To: Dr. Nicole Jund, From: Mike Yakubovsky Date: October 23, 2018 Re: Innovation Plan Proposal Dear Dr. Jund, For over a century, educational leaders have been advocating for change to happen in the classroom. As we move from the early to mid 21st-century the imperative to develop more problem-solving abilities in students has never been greater. The availability of information is never far away. The difficulty comes in evaluating, interpreting, and applying that information to new situations which may have never been presented before. |
|
There are a number of reasons that this change has not occurred. There is a great deal of institutional inertia behind the practices. “That’s the way we’ve done it” is a common phrase. Our district has been very successful with the way we have done things in the past. This makes it difficult to overcome that institutional inertia. Furthermore, people also have a fear the unknown. There is an amount of risk in any endeavor. There is risk that traditional methods won’t work. But it’s a risk that we know. This also causes people to stick with traditional educational methodology. Finally, there’s pressure from assessments and government reporting. Reports and traditional teaching methods fit together very nicely.
All of these reasons are very difficult to overcome. It takes work and dedication to bring these changes about. There’re a lot of examples of people who have done things differently in their classroom and achieved incredible results. Brian Apinall uses the Scratch programming language and Minecraft in his math classes. Larry Reif teaches ELA and Computer Science. He crosses lessons over continually. Additionally, I have had similar experiences in my classes where a struggle with an authentic problem leads to a deeper understanding that is still useful years later.
Through the 20th century, people such as John Dewey and Jean Piaget, laid the groundwork for the constructivist model of education. Seymour Papert and Mitchel Resnick continued that work and developed ways to use programming to develop authenticity in learning. Computational Thinking is a problem-solving method inspired by the developments of Papert, Resnick, and others. Computational Thinking is broken into four main components: Abstraction, Decomposition, Pattern Recognition, and Algorithm Design. This is the foundation that students need to be able to solve the problems they will face after graduation. A great deal of research has shown that computational thinking needs to be embedded into k-12 education to properly prepare students for the accelerating change and increasing complexity of the 21st century.
My proposal is to work with teachers to create lessons and activities within their existing curriculum that embed computational thinking. For example, an ELA teacher could use Sphero robots in a “Lord of the Flies” project. Instead of having the students act out and record a scene, they can “direct” Sphero to be the actors. The students will have to work through the challenge of programming Sphero to behave in the right way to accurately convey the meaning intended by the author. It won’t happen by accident. Teams will have to deconstruct all of the actions and motivations of each character. They will find patterns that can be copied from one character to another. Students will have to debate and work through several iterations to get it right. The teacher can add a new twist, such as having the students imagine how the scene would be changed if there was a girl on the island. Every action programmed has to be deliberate.
To help this program become sustaining, I am going to leverage resources I already have available. My students work on their communication skills by working with other classes throughout the district. I will coach them to be able to work with teachers to implement coding and technology related activities into existing lessons. The goal is not to just add technology but use the technology as a way to implement computational thinking in a calculated and direct manner. The students will be trained to assist the teacher in identifying the intended outcomes and methods for assessment. Then, they will help in implementing the new activity. Finally, my students will be documenting their work into a volume that will be published for other teachers to use so they can duplicate this process.
The goal is to create a framework and environment from the “top-down”. At the same time, I want to promote an enthusiasm and desire from the “bottom-up”. Computational Thinking is a necessary skill for all students in our district. Regardless of the field of employment, the challenges they will face will be new and complex. Building Computational Thinking into the curriculum will help us be deliberate in preparing them for the challenges ahead.
Sincerely,
Mike Yakubovsky
References
Glassman, M., & Whaley, K. (2000). Dynamic aims: The use of long-term projects in early childhood classrooms in light of dewey's educational philosophy. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 19.
McLeod, S. (2018, June 6). Jean Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development. Retrieved from SimplyPsychology: https://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html
Resnick, M. (2018). Retrieved from Mit Media Lab: https://www.media.mit.edu/people/mres/overview/
Papert, S. (1999, June 22). Retrieved from papert.org: http://papert.org
TeachThought Staff. (2016, January 23). The Pedagogy Of John Dewey: A Summary. Retrieved October 2018, from TeachThought: https://teachthought.com/learning/pedagogy-john-dewey-summary/
All of these reasons are very difficult to overcome. It takes work and dedication to bring these changes about. There’re a lot of examples of people who have done things differently in their classroom and achieved incredible results. Brian Apinall uses the Scratch programming language and Minecraft in his math classes. Larry Reif teaches ELA and Computer Science. He crosses lessons over continually. Additionally, I have had similar experiences in my classes where a struggle with an authentic problem leads to a deeper understanding that is still useful years later.
Through the 20th century, people such as John Dewey and Jean Piaget, laid the groundwork for the constructivist model of education. Seymour Papert and Mitchel Resnick continued that work and developed ways to use programming to develop authenticity in learning. Computational Thinking is a problem-solving method inspired by the developments of Papert, Resnick, and others. Computational Thinking is broken into four main components: Abstraction, Decomposition, Pattern Recognition, and Algorithm Design. This is the foundation that students need to be able to solve the problems they will face after graduation. A great deal of research has shown that computational thinking needs to be embedded into k-12 education to properly prepare students for the accelerating change and increasing complexity of the 21st century.
My proposal is to work with teachers to create lessons and activities within their existing curriculum that embed computational thinking. For example, an ELA teacher could use Sphero robots in a “Lord of the Flies” project. Instead of having the students act out and record a scene, they can “direct” Sphero to be the actors. The students will have to work through the challenge of programming Sphero to behave in the right way to accurately convey the meaning intended by the author. It won’t happen by accident. Teams will have to deconstruct all of the actions and motivations of each character. They will find patterns that can be copied from one character to another. Students will have to debate and work through several iterations to get it right. The teacher can add a new twist, such as having the students imagine how the scene would be changed if there was a girl on the island. Every action programmed has to be deliberate.
To help this program become sustaining, I am going to leverage resources I already have available. My students work on their communication skills by working with other classes throughout the district. I will coach them to be able to work with teachers to implement coding and technology related activities into existing lessons. The goal is not to just add technology but use the technology as a way to implement computational thinking in a calculated and direct manner. The students will be trained to assist the teacher in identifying the intended outcomes and methods for assessment. Then, they will help in implementing the new activity. Finally, my students will be documenting their work into a volume that will be published for other teachers to use so they can duplicate this process.
The goal is to create a framework and environment from the “top-down”. At the same time, I want to promote an enthusiasm and desire from the “bottom-up”. Computational Thinking is a necessary skill for all students in our district. Regardless of the field of employment, the challenges they will face will be new and complex. Building Computational Thinking into the curriculum will help us be deliberate in preparing them for the challenges ahead.
Sincerely,
Mike Yakubovsky
References
Glassman, M., & Whaley, K. (2000). Dynamic aims: The use of long-term projects in early childhood classrooms in light of dewey's educational philosophy. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 19.
McLeod, S. (2018, June 6). Jean Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development. Retrieved from SimplyPsychology: https://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html
Resnick, M. (2018). Retrieved from Mit Media Lab: https://www.media.mit.edu/people/mres/overview/
Papert, S. (1999, June 22). Retrieved from papert.org: http://papert.org
TeachThought Staff. (2016, January 23). The Pedagogy Of John Dewey: A Summary. Retrieved October 2018, from TeachThought: https://teachthought.com/learning/pedagogy-john-dewey-summary/