engaging and effective cur- riculum. So, what is the proper relationship between the Standards and cur- riculum? Consider another analogy with home building and renovation: The standards are like the building code. Architects and builders must attend to them but they are not the purpose of the design. The house to be built or reno- vated is designed to meet the needs of the client in a functional and pleasing manner—while also meeting the building code along the way.

Similarly, while curriculum and instruction must address established Stan- dards, we always want to keep the long-term educational ends in mind—the development of important capabilities in the learner as a result of engaging and effective work. In other words, a curriculum works with the Standards

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 258 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas

to frame optimal learning experiences. To shift analogies, the Standards are more like the ingredients in a recipe than the final meal; they are more like the rules of the game rather than a strategy for succeeding at the game.

* * *

Big Idea # 3—Standards Need to be “Unpacked”

As suggested above, the first step in translating the Common Core Standards into engaging and outcome-focused curriculum involves a careful reading of the documents in order to insure clarity about the end results and an under- standing of how the pieces fit together. This idea is not new. Over the years, we have suggested various ways of unpacking standards in conjunction with our work with the Understanding by Design framework-. (See, for example, Wiggins & McTighe 2011, 2012).

When working with the Common Core, we recommend that educators “unpack” them into four broad categories—1) Long term Transfer Goals, 2) Overarching Understandings, 3) Overarching Essential Questions, and 4) A set of recurring Cornerstone Tasks.

The first category, Transfer Goals, identifies the effective uses of content under- standing, knowledge, and skill that we seek in the long run; i.e., what we want students to be able to do when they confront new challenges—both in and outside of school. They reflect the ultimate goals, the reason we teach specific knowledge and skills. Unlike earlier generations of standards where trans- fer goals were implicit at best, the Common Core Standards have made them more overt. Indeed, the College and Career Anchor Standards in ELA specify long-term transfer goals, while the Mathematics Standards strongly suggest a goal such as, Students will be able to use the mathematics they know to solve “messy,” never-seen-before problems using effective mathematical reasoning.

The second and third unpacking categories—overarching Understandings and Essential Questions—are like two sides of a coin. The Understandings state what skilled performers will need in order to effectively transfer their learning to new situations, while explorations of the Essential Questions engage learners in making meaning and deepening their understandings.

* * *

The term overarching conveys the idea that these understandings and ques- tions are not limited to a single grade or topic. On the contrary, it is expected that they be addressed across the grades with application to varied topics, problems, texts and contexts.

The fourth category, Cornerstone Tasks, are curriculum-embedded tasks that are intended to engage students in applying their knowledge and skills in an authentic and relevant context. Like a cornerstone anchors a building, these tasks are meant to anchor the curriculum around the most important perfor- mances that we want learners to be able to do (on their own) with acquired

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 259 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas

content knowledge and skills. Since these tasks are set in realistic contexts, they offer the natural vehicle for integrating the so-called 21st century skills (e.g., creativity, technology use, teamwork) with subject area content knowl- edge and skills. They honor the intent of the Standards, within and across sub- ject areas, instead of emphasizing only the content measured more narrowly on external accountability tests. These rich tasks can be used as meaningful learning experiences as well as for formative and summative purposes.

Cornerstone tasks are designed to recur across the grades, progressing from simpler to more sophisticated; from those that are heavily scaffolded toward ones requiring autonomous performance. Accordingly, they enable both edu- cators and learners to track performance and document the fact that students are getting progressively better at using content knowledge and skills in wor- thy performances. Like the game in athletics or the play in theater, teachers teach toward these tasks without apology.

* * *

Big Idea # 4—A Coherent Curriculum Is Mapped Backwards From Desired Performances

The key to avoiding an overly-discrete and fragmented curriculum is to design backward from complex performances that require content. A return to the linguistic roots of “curriculum” reveals the wisdom in this outcome-focused view. The Latin meaning of the term is a “course to be run.” This original con- notation helpfully suggests that we should think of a curriculum as the path- way toward a destination.

* * *

Thus, the first question for curriculum writers is not: What will we teach and when should we teach it? Rather the initial question for curriculum develop- ment must be goal focused: Having learned key content, what will students be able to do with it?

Our long-standing contention applies unequivocally to the Common Core Standards as well as to other Standards: The ultimate aim of a curriculum is independent transfer; i.e., for students to be able to employ their learning, autonomously and thoughtfully, to varied complex situations, inside and out- side of school. Lacking the capacity to independently apply their learning, a student will be neither college nor workplace ready.

* * *

Big Idea #5—The Standards Come to Life Through the Assessments

A prevalent misconception about standards in general is that they simply specify learning goals to be achieved. A more complete and accurate concep- tion, in line with the colloquial meaning of the term, recognizes that standards also refer to the desired qualities of student work and the degree of rigor that must be assessed and achieved.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 260 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.8 From Common Core Standards to Curriculum: Five Big Ideas

Think about what we mean when we talk about “high standards” in athletics, music or business: we refer to the quality of outcomes, not the inputs. We ask if work is up to standard, not whether we “covered” such standards as teach- ers. In this sense, the standards are at their core a set of criteria for building and testing local assessment. They tell where we must look and what we must look for to determine if student work is up to standard. Such information is crucial to guide local assessments and insure that these are validly anchored against national standards.

* * *

This performance-based conception of Standards lies at the heart of what is needed to translate the Common Core into a robust curriculum and assess- ment system. The curriculum and related instruction must be designed back- ward from an analysis of standards-based assessments; i.e., worthy perfor- mance tasks anchored by rigorous rubrics and annotated work samples. We predict that the alternative—a curriculum mapped in a typical scope and sequence based on grade-level content specifications—will encourage a cur- riculum of disconnected “coverage” and make it more likely that people will simply retrofit the new language to the old way of doing business.

References National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Offi-

cers (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington DC: Author.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). Understanding by Design Guide to Advanced Concepts in Creating and Reviewing Units. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2012). Unpacking The Common Core Standards Using The UbD framework [DVD]. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Source: McTighe, J. & Wiggins, G. (2012). From common core standards to curriculum: Five big ideas. © 2012 Jay McTighe and Grant Wiggins. Reprinted with permission.

Summary McTighe and Wiggins offer five “big ideas” to keep in mind when exploring, implementing, and evaluating CCSS. First, the authors argue that these standards are different from previous stan- dards and require careful inspection. Then, they remind readers that standards are not the same as curriculum. Standards are outcomes, and they do not dictate curriculum. It is the responsibil- ity of educators to design the curriculum to address the standards.

These standards also need to be viewed in terms of a set of categories: (a) Long-term trans- fer goals, (b) overarching understandings, (c) overarching essential questions, and (d) a set of recurring cornerstone tasks. These categories clearly indicate that Common Core is focused on big ideas as well as cross-grade and ability-level growth and depth.

McTighe and Wiggins’ last two big ideas to deconstruct CCSS relate to assessment. Teachers can apply the authors’ backward design framework for making curriculums. They can also integrate assessment that encourages students to perform or exhibit what they know in order to address issues of quality and rigor in student work. Such performance assessments allow

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 261 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.9 A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching

multiple audiences to determine the degree to which students have really learned the material and are able to apply it.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. McTighe and Wiggins are adamant about the fact that CCSS is not like sets of standards

that have been previously introduced in education. As they further remind readers, “Merely trying to retrofit the Standards to typical teaching and testing practices will undermine the effort.” If we accept their premise, how can educational technology accept this chal- lenge and contribute to a different approach to teaching and testing to address these new standards?

2. List alternatives to typical scope and sequence curriculum plans that might respond to the categories of “long-term transfer goals” and “a set of recurring cornerstone tasks.” How do these two patterns in CCSS demand something different from scope and sequence? What would curriculum look like that embeds each of these experiences?

3. The authors assert: “The ultimate aim of a curriculum is independent transfer; i.e., for stu- dents to be able to employ their learning, autonomously and thoughtfully, to varied complex situations, inside and outside of school.” Outline a set of assessments that would display this kind of transfer using an online environment as part of the context for the exhibition. How do those assessments provide evidence of increasingly independent transfer?

4. What kind of professional development might be most beneficial as teachers and leaders grasp and then implement CCSS?

5.9 A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching, by Robert J. Marzano

Introduction This excerpt is a table designed by Robert J. Marzano. Marzano has received national and inter- national attention for his work in educational assessment, cognition, supervision, leadership, and, most recently, effective teaching strategies to inform teaching. The table is from his 2009 article in Kappan, titled “Setting the Record Straight on ‘High-Yield’ Strategies,” in which the author cautions educators to consider the complexity of rushing to conclusions about the direct correlations between the use of effective teaching strategies and student achievement. He also notes the dangers of focusing on a very narrow set of strategies and assuming that specific strat- egies should be used in every classroom every day.

With those comments in mind, review the table and analyze the categories as well as the subsec- tions of strategies that Marzano proposes. Begin to develop a theory of action for decisions on how and when as well as how often to use these strategies in a given content area, grade level, or school context. It is the intelligent, informed decision maker or teacher who can reasonably assume con- nections between the application of strategies and subsequent impact on student learning.

Excerpt The following is an excerpt from Marzano, R. J. (2009). Setting the record straight on “high- yield” strategies. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(1), 30–37.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 262 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.9 A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching

A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching

I. CONTENT

A. Lessons Involving New Content STRATEGY

1. Identifying critical information (e.g., the teacher provides cues as to which information is important) A&S

2. Organizing students to interact with new knowledge (e.g., the teacher organizes students into dyads or triads to discuss small chunks of content) CITW

3. Previewing new content (e.g., the teacher uses strategies such as: K-W-L, advance organizers, preview questions) CITW

4. Chunking content into “digestible bites” (e.g., the teacher presents content in small portions that are tailored to students’ level of under- standing) A&S

5. Group processing of new information (e.g., after each chunk of infor- mation, the teacher asks students to summarize and clarify what they have experienced) CITW

6. Elaborating on new information (e.g., the teacher asks questions that require students to make and defend inferences) CITW

7. Recording and representing knowledge (e.g., the teacher ask stu- dents to summarize, take notes, or use nonlinguistic representations) CITW

8. Reflecting on learning (e.g., the teacher asks students to reflect on what they understand or what they are still confused about) CAGTW

B. Lessons Involving Practicing and Deepening Content That Has Been Previously Addressed

STRATEGY 9. Reviewing content (e.g., the teacher briefly reviews related content

addressed previously) CITW 10. Organizing students to practice and deepen knowledge (e.g., the

teacher organizes students into groups designed to review informa- tion or practice skills) CITW

11. Practicing skills, strategies, and processes (the teacher uses massed and distributed practice) CITW

12. Examining similarities and differences (e.g., the teacher engages stu- dents in comparing, classifying, creating analogies and metaphors) CITW

13. Examining errors in reasoning (e.g., the teacher asks students to examine informal fallacies, propaganda, bias) A&S

14. Using homework (e.g., the teacher uses homework for independent practice or to elaborate on information) CITW

15. Revising knowledge (e.g., the teacher asks students to revise entries in notebooks to clarify and add to previous information) CITW

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 263 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.9 A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching

C. Lessons Involving Cognitively Complex Tasks (Generating and Test- ing Hypotheses)

STRATEGY 16. Organizing students for cognitively complex tasks (e.g., the teacher

organizes students into small groups to facilitate cognitively complex tasks) CITW

17. Engaging students in cognitively complex tasks (e.g., the teacher engages students in decision-making tasks, problem-solving tasks, experimental inquiry tasks, investigation tasks) CITW

18. Providing resources and guidance (e.g., the teacher makes resources available that are specific to cognitively complex tasks and helps students execute such tasks) A&S

II. ROUTINE ACTIVITIES

D. Communicating Learning Goals, Tracking Student Progress, and Celebrating Success

STRATEGY 19. Providing clear learning goals and scales to measure those goals (e.g.,

the teacher provides or reminds students about a specific learning goal) CAGTW

20. Tracking student progress (e.g., using formative assessment, the teacher helps students chart their individual and group progress on a learning goal) CAGTW

21. Celebrating student success (e.g., the teacher helps student acknowl- edge and celebrate current status on a learning goal as well as knowledge gain) CAGTW, CITW

E. Establishing and Maintaining Classroom Rules and Procedures STRATEGY

22. Establishing classroom routines (e.g., the teacher reminds students of a rule or procedure or establishes a new rule or procedure) CMTW

23. Organizing the physical layout of the classroom for learning (e.g., the teacher organizes materials, traffic patterns, and displays to enhance learning) CMTW

III. BEHAVIORS THAT ARE ENACTED ON THE SPOT AS SITUATIONS OCCUR

F. Engaging Students STRATEGY

24. Noticing and reacting when students are not engaged (e.g., the teacher scans the classroom to monitor students’ level of engage- ment) CMTW

25. Using academic games (e.g., when students are not engaged, the teacher uses adaptations of popular games to reengage them and focus their attention on academic content) A&S

26. Managing response rates during questioning (e.g., the teacher uses strategies to ensure that multiple students respond to questions such as: response cards, response chaining, voting technologies) A&S

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 264 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.9 A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching

27. Using physical movement (e.g., the teacher uses strategies that require students to move physically such as: vote with your feet, physical reenactments of content) CMTW

28. Maintaining a lively pace (e.g., the teacher slows and quickens the pace of instruction in such a way as to enhance engagement) CMTW

29. Demonstrating intensity and enthusiasm (e.g., the teacher uses verbal and nonverbal signals that he or she is enthusiastic about the content) CMTW

30. Using friendly controversy (e.g., the teacher uses techniques that require students to take and defend a position about content) A&S

31. Providing opportunities for students to talk about themselves (e.g., the teacher uses techniques that allow students to relate content to their personal lives and interests) CMTW

32. Presenting unusual information (e.g., the teacher provides or encour- ages the identification of intriguing information about the content) A&S

G. Recognizing Adherence and Lack of Adherence to Classroom Rules and Procedures

STRATEGY 33. Demonstrating “withitness” (e.g., the teacher is aware of variations

in student behavior that might indicate potential disruptions and attends to them immediately) CMTW

34. Applying consequences (e.g., the teacher applies consequences to lack of adherence to rules and procedures consistently and fairly) CMTW

35. Acknowledging adherence to rules and procedures (e.g., the teacher acknowledges adherence to rules and procedures consistently and fairly) CMTW

H. Maintaining Effective Relationships with Students STRATEGY

36. Understanding students’ interests and backgrounds (e.g., the teacher seeks out knowledge about students and uses that knowledge to engage in informal, friendly discussions with students) CMTW

37. Using behaviors that indicate affection for students (e.g., the teacher uses humor and friendly banter appropriately with students) CMTW

38. Displaying objectivity and control (e.g., the teacher behaves in ways that indicate he or she does not take infractions personally) CMTW

I. Communicating High Expectations STRATEGY

39. Demonstrating value and respect for low-expectancy students (e.g., the teacher demonstrates the same positive affective tone with low- expectancy students as with high-expectancy students) A&S

40. Asking questions of low-expectancy students (e.g., the teacher asks questions of low-expectancy students with the same frequency and level of difficulty as with high-expectancy students) A&S

41. Probing incorrect answers with low-expectancy students (e.g., the teacher inquires into incorrect answers with low-expectancy stu- dents with the same depth and rigor as with high-expectancy stu- dents) A&S

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 265 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Section 5.9 A Comprehensive List of Strategies that Relate to Effective Teaching

Source: Marzano, R. J. (2009). A comprehensive list of strategies that relate to effective teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(1), 30–37. © Robert J. Marzano (2009). Used by permission.

Summary Marzano’s list suggests three general categories of strategies: (a) content, (b) routine activities, and (c) behaviors that are enacted on the spot. Within those categories, specific strategies are arranged in subsections. For example, the content category proposes strategies for introducing new content, lessons that deepen content, and lessons that involve “cognitively complex tasks,” such as problem solving and inquiry investigations. Such strategies are separated in Marzano’s typology from those that focus on student engagement, classroom management, and maintain- ing relationships. Those strategies are outlined in the other two categories in the table: routine activities, and behaviors that are enacted on the spot.

Marzano’s suggestion is that, per the title of the table, the intentional use of these strategies can relate to effective teaching that may contribute to student achievement. Marzano’s strategies have been used by policy leaders, web-based and traditional textbook publishers, and district curriculum directors to inform professional development as well as teacher evaluation systems in schools and districts. The practical and authentic use of these strategies is of concern not only to educators and policy makers, but also to Marzano himself.

Critical Thinking Questions 1. There are only two of 41 specific strategies in Marzano’s table related to “establishing and

maintaining classroom rules and procedures.” One pertains to establishing classroom rou- tines and one addresses the organization of the physical classroom for face-to-face group learning. Why might that be intentional and why might that be an important observation?

2. Note that “content strategies” and “engaging students strategies” are in different categories in Marzano’s table. Why might that be important for educators to understand? How might this separation be useful for beginning teachers as they learn to teach? How might the categorization of strategies in general be used in professional development for experienced teachers?

3. There is much discussion among teachers about the role of high expectations in student learning. Marzano proposes three strategies to communicate high expectations to students. He suggests that teachers obviously demonstrate value and respect for low-expectancy students and that they ask the same questions with the same frequency and level of diffi- culty for all students. Marzano suggests that teachers then probe and inquire into incorrect answers for all students. What do these strategies look like in an online environment? Is the distinction between “high expectancy” and “low expectancy” students different online? Is there a way to think about frequency, difficulty, and probing using questioning that is differ- ent online than in face-to-face classrooms?

4. Design a long-term plan for collaborative and interactive professional development for a group of educators focused on some aspect of the table.

5. What are your views about the relationship between the use of these strategies and student achievement? Ask peers and colleagues about their views. How might a school or learning environment offer a clear statement for stakeholders about the relationship between these two important factors in teaching and learning?

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 266 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Summary and Resources

Summary and Resources

Chapter Summary There are four themes in this chapter:

• Curriculum must engage students in creativity and making real-world products; such processes constitute purposeful work that involves learners in problem-based learning.

• Authentic audience and student voice in local and global communities of practice are crucial to teaching and learning in the modern world. Such an approach to curriculum and instruction requires careful attention to digital-citizenship learning among teach- ers and students.

• Deliberate practice and teachers’ intentional use of effective teaching strategies con- tribute to deep and flexible understanding of content.

• Curriculum content is integrative and discipline specific. As such, the process of back- ward curriculum design incorporates mapping standards in specific contexts for diverse learners.

In addition, the chapter suggests the following:

• New roles are emerging for teachers as collaborators, entrepreneurs, and problem solvers.

• Students and teachers need audiences for their work in order to learn from each other. • Digital citizenship professional development is essential as teachers often find them-

selves less knowledgeable than their students in technological spaces. • Standards need not be antithetical to creativity and engaging students in purposeful

work. But standards will thwart such ways of teaching and learning if educators do not consciously cultivate problem-based approaches that allow multiple interpretations of standards and varied ways of representing learning.

• The educational technologists are teaching teachers and administrators by showcas- ing creative and innovative examples of projects and approaches in curriculum and instruction.

• The “classroom” cannot be bound by four walls.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 267 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Summary and Resources

Tying It All Together The excerpts for this chapter could be viewed in three distinct, though clearly connected, catego- ries. Mike Ribble and Adam Bellow speak specifically to the role for digital citizenship and active engagement among educators in technology integration for 21st-century teaching. They provide a new perspective on how teachers and students learn through sharing of ideas and digital edu- cational content in order to promote literacy skills for an online environment.

The authors of three articles offer specific strategies for active engagement and real-world cur- riculum products, whether in digital or face-to-face learning environments. Jane McGonigal describes gaming as a means to creative expression; November advocates for autonomous, pur- poseful student work products with wide audiences; Jane Boss and Suzie Krauss suggest that project-based learning is a means to integrate technology, meaningful learning, and solutions that are relevant in the real world.

Then there are the veteran educational leaders who have been engaged in teacher development, curriculum design discussions, and the production of educational materials for decades. Heidi Hayes Jacobs, Nel Noddings, Jay McTighe and Grant Wiggins, and Robert Marzano are probably the most well-known authors in this chapter among educators and scholars across the spec- trum of grade levels, content fields, and geographic areas. In these selected excerpts, they reveal their consistent ability to make connections with current trends, issues, and topics of concern in school improvement. They react and respond with clear guidelines for practice, acknowledging trends but also calling for integrative, high-quality teaching that responds to those trends and policy directives with intelligence and creativity.

This chapter focused on curricular trends, with an emphasis on roles for technology and creative thinking, and provided a lens through which chapters on leadership, pedagogy, assessment, and content knowledge can be viewed. Curriculum represents the “what” of school learning, but cur- riculum cannot be viewed in a vacuum. The “what” of school learning depends on and is related to “how” (pedagogy) content is taught and “how well” (assessment) it is taught. Curriculum emerges from the disciplines of knowledge and how teachers and school leaders organize and manage that content; curriculum is the foundation for meaningful professional development and action research to improve teaching and learning. Finally, curriculum discussions must be inte- grated with questions about whose knowledge is of value and how curriculum standards meet— and do not meet—the needs of students with diverse backgrounds and contexts for learning.

End of Chapter Critical Thinking Questions

1. Which concepts in this chapter do you feel would be most useful as part of your own individual professional development plan for the next year?

2. How would you design a needs assessment to discern where creativity is most evident in the curriculum that you currently work with? How would you target opportunities to enhance or increase creativity while attending to standards for all students?

3. The dynamic curriculum and instruction model for the 21st century proposed in this chapter seems to blur the lines between traditional teacher and student roles. Com- ment on this in terms of the positive and negative implications.

4. Some teachers currently in the profession are not well versed in technology integra- tion as a function of engaging curriculum for students. Propose a plan for addressing this lack of proficiency and competencies in digital citizenship among some educators. What should be done?

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 268 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Summary and Resources

Further Reading Berrett, D. (2013). Creativity: A cure for the common curriculum. Education Digest, 79(2),

13–20. Duvall, S., Jaaskelainen, K., & Pasque, P. (2012). Essential Google: Curriculum integration and

e–portfolio in assessment. Library Media Connection, 30(6), 52–54. Ghamrawi, N., & Shal, T. (2012). Let us teach them the way they learn: A vision on using

social networking and mobiles in teaching and learning. Educational Research (2141- 5161), 3(12), 921–926.

Grant, M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Students’ perspectives with project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 37–69.

Marzano, R. J. (2010). What teachers gain from deliberate practice. Educational Leadership, 68(4), 82–85.

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York: Penguin.

McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2012). Misconceptions about common core. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(4), 6.

Noddings, N. (2012). The language of care ethics. Knowledge Quest, 40(5), 52–56. November, A. C. (2010). Empowering students with technology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage. November, A. C. (2012). Who owns the learning? Preparing students for success in the digital

age. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. Ribble, M., & Bailey, G. (2007). Digital citizenship in schools. Washington, DC: International

Society for Technology in Education. Silseth, K. (2012). The multivoicedness of game play: Exploring the unfolding of a student’s

learning trajectory in a gaming context at school. International Journal of Computer- Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 63–84.

Tambouris, E., Panopoulou, E., Tarabanis, K., Ryberg, T., Buus, L., Peristeras, V., . . . Porwol, L. (2012). Enabling problem based learning through Web 2.0 Technologies: PBL 2.0. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 15(4), 238–251.

Van Scoter, J., & Boss, S. (2002). Learners, language, and technology: Making connections that support literacy. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Veltri, N. F., Webb, H. W., Matveev, A. G., & Zapatero, E. G. (2011). Curriculum mapping as a tool for continuous improvement of IS curriculum. Journal of Information Systems Educa- tion, 22(1), 31–42.

Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 269 5/21/14 3:15 PM

Summary and Resources

Key Terms

authentic audiences Classroom work is informed and strengthened when students have observers, reactors, and responders— other than the teacher—in mind. Such participants in the learning process may be community leaders, parents, govern- ment officials, artists, historians, scientists, authors, mathematicians, peers, and the larger school community. These constituents become audiences for student learning when they are intentionally made part of cur- riculum tasks. They are authentic because they are real and knowledgeable about the topic and content represented in the student work.

backward curriculum design The process of curriculum development beginning with essential questions, followed by lesson- based assessments and ending with lessons and sequence of learning experiences.

creativity “The first step is imagination, the capacity that we all have to see something in the mind’s eye. Creativity is then using that imagination to solve problems—call it applied imagination. Then innovation is put- ting that creativity into practice as applied creativity” (Scanlon, 2006).

curriculum mapping A process whereby teachers and school leaders communicate and make decisions about grade-level, cross–grade-level, disciplinary, and cross- disciplinary curricula and instructional practices.

deliberate practice “Effortful activity designed to improve performance” (Erics- son, Krampe, and & Tesch-Romer, 1993, p. 363).

digital citizenship “The norms of appro- priate, responsible behavior with regard to technology use” (Ribble & Bailey, 2007, p. 10).

futurist Someone “who studies the future in order to help people understand, antici- pate, prepare for, and gain advantage from coming changes” (Association of Profes- sional Futurists, 2014).

problem- and project-based learning A process of curriculum development in which learners pursue their own questions or articulate real-world problems and engage in the exchange of ideas, answers, and solu- tions with teachers and peers as guides and facilitators.

teacherpreneur An educator who is also an entrepreneur and who has developed and implemented a new design for learning through technology.

bur81496_05_c05_225-270.indd 270 5/21/14 3:15 PM