Oct 162016

This post is born out of a PhD class I am taking called “Models of Teaching.” It is a great class, but one of the requirements early in the semester was to write how I would use direct instruction in my classroom. I refused. I wrote a lengthy screed against DI. I attacked it, aggressively. What you have here is an edited, cleaned up, and less aggressive post born out of that assignment.


As a first year teacher, I was explicitly told by a principal to use direct instruction. He very carefully outlined what he expected any class to look like, and what the learners should be doing at every stage, every minute.

When that year was over, I left that school without a second thought. To deprofessionalize teaching to such a degree that someone could outline any class, any day, any lesson to the minute is reprehensible and borders on educational malpractice.

If you get the sense from this that I do not value direct instruction very highly; good.

I mean, really. Look at the way people think about education and specifically math ed. I think using comics as indicators is a great idea, because comics take a shared experience and pokes fun at it. Comics make us laugh through the pain, and there is a lot of pain in education.

Baldo, I cant believe school starts tomorrow

At the younger grades, we definitely see excitement for learning, but at some point, we beat that excitement out of kids. Why? This is a question I have asked repeatedly here, but I think DI has a lot to do with it. I mean, DI is a common way to teach math, as well as other subjects. Can we blame learners if they are bored, frustrated, and unexcited about classrooms that are taught through DI? And they are all 3.

math class is like a 40 foot long colon

Really? The punch line in this Baby Blues makes me cry. Literally. This is what the general public finds funny about math class?! But it isn’t just these comics. It goes on. And on.


The common theme of memorizing is so frustrating.


I am not advocating for “learn what you want” or unschooling, but certainly we can figure out ways to build in learner interests, right?


And DI just take us to the point repeatedly. “Oh, you weren’t paying attention while I was sharing what you were supposed to be learning? That is your problem, not mine.”

dennis-the-menace-back-to-the-salt-mines  dennis-the-menace-principal-not-warden

Yea, nothing more needs to be said here. Sigh. These were published in October. Of 2016. These are current. It makes it just that much more sad.


This Zits comic pretty much sums up the idea of Direct Instruction for me. It is clear that Jeremy (the teenager) has teachers who use DI pretty much the entire day. He is just consuming the knowledge of the teacher, puking it back for the test, and starting over each day.


And this focus on memorizing, and storing the teacher’s knowledge leaves learners doing what Paige Fox is doing here. Focus on the test, not learning. As long as the test comes out okay at the end, then all is good. Same issue Calvin had above.

But my objection to DI goes beyond the fact that it creates a horrible perception of classrooms. The philosophical underpinnings of direct instruction follow from Behaviorism and the work of B.F. Skinner.  Skinner, in his book “The Technology of Teaching” introduced wonderful machines that replaced teachers. In the behaviorist world, teaching is only necessary to introduce proper conditioning, and you do not need professionals to create those behaviors. Machines, called appropriately enough, “Teaching Machines” can replace teachers wholesale.

teaching machines by skinnerJust read the question, mark the response, check the response to the key, move a lever left if correct and right if wrong. Finish the lesson and repeat until they are all correct. This is the legitimate end result of behaviorism and the deprofessionalization of teaching. We see it in such sites as Con, er, Khan Academy, where the boring and mistake prone  lectures are used to give a false impression of learning. This kind of approach to teaching and learning is why at least one US Senator has suggested doing away with college professors and just have students watch Ken Burns videos to learn about the Civil War. Not joking. This is real. This is the direct benefactor of behaviorism.

In short, there is not enough alcohol to burn this chapter from my memory. [I leave this sentence in here from the assignment for a reason. Yes, I really did turn this sentence in, but also because it shows just how strongly I feel about this issue.]

These are harsh words. I freely admit that. I have very few, if any, kind things to say about direct instruction. I stopped teaching this way after my second year in the mathematics classroom. I would never go back, nor would I ever try to teach this way again.

It is painfully boring for the learners, and it is equally painful for the teacher. The fact it is completely ineffective to teach or learn higher order processes and skills makes it doubly not worth using.

Direct Instruction is the worst of all teaching methods, and continuing to use it just reinforces the boring nature of what learning can be. It doesn’t have to be that way! It really doesn’t.

When I write lessons, whether it was for high school or for the college classes I am teaching now, I start each lesson with these questions (replacing math with teaching now):

Am I:

–Assisting learners in creating THEIR own math understanding?


Forcing learners to curate and consume MY math understanding?

My goal is clear. I want every learner to move beyond my understanding quickly and efficiently. That can’t happen with DI. DI is a way to force learners to store my knowledge and understanding.

And, we need to figure out ways to stop asking learners to store our knowledge and instead celebrate their own. There are many constructivist teaching models. We need to use them. Find two or three that resonate with you and practice them. And then, celebrate the accomplishments of learning for more than 2 seconds.

Calvin is sad for a reason.


Oct 122016

I had the opportunity to read a preprint edition of Malke Rosenfeld’s new book, Math on the Move, and here are my thoughts.

First off, let me start off with what this book is not. As educators we have probably sat through a professional development where someone told us that in math class, we can appeal to the “kinesthetic learning style” by having the learners up and moving around the classroom. We can appeal to “kinesthetic learners” by having them move their arms, or by doing gallery walks. I have sat through several of these. [yes, I put that phrase in quotes on purpose. I do not believe in ‘learning styles’. Multiple Intelligences, yes, learning styles, no.]

Rosenfeld’s book is not this. No where near this. This book is not about “kinesthetic learning” this is about making connections in mathematics through motion, body, and dance for elementary school learners. It is an amazing concept to think about. I really appreciate that on page 2, she says, “not all of dance is mathematical and not all math is danceable.” That sets the tone for the entire book. Rosenfeld looks for the strengths in using movement, and using the body as a thinking tool. This is a powerful idea, and the first chapter of the book is about what doesn’t and does count as using the body as a thinking tool. I loved the deep thinking this chapter provoked, because it made really think about dance and movement with respect to math.

And, let me be honest. My knowledge of math through motion is very limited. My idea of dancing is more aligned with this guy than anything that someone else would consider “dancing.” Honestly, I wondered for a moment if someone had recorded me actually dancing when I saw this gif.

dancing-gif via

But, despite the fact I am both musically and rhythmically challenged, I have always thought there was opportunity to connect math and movement. I have never figured out how, but I have been intrigued by the idea. After reading the table on page 17 I realized why.

table of nouns and verbs about math movement

The verbs of math are aligned with the verbs of dancing. The nouns of math are also aligned in large part. Looking at the list, and knowing, intellectually, about the ideas of dance, it is easy to understand how strong the connection is. Through examples of learner work, QR codes showing video of learners moving, multiple lesson examples, pictures, role playing examples, and well developed explanations, Rosenfeld shows me how to implement dance in a very constructive way in the elementary classroom. By the end of chapter 3, I was willing to try it with elementary kids tomorrow. That takes a lot for me to say, because I am secondary through and through. Little kids scare me. But I am so excited by the opportunity I see after the first three chapters of lessons that I am willing to try them. They are so interesting!

I think the real power comes later in the book when the 6 stages are developed further.

  1. Understand
  2. Experiment
  3. Create
  4. Combine
  5. Transform
  6. Communicate

These stages allow learners to move from the understanding of a concept and goal to the creation of a multi-step dance pattern and ending with the discussion and communication of the idea through a presentation of the dance. The last half of the book has QR Codes on almost every single page with video link examples. The depth of knowledge these can provide is stunning.

All in all, the more I read and find the joy in mathematical dancing, the more opportunity I see to push this into the upper levels. There is so much more that can be done with this idea beyond the boring and basic. It might even make me a better dancer! Well, no. It isn’t a miracle book, just a really good math book. It is authentic movement, not the usual fake stuff we see.

I think it is time to bring real motion in to math class, get learners moving in purposeful, meaningful ways, and leverage that motion into strong mathematical knowledge.

If you want to read a chapter for yourself, check it out on Heinemann’s website.


Sep 092016

To my last post, “No more broccoli ice creamDavid Griswold challenged me with a very serious and thoughtful reply.

The phrase, “No more broccoli ice cream” came from this meme that I saved. I collect these memes, just because the provide interesting fodder for conversations about math in class.

textbook math is like broccoli ice cream

So who is Denise Gaskins? She is a home school parent who specializes in K-6 math (I am inferring this from her website and the books / content she talks about. I could be wrong about the grade levels.) She tweets and has a FaceBook page under the name “Lets Play Math.” It is clear she has a focus on making math fun, interesting, and engaging. At that age, my experience is that learners are very much into mathematics. I saw this bulletin board in a hallway last year.

2015-09-28 12.56.29

If you zoom in, you will see that almost every single one of those 4th graders said their favorite subject was math, or they enjoyed math, or they were good at math. 2 out of the 15 had no positive mention of math. A bulletin board next door to it had a similar proportion. When I saw this board, I wrote a post called “Where does the joy go?” This issue is one that I have been struggling with for a while. Why are young children excited about math, but junior or high school learners typically are not?

I believe it is because at some point, I and my fellow teachers stop thinking about math as joyful, and start thinking about it as “serious work.” We can’t have fun solving these equations, this is “serious business.” But that is true of all subjects in high school. It isn’t just math teachers, but English teachers, history teachers, and other teachers. We turn our subjects into these “serious business” topics that must be “mastered” and “assessed.” If you don’t pass the classes, then you can’t graduate, you can’t be successful in life without knowing “algebra.”

[yes, I used a lot of scare quotes in that paragraph because I do not want anyone to infer that there is an agreed upon meaning of those terms.]

Here is what David said in his questioning of my post:

I’m not sure I completely agree with this, or Lockhart for that matter. There are a lot of people who find joy and beauty in the curriculum, and there are lots of ways to encourage and celebrate that joyousness without throwing too much out. Will some people hate it? Sure. I didn’t like AP US History very much, though I liked my teacher. But I had friends who thrived there. And I’m okay with that.

Personally, I don’t think the ice cream metaphor is realistic. Math isn’t ice cream. Nothing is ice cream. No field or subject is as universally loved and delicious as ice cream, certainly nothing with any practical application. Math isn’t ice cream, it’s vegetables! So maybe “textbook math” is steamed broccoli and it’s up to us to add peas and roasted cauliflower and sweet potatoes (maybe even with some marshmallows on top) and even pickles, but the fact is some people don’t like ANY vegetables and some people like simple steamed broccoli the best and some people like ALL vegetables and, importantly, all of them are part of a well balanced diet. So our job is to be a math nutritionist.

The first paragraph I will not reply to, because it is his personal feelings and I don’t think there is anything there to discuss. It is real.

The second paragraph is the challenge. “No field or subject is as universally loved and delicious as ice cream.” But … I don’t like ice cream. I eat it maybe one time every four or five months, because my wife wants to share something.

And, guess what? Yes, math is as loved as ice cream at the lower grades. I have observed 4th and 5th grade classrooms where the learners are excited, joyful, and enthusiastic about math. The bulletin board above is anecdotal evidence.

I think we need to stop saying it is the subject that is like vegetables, and accept the fact that it is the way we teach the subject that turns it into vegetables.

Watch this video (it is 5 minutes) of these middle school learners struggle and succeed in math.

There is honest to goodness joy there.

They ate some yummy ice cream in that lesson. Why can’t we do that every day?

To answer David. Is math like vegetables? I think it can be. Is math like ice cream? I think it can be. The choice is mine.

If I get to choose whether math is more like vegetables or like ice cream in my classroom, I will choose ice cream (even though I don’t like ice cream).

I choose this not for myself, but for my learners. And David is right. Not everyone will love every subject. I am okay with that. But if I choose to present math like brussel sprouts instead of chocolate fudge peanut butter ripple, then I have denied some learners even the ability to choose whether or not they enjoy math.

And then, how do I make my pre-service teachers understand that it is a choice they can make too? [Wow, that is a whole different can of worms.]

So, is math like ice cream? For my classroom, for my pre-service teachers, the answer must be Yes.

David responded on Twitter with these series of tweets. I think they add a great deal to the conversation.


Thank you David for making me think.

Sep 072016

The struggle to understand why we teach K-12 mathematics in the order we do, and the content we do is real. I have wondered about this for a long time, and really have never found a good answer.

I threw out the idea of teaching y=mx+b as the only way to write lines (even though the district materials at the time said it was all we needed). I took a lot of heat for that decision from some people. I was told I was completely wrong; by teachers. I stuck to my guns because y=mx+b is a stupid way to teach lines. And in the end, I was told by other teachers that I influenced them to change too.

But really, K-12 mathematics education is nothing like this:

Mathematics as human pursuit

Think of Lockhart’s Lament.  You read Paul’s words, and you are hit by the poetry he sees in math. It is also 25 pages long. I read somewhere that Lockhart’s Lament is the the most powerful and often cited mathematics education document that is never acted upon. What does that say about us, as educators, who cite it?

Lockhart is passionate about math education, and he feels that the current state (in 2002) of math education is in trouble. His words may be as apt today as it was then. On page 2 he writes,

In fact, if I had to design a mechanism for the express purpose of destroying a child’s natural curiosity and love of pattern-making, I couldn’t possibly do as good a job as is currently being done— I simply wouldn’t have the imagination to come up with the kind of senseless, soul-crushing ideas that constitute contemporary mathematics education.

How much impact has Lockhart had on mathematics education? Often cited, rarely used or implemented. And yet, my Twitter feed and Facebook still have things like this pop up regularly.

Mathmatician is like a painter G H Hardy

What beautiful words representing fantastic ideals. Are you starting to see the cognitive dissonance I am feeling today? Too bad none of these ideals are found in our textbooks or our standards (and don’t get me wrong, I am not hating on the CCSS-M here). In fact, much of school mathematics is exactly how Seymour Papert described it here.

Papert - outwitting teachers as school goal

It is mindless, repetitive, and dissociated.

So as I was thinking of the question of “Why?”, I stumbled upon this article. Why We Learn Math Lessons That Date Back 500 Years? on NPR. To find out the answer is pretty much, “Because we always have,” is sad, disappointing and frustrating. We have taught it this way for the last 500 years, so we will continue to teach it this way for the foreseeable future.

I call B.S.

Seriously. We need to rethink how we teach math in a substantive manner.

We are part of a system that is not allowing learners to find the joy of mathematics, but the drudgery of mathematics and of learning. And this is not new. Not by any means. Edward Cubberly, Dean of the Stanford University School of Education around 1900) said,

Our schools are, in a sense, factories, in which the raw products (children) are to be shaped and fashioned into products to meet the various demands of life. The specifications for manufacturing come from the demands of twentieth-century civilization, and it is the business of the school to build its pupils according to the specifications laid down.

The fact that the specifications of education haven’t changed in hundreds of years is a problem (see the NPR article). It may even be THE problem. I am not so confident to claim that for sure, but it is definitely A problem.

At what point do we, as teacher leaders, rise up and demand this change. We see the damage. We see the issues. We must start demanding the curriculum be changed to meet the needs of our learners. I am not sure that the CCSS-M is that change. It seems like it is codifying the 500 year old problems that we are currently doing.

But it doesn’t not have to.

The Modeling Standard is gold. It is also 1 single page in the entire document.

I will just end this rant with that thought. Oh, and this thought. No more broccoli flavored ice cream.

textbook math is like broccoli ice cream

Aug 312016

The last #BlAugust post this year, and I wanted to end on some good things.


Monday was a banner day for me, full of firsts. I hit “Finalize” on my very first ever NSF grant. It is a Robert Noyce Scholarship grant that, if we get it, would be a $1.1 million dollar grant for scholarships for learners in the program I teach in. This is huge. 63 scholarships over 5 years of $10,000 each, as well as travel and other programs for the Noyce Scholars. It is in the feedback process at the school, but on 6 September the “Submit” button gets pressed. So exciting.

I also received notice on Monday that Megan Schmidt’s and my proposal for “Statistics & Social Justice” was accepted at the NCTM 2017 National Conference. This means that we are not speakers at both NCSM and NCTM 2017 Nationals. This is my first national speaking opportunity. I am very excited that I get to work with Megan on this.

I also taught the first section of Knowing & Learning in Mathematics & Science on Monday. This was the first 3 credit course that I have been able to teach at the University. Even more special, is the fact that I was allowed to plan the course from the beginning. So, as a doc student, my CV now says that I built a University course. How cool it that!

Then, walking across campus yesterday, 3 amazing young women ran up to me and gave me hugs. These were juniors in high school when they were my learners, and they had just finished their first day of college. Their excitement and wanting to tell me about it was so amazing to experience. And then, a former learner who is in her senior year of high school at a community college program messaged me this:

Hey Mr. Waddell! I hope that you are doing well! I just wanted to let you know that I am taking a Math 122 class (for Elementary Education Majors) and our professor today reminded me of you and some of your classroom policies but also your view on math that still sticks with me and that is that there is no one way to do a problem…because of this, our professor does not use the word ‘step.’ Instead, he says ‘move.’ So like, “what’s the next move you are going to take?” Anyways, I know I’ve said it a million times, but thank you again for being such an awesome math teacher and helping me love math again.

Having experiences like this just reinforces the fact that it is about connections, not content. It is about people, not math. The math will come, the learners will want to learn math when we teach them as people and make connections with them.

Finally, the we are starting off the year with a new member of the team at UNR. We have a third Master Teacher with us, and we are all working together very well. The hiccups that come with a new member joining a team have been small and inconsequential. Working with terrific people is such a rewarding experience, and it will make this year go by quickly.

But I hope not too fast. I want to enjoy this for a while.

An remember, Be Awesome to One Another! Always.

Aug 292016

One of the last #BlAugust posts this year. Not the last post this year for sure, however.


Today is kind of a big day. I have to submit a NSF grant proposal today. That is a big deal. So much work and effort goes into this proposal, and then the chances of getting it are slim.

So there is that, but the biggest thing today is it is the first day of classes in my second semester at UNR. Oh, AND I am teaching a 3 credit class I have been working on half the summer, and it is the first time this course has been taught at UNR.

That is why I am a little nervous. There is a lot going on, lots of moving parts in the class. It is a survey course of ed theory called Knowing and Learning in Mathematics and Science, and there area ton of readings, interviews, and projects.

I haven’t been nervous about teaching anything for 10 years. This is kind of a new feeling all over again, and …. it is different.

I guess the fact I am nervous means that I care how the class develops. That is a good thing to realize.

Oh, and if these reasons to be nervous aren’t enough, I also got the email from NCTM this morning saying my proposal for Statistics and Social Justice with Megan Schmidt was accepted. This means I will be presenting at both NCSM and NCTM on this topic.

So, nervousness, celebrations, a little excitement thrown into the mix.

Yea, I am a mess today. I need a nice cup of coffee and some relaxing music I think.

Aug 242016

#BlAugust is going strong so far. I am digging the morning writing for sure.


Yesterday I was taking a moment after work to look at my Twitter feed and I saw this hashtag #ObserveMe with a picture of a sign outside a classroom. It was this pic.  (you can click on any picture to make embiggen them if you want to see the details.)

observeme pic 1

I know it was this picture, because it is without a number in my folder. I got excited! How powerful is this one simple sign. It tells every person walking in the room that you WANT their feedback. You want them to come into your room. You want them to talk to learners, to watch their interaction, and to give you feedback.

How amazingly powerful.

I followed the hashtag, and found out it was started by Robert Kaplinsky. I am not surprised. It is a powerful statement of changing classroom culture.  Here are some more examples I thought were just amazing.

ObserveMe 3  ObserveMe 5  ObserveMe 7

Notice the statement of what classes are taught when. That way any teacher can chose what topic to watch, or they know what topic to expect as they walk in. I also love the QR code connected to a google form. I scanned them. They work. Finally, the third picture has both a QR code for electronic data collection as well as the forms right there next to the code for ease of use. There is no excuse not to give feedback in Ms. Rani’s classroom.

But how does this change culture?

You cannot be a teacher who shuts their door and ignores the world with this hanging outside your room. You are inviting the world in.

But you are not just inviting the world in, you are asking the world to look for specific things; questioning techniques, understanding, engagement, interaction, problem solving, and ‘teacher as facilitator’ are all things mentioned.

You are asking the world to talk to your learners. You are asking the world to thoughtfully think about the classroom environment, and to evaluate what is going on in your classroom.

How powerful.

But, flip this around. What does it tell the LEARNERS who are passing this sign on the way into your room?

The learners know that at anytime, anyone could be walking in to look for these things. It tells the learners that these are activities or behaviors that you think are important. It tells the learners that you value being a “facilitator” not a “lecturer” and that you are holding yourself accountable for those values. (Yes, Ms. Garner I am calling you out on that because I love it so much.)

We also should not be stagnant on what we look for. As the semester continues, the ‘look fors’ must change and adapt as well. The #ObserveMe flyer in the window below makes that explicit.

ObserveMe 6  ObserveMe 4

Okay, I am in love with this idea and am sharing it widely.

BUT, how can I apply this to my work at the University?

If I just talk about it in class, then who cares. With that in mind, I have put together draft 1 of my sign.


It will definitely get the QR code treatment. I will have to remember to put it up and take it down every class. Wouldn’t that really freak out some professor who didn’t see it there and someone walks into their room to observe them.

I also have two other Master Teachers in the program to sell in the idea who will be in the room with me. I don’t mind throwing myself under the bus, but I won’t throw them without their permission.

I just figure, if I am going to talk about this at the University level to my preservice teachers, I better be willing to walk the walk if I am going to talk the talk.

What do you think? Are my goals reasonable?

Aug 232016

#BlAugust Continues with my Knowing and Learning posts


I was sitting down this morning at 7:30 to do today’s post, and I was stymied. What to write, what to write? So I opened Twitter for inspiration and Christopher Danielson had re-tweeted this:


Okay, it is on. I read the article (found here) and immediately thought of my Knowing and Learning readings (week 4) on B.F. Skinner and his “Teaching Machines.”

If you need a refresher on Skinner’s ideas, you can read the book in it’s entirety (please don’t, gag) or you can just read this one picture that sums up the entire chapter in a gut wrenching caption.

teaching machines by skinner

That’s right! There is your video that Sen. Ron Johnson referred to! You see, this isn’t a new idea to replace teachers with that “one good teacher” and have the learners then rewind and redo the material until they get it right.

On the Nature v. Nuture discussion, Skinner falls on the nurture side, but it is a nurture grounded firmly in behaviorism. While educators of the constructivist philosophy threw up a little in their mouths upon reading the words of Mr. Johnson, the behaviorists celebrated. They have been saying this since 1957, and the philosophical underpinnings of the approach are as solid as Piaget or Pappert.

We can see this thread of education going strong in Mr. Johnson’s remarks, but also in the gobs of money thrown at Kahn Academy. His original, poorly done, math videos were celebrated as the pinnacle of education. Well, the pinnacle of behaviorist teaching machines, at least. “Look, when the learner doesn’t understand something, the response is not correct, and they can just work around the disk again, er, I mean, they can rewind the video.”

I think it is very important for teachers to come out of college knowing that these statements by people like Mr. Johnson, and movements like Kahn’s have a history. A history of failure, but also of enough success that they just won’t die.

And there is a time and place for behaviorism in teaching math. But the extremes that Skinner, Kahn, Mr. Johnson, and others take it to is ridiculous.


[And, as an aside, yes. these are my opinions. This blog has my name in the URL, and I am unabashedly a constructivist teacher. This wasn’t always true, but I learned better.]

Aug 222016

A late in the day #BlAugust post.


Yesterday Jennifer tweeted this at me, and I teared up a little.

And the tweet it refers to is this one:

You see, the High Fives post is one of the most popular posts I have ever written. It was a spur of the moment, almost didn’t do it speech (kind of like the TMC16 speech on overcoming your fears) that has resonated through so many people.

For a long time, I kept track of the people tweeting and blogging about High Fives. I know I missed some. I counted over 20 different individual who tried the High Fiving, and said it changed their classroom culture for the better.

Jennifer tweeted and wrote about it a full year! after I wrote about it. How often does that happen? To me at least, not very often.

To say I am embarrassed and honored by the mentions is an understatement.

To say I am overjoyed by the fact that learners in over 20 classrooms are experiencing something different because I spoke up is exciting and amazing. We need to spread the high five energy.

So, to help more teachers and to spread the power of the high five, I wanted to revisit the video:

My original post: http://blog.mrwaddell.net/archives/1431. The video is short, only 4 minutes. In fact the last 20 seconds can be ignored as it was an announcement for the conference.

You are doing something awesome. You are walking in my classroom. Be awesome. Connect with your learners. Give them energy, and receive the energy in return.

High five to you all!

Edits added:

After I posted this article Lisa Henry posts about All The Stuff I’ve Stolen From The MTBoS. High Fives are the first thing on her list, and she explains why in a different post.


Aug 182016

Continuing on the #BlAugust train! Yay.


To help set the stage for the Big Questions of Knowing and Learning, I will be using the results from this survey. I asked on Twitter for teachers to take it, and it will be required for my learners to take it. (Same questions, but a different set of instructions and explanations on the prompts.)

I will take the results from this survey to juxtapose their responses so we can evaluate what it means to Know, to Learn, and to Believe.

For example, looking at the teacher responses from Twitter, we can see that the teachers mostly all agreed that “Nurture” had the largest impact on ACT, SAT, and AP Scores. Notice, however, the difference between asking about “Success in AP Calculus” and “Success in Science”.

calc  science

Notice all the “3” responses in Science? Those responses are interesting. For whatever reason, the exact same teachers who responded to this survey thought that “Nuture” is more responsible for success in AP Calc than it is for Success in Science. Or, rather, there were more teachers who weren’t sure if “Nuture” was as responsible as “Nature” so they selected a neutral response.

That is interesting. That brings up the immediate question of Why?

Juxtaposing these type of responses on the first day with college learners will give even more variety of responses (at least I hope the responses are varied.)

Also, look at the responses to these questions.


It makes sense that teachers would be almost identical in responses to these two questions, but I am hoping for a more varied response to the question from college students.

Using their own responses will be a common theme in the course. Each day they will have to enter their reading responses into a google form. This allows me to read their responses quickly, sort and categorize them, and then select items for discussion in class that afternoon.

In addition, I will be using the Annenberg Learner video called “A Private Universe”.  If you have not seen the first video on the page, do so. The video is dated (1980’s) but it is well worth the 20 minutes.

The video starts with the interviewer asking questions at a Harvard graduation about why there are seasons, and then moves into the classroom to uncover learner’s misconceptions.

This is a wonderful video to show my learners how even though teachers may think they have taught something, the learners don’t know correct things or didn’t learn correct things from the teaching.

How do we Know? How do we Learn? [which ends up at How do we Teach?]

The main projects  in the class are two Clinical Interviews, and a deeply, well thought out lesson plan.

Along the way, we dive into the different theories of knowing and learning, so the learners can select one for their own lesson plan and utilize it well.

So, the first day will involve discussion about their own ideas, discussion comparing them (novices) to experts (teachers), interviewing clinically (A Private Universe), and a closure with ….


Not sure.

I have not done closures on this type of material before.

A simple written reflection seems too … blase? standard? uninspired? Yes. Uninspired.

I need to think deeply about closures, next.