Perhaps there will be enough money in the Alberta Education budget to address one of the fastest growing threats to students today: cyberbullying.

Here is a news article from the CBC with more detail.
An excerpt from the article states, "In 2008, a study commissioned by the Canadian Teachers' Federation suggested that 34 per cent of Canadians surveyed knew of students in their community who had been targeted by cyberbullying in the past year, and almost one in 10 knew someone close to them who had been cyberbullied.".

I would hope that a student experiencing this form of bullying would tell their parents, and the school counselor.

A student telling a friend is great and should be done, but a parent or counselor may be able to actually do something about it.

Good teaching... Good learning...

Cheers - Mike

Funds from Alberta Education are available to keep our new young teachers teaching our new young students.

Dave Hancock made the announcement today. Please see this article for more. Basically the school boards will be able to hire back many of the newer teachers that were let go in June.

Good. School boards and schools can breathe easier and prepare for fall with a plan that can work to their benefit - and of course, ultimately to the benefit of the students.

Perhaps there will be enough money in the budget to address one of the fastest growing threats to students today: cyberbullying. This will be covered in my next blog entry.

Good teaching... Good learning...

Cheers - Mike

How many definitions are there for the term: critical thinking?

Well, if you use Google and type: define:critical thinking in the search box, you will see at the top of the page, a link (Web definitions for Critical thinking) which will take you to several different website links, each with a different definition. As well, on that first Google results page and the following pages, there are so many websites promoting their own definition that one could be led astray for hours and days. Wow.

You know, for something that has been around for more than 60 years, one would think that the pundits would have an agreed-upon definition worked out by now. But no, some of the groups/organizations think that their definition is the one true definition. Good grief. Sounds like a religion!

Since there is so much disparity, then we must fall back to common sense (what!) and make a definition based on need, future education goals and the instruments to get us there.

One site that has a definition that I personally could work with, is from Prof. Brad Dowden at California State University. He has a light-hearted page with a definition which he likes which is actually a page of his Critical Thinking course. Be sure to read the Specific Skills page too.
A quote from his page:
"The following is a brief, but excellent, definition of "critical thinking" from a bill in the California State Senate that was trying to update the State's Education code:
Critical thinking is the ability to engage in reasoned discourse with intellectual standards such as clarity, accuracy, precision, and logic, and to use analytic skills with a fundamental value orientation that emphasizes intellectual humility, intellectual integrity, and fair-mindedness."

OK then, let's go to a so serious you can't crack a smile definition found here.
"Paul (1992, p. 9-10) defines critical thinking as "disciplined, self-directed thinking that exemplifies the perfections of thinking appropriate to a particular mode or domain of thought." Glock (1987, p. 9) offers the following broad definition: "Critical thinking skills are (a) those diverse cognitive processes and associated attitudes, (b) critical to intelligent action, (c) in diverse situations and fields, (d) that can be improved by instruction or conscious effort."

Then there is this more mellow, thoughtful reference to related "Reflected Thinking".

There are more "definitions" here.

So the beat goes on...

It is my hope that Alberta Education will present a coherent, logical, simple, easy to understand, easy to adopt, definition of "critical thinking", which will take us into the "21st century". The term has been bandied about quite a bit over the last 2-3 years in Alberta. I'm betting that for every school in Alberta there is a unique definition.

To think forward we sometimes have to look at the past, and preferably not make the same mistakes again.

Good teaching...Good learning...

Cheers - Mike

It was with great anticipation that I visited the Alberta Education website after the announcement today that the Inspiring Action on Education Discussion Paper was available to read. It can be found here. It is a pdf file which you may want to save on your computer to read at your leisure.

Well, then - here is my initial impression after reading the discussion paper once. I know that re-reading it will shed more insight, but first impressions are interesting.

It seems to be written by academics, for academics. I ran some paragraphs through a Flesch-Kincaid reading level analysis and from two different sources it ranged between 17.8 to 20.7 (grade level) with a Reading Ease of -.6 to 12.1 (a higher score indicates easier readability; scores go from 0 to 100).
The following scores were based on this paragraph:
"Education partners including government, school boards, schools, students, parents, teachers, post-secondary, business, industry and increasingly mobilized communities will need to develop and enhance relationships to support young Albertans. Focusing less on the system and the school and more on the student and their education will be achieved by learning partners recognizing and understanding the importance of student needs and the student voice. Partners will actively engage the student voice in further developing innovative and creative opportunities to optimize student success. This will involve developing new models and approaches to identifying student needs, developing flexible learning opportunities and supports, and creating responsive policies and enabling structures. Traditional learning approaches will be enhanced to incorporate emerging learning and teaching approaches, expanding learning contexts and enhanced learning experiences."

The Gunning-Fog Score was 20.90, the Coleman-Liau Index was 22.40, the SMOG (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook) Index was 15.40, the Automated Readability Index was 21.70.

The "discussion paper" seems to be aimed at teachers and government workers but not necessarily the stake-holders and partners, including parents and students. To reach the most number of people it seems to me that the score or index should be 12-14. Perhaps it could be re-written with that in mind.

I believe most parents reading it would just throw up their hands and say BS. Most of the items mentioned seem to be forgone conclusions and decisions made. I think it is called a discussion paper because people could provide input on the little, tiny details which won't matter much in the long run. The section about teachers was an interesting read. When will there be enough teachers to pull this knowledge-enhancement off, and where are they going to get the time to do it? Considering that right now school boards are considering layoffs because of budget constraints, this grandiose plan is a bit in cloud heaven.
Ah, but this is a plan for the future, right? Well, when is the future?

Is it possible that enabling legislation will be passed and the policy and procedural details will be worked out later? And, who will be doing that? The ones without a reality check - heads in clouds - making decisions which may not make sense? Or is it that the "public" will be "engaged" to "help" with input to the decisions or plans? With facilitators to help guide the public responders in an appropriate direction? I sure hope not.

So I am still hoping that some good will come of this next "engagement" process. But, after all the "feel good" and hope from last year and then to be presented with this "discussion paper", I'm starting to wonder.

You know, I am not normally negative about things. So I will re-read the paper and try to find some good in it and update this blog when I do.

To all you teachers, students and parents, I hope (yes, still hope) that your education future will be bright, thoughtful, meaningful and helpful, with incredible learning opportunities for all.

Good teaching...Good learning...

Cheers - Mike

PS: more related light reading for you...
Inspiring Education, Alberta Education, the School Act review
Anticipating Alberta's Inspiring Education Report as a Game Changer
inspiring education in alberta. | daveberta.ca
Braid: Alberta's education vision collides with hard reality‎
Alberta Education report is recycled edu-babble‎
Report may spark reform in Alberta schools

And finally;
Get with the times by Dave Hancock

Recently I became aware of an issue where a teacher took a student's cell phone for the day. I believe she thought it was a iPod. But it was not. It was an iPhone, which also has the capability of an iPod.

The scenario
Students were told they could listen to their iPods. About 20 minutes later, one student was asked what he was doing, to which he replied, "listening to music" and she asked him for his device for the duration of the class. When he reminded her that she had said it was ok, she then made the forfeiture an all day event. He was advised to get it from her at her office at the end of the day. However, when he went to get it she wasn't there. After looking for her for the better part of half an hour, he left school. He was without it overnight and didn't get it back until mid-morning the next day. and only after having to track her down.

I asked for legal advice regarding this scenario and here is what I received. There are three possible grounds for a lawsuit.

1. Theft
The iPhone was kept overnight when it was to be returned that day.

2. Charter violation
Because other kids in class were also listening to music but only one kid was singled out.

3. Child endangerment
The boy has a back issue and wears a brace. If something had happened to him on the way home from school and he couldn't call for help because his phone was taken, then he would be put into a danger situation.

After the fact, it turns out the teacher had forgotten to be at her office after classes ended for the day because she had another engagement at the school supervising an event with a great many kids.

This scenario was interesting because his iPhone was considered an essential safety device for his parents and himself.

Normally student/school issues don't go to court, but some issues could. Most of the time a school trustee would become involved in the escalation process, but not necessarily.

Teachers and principals must have clear policies related to electronic devices. A safety device must never be taken from a student.

This particular case was resolved, with greater understanding by all parties of the issue, the possible consequences and the result. The boy understands that teachers have responsibilities and the teacher now understands that a cell phone can be considered as a safety (emergency) device.

So all is done with the help of the principal and everything is back on track.

In summary then, cell phones can be considered an emergency device. Students and teachers need to understand each others' positions. Teachers are there to teach and distractions don't help in that regard. Teachers must understand what the impact is for parents and student when they make what seems like a small decision - but which can impact student safety.
Students are there to learn and distractions, whether by other students or the teacher, don't help the student learn all that is possible. Students must take responsibility for learning.

A Matter of Time
It is only a matter of time before schools recognize the value of Wi-Fi enabled portable devices and the opportunities afforded by incorporating them into a teaching/learning scenario.

A local junior high school in St. Albert, Richard S. Fowler Catholic Junior High School, will allow students to use their iPhones or iPod Touches in the classroom starting this fall (2010). More from the CBC article, "Sean Brown, vice-principal of the school, said the school has changed its policy because the school believes the Apple products can be used to teach students."

This Connect2Edmonton forum has a discussion on the topic as well, with lots of 'for and against' comments.

Good teaching - Good listening...

Cheers - Mike

Well, at last some news!

Alberta education minister, Dave Hancock, announced the release of the steering committee's report. The report outlines the government's vision for Alberta students over the next twenty years.

An excerpt from the article in the Edmonton Journal reads in part, “Participants concluded that the education system needs more than minor change,” the report says. “Indeed, they advocated for an informed transformation of Alberta’s education system, one that challenges commonly held beliefs and leads to new structures and approaches.”

Read the Journal article here and the report here as a pdf file.
Unfortunately the pdf file is version 1.6 compressed for the web and not easily opened by older Acrobat readers or alternate readers. I hope the ministry rethinks that strategy and re-issues a more friendly version of the report.

The report is more of an outline of principles and there is much more to be done. However it is certainly a good start.

Happy learning...

Cheers - Mike

Well, as usual, Sir Ken Robinson has stirred the pot again.

This time he is saying, "Bring on the learning revolution".
This is a May 2010 TED talk and here is an excerpt from the TED webpage describing the talk: "In this poignant, funny follow-up to his fabled 2006 talk, Sir Ken Robinson makes the case for a radical shift from standardized schools to personalized learning -- creating conditions where kids' natural talents can flourish.".

His previous talk, "schools kill creativity", is linked on the talk page.

Good teaching...

Cheers - Mike