Lo and behold the worksheet worked!
1) So the 8th grade spent the second half of the second trimester studying the two gay marriage cases to be argued before the Supreme Court. (Hollingsworth vs. Perry; U.S. vs. Windsor) We started by contemplating the purpose of marriage - its development as an institution - using some deductive reasoning to try to understand how the institution of marriage upholds civilization. (A tricky thing to do as marriage is one of those 'institutions' an 8th grader would take for granted. Hard to imagine what it might be like w/out it.) This was valuable as most 8th graders are viscerally and passionately supportive of gay marriage. At the very least, we wanted to make sure why anyone would resist change at too passionate a pace. We answered the question of how someone could be supportive and empathetic to gays - and still be resistant to gay marriage. Students were engaged and required little encouragement to offer their opinions. They learned willingly.
2) All well and good - and then we dived into the cases at hand. This mostly entailed using press accounts explaining the cases, their background, and also some commentary anticipating the Supreme Court's options in analyzing the two cases. The 8th grade Civics students were well versed in the Constitution from the fall - particularly specific clauses that would turn out to be important here, like the full faith and credit clause (to be found in Article IV) - so I assumed that studying current cases - in action! - would be an excellent way to utilize the Constitution, to show it as a living, breathing entity. And an excellent way to expand from the learning platform we established in the fall. But the class began to bifurcate here - some students still attentively interested, others waning in the fog of details. And the details came quickly. Names, dates, precedents, and lots of legal mumbo jumbo to be sure.
I like to use New York Times and Wall Street Journal articles because those are papers I read every day - so I am up to date on daily nuances in cases like these - and I have access to a full range of editorial opinion. (In this case, I also shared articles from the Atlantic - and even the New York Review of Books.) One might ask if it's worth also sharing material from other sources - perhaps more middle school friendly sources. A legitimate question. But I think it's worth expecting high standards of our 8th graders here. I really think that to be prepared for high school one should be able to read a NYT article or commentary and make sense of it on his/her own. And of course we also do pause to explore and break down some of the material in the articles together - determining what is salient and what less so.
3) Students were also asked to pause here and prepare 6-person presentations on both cases. I gave them ten days and this allowed each student to specialize in some aspect of the cases - and then the new information gleaned was shared with all - theoretically making the whole class smarter and well-informed. But again we were treated to presentations of bifurcated quality - some thorough and probing, but many incomplete, shallow, or even slap-dash.
4) Finally - before completing our study - I treated the 8th graders to presentations on two important background cases - the two essential precedent-setting cases without which there would be no question of gay marriage before our Supreme Court: Loving vs. Virginia, which legalized inter-racial marriage in 1967; and Lawrence vs. Texas, which de-criminalized homosexual sexual activity across the United States in 2003. They found this material compelling, gaining a clear understanding of how it takes historical progress to get where we are today. (This was not difficult, they having previously covered similar ground w/ Plessy vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. Board of Ed. as 6th graders.) Many of the students found this material a valuable intellectual extension and embraced details like understanding the dissents in the cases.
5) And so onto the final assessment to crown our study of gay marriage in preparation for the historic argument and decision before the Supreme Court. Typically one would want to have a class debate at this point. Give the students time to prepare, establish a formal protocol, and then let 'em have it out. I elected not to do that. Mainly because I feared the discrepancies in preparation and contributions from too many members of the class. Such a question is always there when you contemplate a group activity like a class debate - but in this case I read the 8th graders as being largely unmotivated at this point (their exhausting high school application process over) and I did not want to waste the class time or preparation time on an exercise that seemed unlikely to advance our understanding of the issue or the cases.
To be even franker their lack of motivation was a little dis-spiriting. In a cavalier moment I might even have said I was "tired of teaching them." Of course this is not really true - but one must allow for moments of disillusion. Before sucking it up and going back to the drawing board.
[And in their defense, not only had they just completed the months long high school application - they had also just completed their months long VJAS projects in science class. Such are the travails of a middle school student - and a middle school teacher - weathering the waxing and waning fortunes of enthusiasm and motivation. Who among us doesn't remember the vaunted Senior Slump among high school students entering the back half of their senior year?]
I elected instead to assign them the task of writing their own debate dialogues - individually.
6) But before giving them that assignment - I gave them a worksheet. A worksheet? Yes - a worksheet.
Do I believe in worksheets? Certainly not. They're usually make-work assigned by teachers trying to fill time. Very un-Sabot. Very.
Yet I assigned it anyway. A mere 9 questions written by me - one with important sub-parts.
The purpose of the worksheet? Review. In the truest sense of the word. A worksheet to ensure that everyone was cognizant of and possessed the same elementary understandings - cases, principals, principles, clauses - necessary to composing the dialogue.
It had become clear that the class - as a whole - was not as consistently well versed as I expected them to be - as they needed to be - to complete the unit. Such a worksheet should in all honesty be "easy" for well-prepared students - and provide real work - useful, valuable, review work - but work just the same - for students who had been slacking.
Of course I asked myself - why had the unit not progressed as I had hoped/anticipated? Was it my fault? Did I not teach it constructivist enough? Did I make it boring by emphasizing too much - or too arcane - Constitutional detail?? Was it their fault? A simple case of 8th graders checking out in the second half of the year?
Whatever the reason - it was still my responsibility to diagnose and adapt and try to achieve the unit's objectives.
Was the worksheet punitive? Not really. The questions were carefully chosen. They were not meant to be "hard." They were meant to be useful. Nothing was on there just to fill space. The worksheet was actually designed to make sure a student knew the bare minimum to be able to discuss the ins and outs of the two gay marriage cases. (As a worksheet should?)
Now here's the critical move - the element that, in retrospect, I think made the exercise click. I told students that the worksheet was not only required - but that every question must be answered accurately. I told them that I would be reviewing the worksheets carefully - not to earn a grade - but for bare minimum accuracy up and down the 9 questions. I told them that receiving the final dialogue assignment was conditional upon completing the worksheet accurately.
(The original reason for these requirements was to make sure the students who most needed to benefit from the worksheet would do so. What good would it do to assign and let the strong students slave over it and the less motivated students turn in more sloppy work?)
I expected it would take students no more than one class period to answer the questions on the worksheet. I gave them the worksheet - and they tasked away over it - and were not able to complete it in one sitting.
Several students did send me the completed version that night. (Good.) But no one's first attempt was accurate 1 to 9. (Question 5 - the one with the sub-parts - proved to be especially daunting. It required students to list the four different constitutional provisions already used in previous cases to render either Proposition 8 or the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional and to explain - in one sentence - how each clause rendered legislation unconstitutional.)
What followed was an interesting and unexpectedly valuable exercise. I gave students instant feedback and further responses trickled in over the course of the next ten days. Some students got right on it and nailed down the missing details in a a day or two. Others spent more than a week before they had finally iced every niggling specific.
A psychologist might call that feedback and response. But what impressed me is that I didn't get any sour grapes from anyone about being so demanding. Everyone had something still to learn and clarify. And some students had a lot - but they learned it. They really did. Some attacked it with more alacrity than others. But they did it. They didn't cheat or over-rely on stock answers cribbed from someone else's approved paper. They engaged in dialogue with me. They maintained good cheer. And they learned.
Why hadn't they learned it all before? I still haven't figured that out for sure. Perhaps I never will. Those four constitutional provisions from Question 5? They were all in the PowerPoint presentations the 12 of them had given 3 weeks earlier.
This question will still plague me. But I am pleased to report that the worksheets worked! The dialogues the students eventually turned in were uniformly better than I expected - two weeks earlier - they could possibly be. Despite themselves - or despite me - or despite the material - all twelve 8th grade students demonstrated a conversance and understanding of the due process and equal protection clauses, of the salience of the 10th Amendment and our year-long celebration of federalism, and even of the mysterious full faith and credit clause. They showed a respect and sensitivity for the arguments on both sides of the issue. They were able to simply and easily cite material from the different secondary sources we shared. (Some went further than that.) They showed an easy facility w/ Loving and Lawrence. And - unsurprisingly - they larded their dialogues with wit and spirited touches.
The work on display in the dialogues corresponded strongly with the quality of work I hoped students would attain when we started the unit 8 weeks earlier. It was work that 3/4 of them would not have been capable of producing the day I handed out the worksheet. There is no doubt in my mind the worksheet was the difference. The e-mail and personal exchanges with students - the required attention to detail - resulting in clear, actual, demonstrable understanding - all paid off.
Against all my pedagogical instincts - the worksheet worked.
[As noted previously - Blogger confoundingly won't let me post sample files in the blog - not even PDFs. When we get around to having our own teacher websites - I can share both the worksheet and sample dialogues if you're curious.]
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Relevance as February Wanes
A couple of quick updates from the week's early headlines...
The 8th graders are studying the legality of gay marriage in the United States in anticipation of next month's landmark cases to be argued before the Supreme Court (Hollandsworth vs. Perry; U.S. vs. Windsor). They have learned the background of both cases - Proposition 8 in California and the Defense of Marriage Act from the Clinton era) - and even the deep background of how we got here (Loving vs. Virginia; Lawrence vs. Texas). As they are well aware, our culture and our nation have moved very quickly on this issue in the last 15 years. Today's headlines tell us that Republican leaders are moving quickly, too...
Republicans Sign Brief in Support of Gay Marriage
The 7th Graders have just finished their quick tour of highlightes in Islamic history from the death of Muhammad (632 C.E.) to the end of the Ottoman Empire (1923). These highlights included: the Sunni-Shiite split; the Islamic conquests; the Ummayad and Abbasid Empires; the Golden Age of Islam; Saladin and the Crusades; the Ottoman Empire; and the great Turkish modernizer, Kemal Ataturk. No sooner had we learned about Ataturk - and his remarkable revolution to modernity in Turkey - banning the fez and the veil and turban; changing the alphabet and dramatically increasing literacy rates - no sooner had we introduced the notion of the Lexus and the Olive Tree - how societies manage the tension inherent in transitioning from traditional mores and values to modern, rational, Western, technological, pluralist values - then we see this story on yesterday's front page...
Turks Debate Modest Dress Set for Takeoff
And for the 6th graders? Slimmer pickings. We have just begun a new unit which will take us to the eve of WW II. We have grappled w/ the Spanish-American War - adding to our arsenal of -isms - isolationism, interventionism, expansionism, imperialism. And appraised Teddy Roosevelt, paying especial attention to how his Great White Fleet exemplified his famous slogan, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." The 6s were quite taken with T.R.'s can-do mentality, his perseverance and energy. (Who isn't?) In fact, David Brooks concluded his column in today's paper - suggesting how President Obama might transcend party differences and partisan ideologies - by emulating no less than Teddy Roosevelt...
My dream Obama wouldn’t be just one gladiator in the zero-sum budget wars. He’d transform the sequester fight by changing the categories that undergird it. He’d possess the primary ingredient of political greatness: imagination. The great presidents, like Teddy Roosevelt, see situations differently. They ask different questions. History pivots around their terms.
Our Second Adolescence
The lesson: We try to keep things relevant in the History classroom in the Pool House. And hopefully we succeed.
The 8th graders are studying the legality of gay marriage in the United States in anticipation of next month's landmark cases to be argued before the Supreme Court (Hollandsworth vs. Perry; U.S. vs. Windsor). They have learned the background of both cases - Proposition 8 in California and the Defense of Marriage Act from the Clinton era) - and even the deep background of how we got here (Loving vs. Virginia; Lawrence vs. Texas). As they are well aware, our culture and our nation have moved very quickly on this issue in the last 15 years. Today's headlines tell us that Republican leaders are moving quickly, too...
Republicans Sign Brief in Support of Gay Marriage
The 7th Graders have just finished their quick tour of highlightes in Islamic history from the death of Muhammad (632 C.E.) to the end of the Ottoman Empire (1923). These highlights included: the Sunni-Shiite split; the Islamic conquests; the Ummayad and Abbasid Empires; the Golden Age of Islam; Saladin and the Crusades; the Ottoman Empire; and the great Turkish modernizer, Kemal Ataturk. No sooner had we learned about Ataturk - and his remarkable revolution to modernity in Turkey - banning the fez and the veil and turban; changing the alphabet and dramatically increasing literacy rates - no sooner had we introduced the notion of the Lexus and the Olive Tree - how societies manage the tension inherent in transitioning from traditional mores and values to modern, rational, Western, technological, pluralist values - then we see this story on yesterday's front page...
Turks Debate Modest Dress Set for Takeoff
And for the 6th graders? Slimmer pickings. We have just begun a new unit which will take us to the eve of WW II. We have grappled w/ the Spanish-American War - adding to our arsenal of -isms - isolationism, interventionism, expansionism, imperialism. And appraised Teddy Roosevelt, paying especial attention to how his Great White Fleet exemplified his famous slogan, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." The 6s were quite taken with T.R.'s can-do mentality, his perseverance and energy. (Who isn't?) In fact, David Brooks concluded his column in today's paper - suggesting how President Obama might transcend party differences and partisan ideologies - by emulating no less than Teddy Roosevelt...
My dream Obama wouldn’t be just one gladiator in the zero-sum budget wars. He’d transform the sequester fight by changing the categories that undergird it. He’d possess the primary ingredient of political greatness: imagination. The great presidents, like Teddy Roosevelt, see situations differently. They ask different questions. History pivots around their terms.
Our Second Adolescence
The lesson: We try to keep things relevant in the History classroom in the Pool House. And hopefully we succeed.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Lawrence of Arabia and the Day Muhammad Died
Quick update on our two latest moves in 7th Grade Global Studies:
The 7s concluded their study of Muhammad and the founding of Islam by writing their Muhammad songs and poems. They were asked to tell the story of Muhammad and the founding of Islam - by adapting the lyrics of a song of their choice. Grading criteria were thoroughness, aptly chosen terms and moments, and wittiness as expressed in the adaptation. This is a tried and true assessment technique - requiring them to demonstrate their mastery and command and understanding of the unit - while hopefully allowing them to have a little fun adapting a hip-hop song or children's chestnut of their choice. Of course, the real work is that in explaining Islam to someone else - one ensures one has complete command.
This year one or two students left too many terms and events out of their songs - while at least one student was exhaustively thorough (although I loved his repeated inshallah allahu akhbar refrain). But the best song was turned in by Luke Hawkins who painstakingly adapted the lyrics to Don McClean's "American Pie." He left out one or two things but all the important stuff is there - including the 5 Pillars - and it's awfully fun to read. Check it out...
"The Day Muhammmad Died"
by Luke Hawkins
The 7s concluded their study of Muhammad and the founding of Islam by writing their Muhammad songs and poems. They were asked to tell the story of Muhammad and the founding of Islam - by adapting the lyrics of a song of their choice. Grading criteria were thoroughness, aptly chosen terms and moments, and wittiness as expressed in the adaptation. This is a tried and true assessment technique - requiring them to demonstrate their mastery and command and understanding of the unit - while hopefully allowing them to have a little fun adapting a hip-hop song or children's chestnut of their choice. Of course, the real work is that in explaining Islam to someone else - one ensures one has complete command.
This year one or two students left too many terms and events out of their songs - while at least one student was exhaustively thorough (although I loved his repeated inshallah allahu akhbar refrain). But the best song was turned in by Luke Hawkins who painstakingly adapted the lyrics to Don McClean's "American Pie." He left out one or two things but all the important stuff is there - including the 5 Pillars - and it's awfully fun to read. Check it out...
"The Day Muhammmad Died"
by Luke Hawkins
Chorus:
God, god there
is only one god
Muhammad’s speech'n
and a preaching, like the Kabba's Allah's
No more pagans
in mecca because
The angel told
me to recite, the angel told me to recite
Song:
A long, long, time ago
I
can still remember when I learned that I'd recite.
I knew if I had
my chance, mecca would be mine at last
and god just might
be happy, for a while.
But then the
Quraysh made me shiver
They tried to
kill with sword and quiver
I survived and
preached but not many followed me yet
I can remember
when I cried; I lost my uncle, and my bride
Still something
touched me deep inside, the day that I'd recite
so..
Chorus
Muhammad saw
some pilgrims come, and they liked the thought of god above,
and he went to
Yathrib.
Do you believe
in god as whole
'cause he can
save your mortal soul
and can I teach
you how to pray reeeeal slloooow
I know you
wanna' be Muslim
cause yathrib
could be neat again.
Medina sounds so
good
I know that it
just could!!
Oooh!
I was a lonely
Arab, broncin' buck,
with tribal
values and some Allah's luck
I knew with Jihad
I wasn't stuck
and me..cca,
could be mine
I started
singing
Chorus:
A few years
we've been on our own
We'll steal caravans,
fat with a pile o' gold
though that's
not how it used to be.
When medina
teased the Meccans teemed
a war broke out,
Quraysh were mean
And a choice was
made for you and me
while the Quraysh
was looking down
Medina attacked
at badar
the Quraysh were
adjourned
They fought back
without a word
and while they
attacked they saw a trench
The bad guys
stopped and seemed so wretched
they didn't know
bout' this trench
and then, medina
won
So
Chorus:
(skip the helter
sketlter line and go to the "and they were all in one place, a generation
lost in space").
Oh and there we
were all in one place
a treaty that came
to make some space
with time to
come, next year
Medina be
nimble, and be quick
blow mecca out
like a candlestick
cause holy wars,
gotta' end.
so idols were
smashed right off the stage
Mecca's people
were not in rage
and nobody born
in hell,
could break that
happy spell.
the happiness
rose in the night, and Islam was made just right.
I saw people
laughing with delight
the day the
idols, died
Chorus:
I made some
pillars that made the rules, there five of these and they are cool
Muslims follow or
turn away
I am prophet,
god is god, you must pray five times, too Allah, give alms,
Have Ramadan
once a month, in the day
make pilgrimage
to the holy place, were people sigh and others beam,
not a word is
spoken, prayers all were noticed
When he died he
died in hope, that no more pagans will be popes
and he took the
god train to the skies
the day Muhammad
died
Chorus: X2
THE END
**
We also spent a week watching David Lean's 1962 film, Lawrence of Arabia. This is a hinge moment in our study of Islam and Arabia and the Middle East. The story takes place during WW I - and hence might seem out of sequence - 1300 long years from Muhammad's death in 632. But we use the film - not only to "see" what Arabs and bedouins and fighting caravans look like - or two see what values and customs emerge from living in the desert - but even more importantly to identify and witness themes that challenged the Arabs in Muhammad's time - and continue to challenge Arab nations and peoples today.
Students quickly get caught up in the charm and drama of Lawrence's story - of his eccentricities and of how he eventually wins the Arabs' trust through his daring and bravery, creativity and unorthodox leadership. (The fascinating performances by Peter O'Toole and Omar Sharif and Alec Guinness [Obi-Wan Kenobi to most middle schoolers] and Anthony Quinn, help too.)
But when we get our pens and notepads out we focus on tribalism. On what it means to denigrate or feud w/ one tribe over another. Or protect drinking rights at a well from one tribe or another. Or to ally - or not - w/ other tribes vs. a common enemy. (In this case vs. the Ottoman Turks.)
We use the film as a text. I provide them w/ a character and credits sheet - and ask them to keep an eye out for - and take notes on - important scenes and especially important lines. They are held responsible for characters' names. You never know when we may want or need to make reference to them or their situations or something they say - later in the year. I eventually provide a supplemental cheat cheat repeating the dialogue of key scenes.
Most students leave the film able to quote in full Lawrence's line from the Mastura Well: "So long as the Arabs fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people - greedy, barbarous, and cruel, as you are."
And after some discussion they come to appreciate the telling significance of tribal leader Auda Abu Tayh's response to Lawrences's suggestion that the Arabs unite to fight the Turks. "The Arabs? What tribe is that?" asks Auda incredulously.
Students recognize easily how momentous it was that Muhammed was able to unite disparate tribes in Medina and then later to begin the Islamic conquests. But how quickly things begin to fray - with the Sunni-Shiite split less than 50 years his death. Lawrence was a brief exception - someone who through the force of his charismatic personality was able to unite Arab tribes. (They learn later that the great Saladin [himself a Kurd] was able to do the same - on a grander scale - to fight off the European Christians during the Crusades.)
And the table is set for understanding how difficult it remains for Arab nations to embrace the notion of E Pluribus Unum. All of this will serve as a useful object lesson when we turn to the Arab Spring and learn of the current travails in Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan...
History is never quiet - or dead - in the Middle East.
[Note: Blogger won't let me attach PDF files. (What's w/ that?) If any of you would like to see the Lawrence of Arabia prep or cheat sheets - ask your 7th grader - or just ask me and I will gladly pass them on.]
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Papers and Presentations
So many objectives when you assign research papers to 6th graders for the first time. We want to give them a chance to dive into a discrete sub-topic of their own choosing. We want to let them get their hands dirty w/ research for the first time. For some it's a confidence builder to find and get down and master a finite amount of useful, connected information. For others it's a boon to not find what you want and have to look harder - to learn how to handle that hurdle. We want them to face that blank digital canvas and see what it's like - how hard it easy, how easy it is, how gratifying it is - to organize and get all that information down in one place. We want to make sure we see both how and why to cite our sources. We want to pick our heads up from our own little mini focused world and connect our own topic w/ the larger world of the class and the text and the teacher and the Gilded Age. We want to then turn around and show off our knowledge and mastery. A whole new set of demands crop up - how to translate our knowledge to a new medium; how to re-craft the material so it speaks effectively and usefully to our audience. We want to think of our audience!
It is a lot to try to accomplish that first time. In truth - the assignment exposes students to each of these challenges. It does not asssume every student will master each of them the first time.
I haven't even mentioned confronting and grappling w/ content - trying to understand and master the specific questions our own topic raises. Making sure to go the extra mile and provide contextual information - statistics! Learning the basic premise of research - how the answer to any question yields new questions - in an infinite regression - until it's time to write.
With all this to do - to meet - to learn - I elected not to hand deliver everything to them. I wanted to throw them into this sea of challenges and responsibilities and see who needed what. Who needs help w/ an outline? Who needs to learn about the drafting process? Who needs help finding sources? In particular I decided not to front-load and pre-program the paper construction process. I didn't pre-teach the premises of the intro and the conclusion. I alluded to it. It came up in private conversation. But - as much as possible - I wanted students to discover the utility of the intro and conclusion. Learned this way - from the ground up (constructivist style) - intros and conclusions might take on their own necessary and illuminating life of their own. Or that's the theory any way.
Turns out the vast majority of students had little trouble doing the research or mastering their topics. There were exceptions. Some students still mastering the notion of thoroughness. One or two who needed to get over assuming that because they'd found some good stuff - it was enough. A simple conversation - one or two pointed questions - is usually enough to address that.
And seemingly all students had no trouble putting their information in order and making it look good. Getting the facts, getting 'em down, and making them look orderly and useful turned out to be an in the bag snap for the 6th grade.
What was hard was connecting it to the big picture. So much easier to let each subject reside in its own tight little research vacuum - unsullied or uncomplicated by the outside historical world or context. Immigration? The growth of the continent and the demise of the Native Americans? The statistical development of urban America? The massive growth of the American economy? These largely existed at the fringes of the papers. Directly, thoroughly, consistently connect details about Frederick Weyerhauser or Crazy Horse or Boss Tweed to these larger themes ? That is a harder task - a different order of historical analysis. That was harder for most 6th graders. That is connection. They can do it - but they don't always do it naturally - especially w/ so many peripheral details to attend to. (Sources? What sources?)
Many students provided me with full drafts of their papers a week or two ahead of time. These students really maximized the extended time made available to research, write, and revise their papers. It is always interesting to see what students will do with your constructive criticism when they get a draft back. Some students will make the minimal corrections, concentrating on the technical stuff. Some students will try - but making robust connections to a main theme is still an analytic and cognitive challenge. And some rare students dive into the revision process and come out w/ dramatic improvements. This round included a little of each of these phenomena.
Hank researched the Donner Party. He was interested in illustrating Westward Expansion and let us know some of the down and dirty details of what life was like for the actual pioneers.
Tom dived into the Battle of Little Bighorn. After a little focused immersion, Tom was able to pull back and give us some bird's-eye context, including some timely information about the guns used in the battle.
Julia bravely researched Richmond's own Gilded Age titan - James Dooley - the man who built and donated the Maymont estate. The class found it interesting to "evaluate" a local philanthropist.
Brent tackled the ever challenging topic of Tammany Hall. His presentation used some of his own artistic embellishments and he did a fine job explaining how immigrants found protection and favor - however corrupt - in America's growing cities.
Katesby researched the Brooklyn Bridge - a necessary infrastructural improvement as trade and population grew in New York City.
Dominic tackled the Gilded Age titan, Cornelius Vanderbilt. His analysis of Vanderbilt was thorough and far-reaching. He set the bar very high as we "evaluated" each industrialist, asking how much they contributed and made Americans lives better thru their work and their philanthropy.
Mathilde re-presented the tragic story of the Nez Percé Indians - a tribe who welcomed Lewis and Clark and yet still met an end no different than the Sioux.
Anna brought the infamous Boss Tweed to life - explaining Tammany Hall as well as a 9th grader could - adding color and captions to Thomas Nast's famous cartoons.
Margaret explored the life of Crazy Horse - one of Custer's nemeses at Little Big Horn.
Jack detailed the engines that made Henry Ford's assembly lines and factories tick.
Gardiner fairly weighed the pros and cons of the Chinese Exclusion Act - that spasm of American racism that shut the door - for almost 50 years - on the workers who built half of the Trans-Continental RR.
Hunter showed us what can happen when a city grows too quickly, housing its burgeoning workers in close-packed wooden buildings, as he detailed the block by block spread of the Great Chicago Fire.
Hannah mastered Jay Gould - the RR financier who built the Erie RR and tried to corner the gold market. Hannah tirelessly tried to master and explain every aspect of Gould's financial shenanigans.
Lilac chose a lesser known Gilded Age titan - yet one we still all know - the immigrant timber giant Frederick Weyerhauser.
Sami waded into the Apache sharing the flora and fauna of their environs before the 7 tribes were shunted West.
William embraced the great democrat, Carl Schurz. Using his time wisely and embracing the revision process, William was able to connect Schurz's background in the German constitutional revolution of the 1830s w/ his support of anti-slavery and equal rights once he became an influential American.
I hope you can see from this brief list how valuable the presentations are to our overall unit. Not only for each student's development of presentation skills. But to illustrate and flesh out and connect the themes of the unit. "The U.S. economy grew during the Gilded Age" is a pallid generalization. But if we can see the cities growing thru Tammany Hall and the Brooklyn Bridge and the Great Fire in Chicago - if we can see the immigrants peopling these cities and getting jobs on Henry Ford's assembly lines - if we can see the Indians being cleared away to make room for Jay Gould's RRs - and Frederick Weyerhauser's timber - then the Gilded Age comes alive. Specific stories - people, anecdotes, products, businesses - make these themes three dimensional.
Most students chose to present their papers via PowerPoint. I place a lot of emphasis on learning how to present effectively - in any medium. Because of the ubiquity and popularity of the PowerPoint and KeyNote formats I gave the 6s a scaffolding presentation on the Dos and Don'ts of PowerPoints. The emphasis is on using a visual medium, being in command of your information, and entertaining not boring your audience. So - every slide should have an image; you should not over-rely on text (i.e. bullet points are better than sentences; and captions are better than bullet points); and Thou Shalt Not Read Thy PowerPoint. (unless reading a quotation)
The 6s largely learned these goals quickly. So quickly that when one of their peers violated one of the principles it was evident and conspicuous to all. Better they correct each other than I have to.
They also learned the value of rehearsing their PowerPoint presentations. To husband length. To learn what's hard to explain. And to anticipate weak or vague moments in their PPs. They learned to anticipate their audience's questions - and to pre-empt those questions when possible or appropriate.
Hank learned to re-balance his presentation - to emphasize the most important information and de-emphasize less important details.
Tom learned the value of captions and rich illustrations - and the value of maps.
Julia learned to use more illustrations to illustrate even the most familiar information.
Brant was creative and inventive in supplementing the illustrations he found w/ his own art work to better illustrate the connection of the material to the unit's themes.
Katesby used nice images of the growing East River traffic in NYC.
Dominic used his PP to better pose the dilemma of gauging Vanderbilt. He did a nice job illustrating Vanderbilt's moments of vaulting ambition.
Mathilde brilliantly used two slides that were all words and sentences! She juxtaposed full quotations from Chief Joseph and Abraham Lincoln on equal rights. She knew just when it's OK to break the PP rules.
Anna used Thomas Nast's illustrations to show her class who Boss Tweed was - and then Ted-talked her way thru his deeds and mis-deeds.
Margaret showed us a lot of illustrations from Crazy Horse's personal life.
Jack laid out Henry Ford's assembly lines - making more efficient and productive workers and factories - and yielding cheaper cars.
Gardiner laid out some of the pictorial details of how Americans discriminated against the Chinese in the Gilded Age.
Hunter provided a step by step run through of the progression of the Great Chicago Fire. (Did you know the fire hopped the Chicago River - twice?)
Hannah didn't do a PowerPoint. She did a poster on Jay Gould. She presented it Ted-talk style - using the images and text boxes to challenge the class to assess Jay Gould a la Machiavelli.
Lilac gave a very tight review of Frederick Weyerhauser - the immigrant timber giant whose reach spread from Illinoi to Washington state.
Sami showed us multiple variety of plant and animal life in the Apache domain of the American southwest.
William used the online presentation form Prezi to dynamically chronicle the life and accomplishments of Carl Schurz. William learned that it's best to show his audience his finely chosen images - while we listen to him discourse on their background and meaning.
As we could anticipate - some students more fully realized their aims in their papers; others in their presentations. But all students presented something to learn from - and most students did a considerable amount of that learning during the 3 class weeks devoted to the project.
The presentations themselves weren't just about mastering the technical aspects of their chosen medium. Students still had to pose framing questions to their audience. In the most successful cases they gave their audience the info and the ability - and the question! - that enabled their peers to evaluate the topic in question.
They also still had to connect their discrete topic to the larger themes of the Gilded Age. For some students this was easier - or more easily came alive - while illustrating these connections via image and PowerPoint. And the time will soon come when I can circle back and use the PowerPoints to show some students how one can - and should - do the same illustrating and connecting in text form in the paragraphs of their next papers.
All in good time.
It is a lot to try to accomplish that first time. In truth - the assignment exposes students to each of these challenges. It does not asssume every student will master each of them the first time.
I haven't even mentioned confronting and grappling w/ content - trying to understand and master the specific questions our own topic raises. Making sure to go the extra mile and provide contextual information - statistics! Learning the basic premise of research - how the answer to any question yields new questions - in an infinite regression - until it's time to write.
With all this to do - to meet - to learn - I elected not to hand deliver everything to them. I wanted to throw them into this sea of challenges and responsibilities and see who needed what. Who needs help w/ an outline? Who needs to learn about the drafting process? Who needs help finding sources? In particular I decided not to front-load and pre-program the paper construction process. I didn't pre-teach the premises of the intro and the conclusion. I alluded to it. It came up in private conversation. But - as much as possible - I wanted students to discover the utility of the intro and conclusion. Learned this way - from the ground up (constructivist style) - intros and conclusions might take on their own necessary and illuminating life of their own. Or that's the theory any way.
Turns out the vast majority of students had little trouble doing the research or mastering their topics. There were exceptions. Some students still mastering the notion of thoroughness. One or two who needed to get over assuming that because they'd found some good stuff - it was enough. A simple conversation - one or two pointed questions - is usually enough to address that.
And seemingly all students had no trouble putting their information in order and making it look good. Getting the facts, getting 'em down, and making them look orderly and useful turned out to be an in the bag snap for the 6th grade.
What was hard was connecting it to the big picture. So much easier to let each subject reside in its own tight little research vacuum - unsullied or uncomplicated by the outside historical world or context. Immigration? The growth of the continent and the demise of the Native Americans? The statistical development of urban America? The massive growth of the American economy? These largely existed at the fringes of the papers. Directly, thoroughly, consistently connect details about Frederick Weyerhauser or Crazy Horse or Boss Tweed to these larger themes ? That is a harder task - a different order of historical analysis. That was harder for most 6th graders. That is connection. They can do it - but they don't always do it naturally - especially w/ so many peripheral details to attend to. (Sources? What sources?)
Many students provided me with full drafts of their papers a week or two ahead of time. These students really maximized the extended time made available to research, write, and revise their papers. It is always interesting to see what students will do with your constructive criticism when they get a draft back. Some students will make the minimal corrections, concentrating on the technical stuff. Some students will try - but making robust connections to a main theme is still an analytic and cognitive challenge. And some rare students dive into the revision process and come out w/ dramatic improvements. This round included a little of each of these phenomena.
Hank researched the Donner Party. He was interested in illustrating Westward Expansion and let us know some of the down and dirty details of what life was like for the actual pioneers.
Tom dived into the Battle of Little Bighorn. After a little focused immersion, Tom was able to pull back and give us some bird's-eye context, including some timely information about the guns used in the battle.
Julia bravely researched Richmond's own Gilded Age titan - James Dooley - the man who built and donated the Maymont estate. The class found it interesting to "evaluate" a local philanthropist.
Brent tackled the ever challenging topic of Tammany Hall. His presentation used some of his own artistic embellishments and he did a fine job explaining how immigrants found protection and favor - however corrupt - in America's growing cities.
Katesby researched the Brooklyn Bridge - a necessary infrastructural improvement as trade and population grew in New York City.
Dominic tackled the Gilded Age titan, Cornelius Vanderbilt. His analysis of Vanderbilt was thorough and far-reaching. He set the bar very high as we "evaluated" each industrialist, asking how much they contributed and made Americans lives better thru their work and their philanthropy.
Mathilde re-presented the tragic story of the Nez Percé Indians - a tribe who welcomed Lewis and Clark and yet still met an end no different than the Sioux.
Anna brought the infamous Boss Tweed to life - explaining Tammany Hall as well as a 9th grader could - adding color and captions to Thomas Nast's famous cartoons.
Margaret explored the life of Crazy Horse - one of Custer's nemeses at Little Big Horn.
Jack detailed the engines that made Henry Ford's assembly lines and factories tick.
Gardiner fairly weighed the pros and cons of the Chinese Exclusion Act - that spasm of American racism that shut the door - for almost 50 years - on the workers who built half of the Trans-Continental RR.
Hunter showed us what can happen when a city grows too quickly, housing its burgeoning workers in close-packed wooden buildings, as he detailed the block by block spread of the Great Chicago Fire.
Hannah mastered Jay Gould - the RR financier who built the Erie RR and tried to corner the gold market. Hannah tirelessly tried to master and explain every aspect of Gould's financial shenanigans.
Lilac chose a lesser known Gilded Age titan - yet one we still all know - the immigrant timber giant Frederick Weyerhauser.
Sami waded into the Apache sharing the flora and fauna of their environs before the 7 tribes were shunted West.
William embraced the great democrat, Carl Schurz. Using his time wisely and embracing the revision process, William was able to connect Schurz's background in the German constitutional revolution of the 1830s w/ his support of anti-slavery and equal rights once he became an influential American.
I hope you can see from this brief list how valuable the presentations are to our overall unit. Not only for each student's development of presentation skills. But to illustrate and flesh out and connect the themes of the unit. "The U.S. economy grew during the Gilded Age" is a pallid generalization. But if we can see the cities growing thru Tammany Hall and the Brooklyn Bridge and the Great Fire in Chicago - if we can see the immigrants peopling these cities and getting jobs on Henry Ford's assembly lines - if we can see the Indians being cleared away to make room for Jay Gould's RRs - and Frederick Weyerhauser's timber - then the Gilded Age comes alive. Specific stories - people, anecdotes, products, businesses - make these themes three dimensional.
Most students chose to present their papers via PowerPoint. I place a lot of emphasis on learning how to present effectively - in any medium. Because of the ubiquity and popularity of the PowerPoint and KeyNote formats I gave the 6s a scaffolding presentation on the Dos and Don'ts of PowerPoints. The emphasis is on using a visual medium, being in command of your information, and entertaining not boring your audience. So - every slide should have an image; you should not over-rely on text (i.e. bullet points are better than sentences; and captions are better than bullet points); and Thou Shalt Not Read Thy PowerPoint. (unless reading a quotation)
The 6s largely learned these goals quickly. So quickly that when one of their peers violated one of the principles it was evident and conspicuous to all. Better they correct each other than I have to.
They also learned the value of rehearsing their PowerPoint presentations. To husband length. To learn what's hard to explain. And to anticipate weak or vague moments in their PPs. They learned to anticipate their audience's questions - and to pre-empt those questions when possible or appropriate.
Hank learned to re-balance his presentation - to emphasize the most important information and de-emphasize less important details.
Tom learned the value of captions and rich illustrations - and the value of maps.
Julia learned to use more illustrations to illustrate even the most familiar information.
Brant was creative and inventive in supplementing the illustrations he found w/ his own art work to better illustrate the connection of the material to the unit's themes.
Katesby used nice images of the growing East River traffic in NYC.
Dominic used his PP to better pose the dilemma of gauging Vanderbilt. He did a nice job illustrating Vanderbilt's moments of vaulting ambition.
Mathilde brilliantly used two slides that were all words and sentences! She juxtaposed full quotations from Chief Joseph and Abraham Lincoln on equal rights. She knew just when it's OK to break the PP rules.
Anna used Thomas Nast's illustrations to show her class who Boss Tweed was - and then Ted-talked her way thru his deeds and mis-deeds.
Margaret showed us a lot of illustrations from Crazy Horse's personal life.
Jack laid out Henry Ford's assembly lines - making more efficient and productive workers and factories - and yielding cheaper cars.
Gardiner laid out some of the pictorial details of how Americans discriminated against the Chinese in the Gilded Age.
Hunter provided a step by step run through of the progression of the Great Chicago Fire. (Did you know the fire hopped the Chicago River - twice?)
Hannah didn't do a PowerPoint. She did a poster on Jay Gould. She presented it Ted-talk style - using the images and text boxes to challenge the class to assess Jay Gould a la Machiavelli.
Lilac gave a very tight review of Frederick Weyerhauser - the immigrant timber giant whose reach spread from Illinoi to Washington state.
Sami showed us multiple variety of plant and animal life in the Apache domain of the American southwest.
William used the online presentation form Prezi to dynamically chronicle the life and accomplishments of Carl Schurz. William learned that it's best to show his audience his finely chosen images - while we listen to him discourse on their background and meaning.
As we could anticipate - some students more fully realized their aims in their papers; others in their presentations. But all students presented something to learn from - and most students did a considerable amount of that learning during the 3 class weeks devoted to the project.
The presentations themselves weren't just about mastering the technical aspects of their chosen medium. Students still had to pose framing questions to their audience. In the most successful cases they gave their audience the info and the ability - and the question! - that enabled their peers to evaluate the topic in question.
They also still had to connect their discrete topic to the larger themes of the Gilded Age. For some students this was easier - or more easily came alive - while illustrating these connections via image and PowerPoint. And the time will soon come when I can circle back and use the PowerPoints to show some students how one can - and should - do the same illustrating and connecting in text form in the paragraphs of their next papers.
All in good time.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Reports from the world of micro-economics
After spending most of their Economics time in the 1st trimester learning about macro-economics - big picture questions like understanding the Federal budget - the 8th grade students have spent the first half of the 2nd trimester diving into micro-economics. Specifically, they have just turned in their papers on micro-economics - researching either a successful company that eventually failed or a rising up and coming new company and assessing its fortunes. In each case they were asked to describe how their company became successful, what hurdles or innovations they created, and what the market in their respective industry looked or looks like.
To evaluate their work - a comparison w/ the 6th grade - who also just completed research papers (on the Gilded Age) is useful. The 6th graders have excelled at digging into and finding a story to tell - telling it coherently and logically - peppered w/ useful detail. But many of the 6th graders - in their first try - have not found it a natural thing to relate or connect their own topic w/ the wider themes of the Gilded Age - westward expansion and the demise of the Indians; the growth of the U.S. economy, population, and contintent; immigration. The first task - telling a rich, meaningful, coherent, logical, detailed story - is valuable - and they essentially have it down. The second task is more analytical and comparative - and cognitively harder. (They'll be a lot more of that as we move into 7th and 8th grade - 6th graders...)
The 8th grade papers demonstrate a similar pattern - though at an advanced level. The 8th graders had little trouble diving into their topics. They easily found the enthusiasm to describe colorful and illustrative aspects of their chosen companies. They often even found some analytical moments to describe and diagnose. Their papers are mostly rich w/ a wide range of sub-themes covered. The 8th graders seemed to have fine radar for this. (The paper requirement was 3-5 pages - so this may have induced searching farther afield.) But the 8th graders - by and large - struggled w/ the final aspect of their papers - explaining in detail the market their respective companies faced. Who were their competitors? How did they gain market share? How did they lose it? The 8th graders struggled especially to find and use statistics - especially market share stats - to illustrate and explain their companies' fortunes.
Dispatches:
John Blue investigated the demise of the brokerage houses during the housing market and stock market collapse of 2007. He chose AIG - but what he really did was learn all about that hardest to understand topic - the financial derivatives reputed to have brought down Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers when the housing market collapsed. No time to read Michael Lewis? Ask John to tell you all about collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps. He'll whip out a piece of chalk and have you to up to speed in no time. Hungry for more? Dare - if you will - to ask him about synthetic CDOs! He will.
Ava Cocagna described - in concise and effective detail - how Howard Schulz rescued Starbucks from overreaching and too-fast growth and restored Starbucks to profitability in 2008. ("It's all about the coffee," reports Schulz.)
Séarlait Coffey learned about her cousin's start-up in Silicon Valley - an on-line used women's clothing company called twice (as in "twice liked"). Séarlait reports on some of the doings of the young entrepreneurs out there. ("It's all about getting capital," Séarlait learned from her cousin.)
Sabrina Daglish dived into the world of retail frozen yogurt - detailing the strategy and prospects of sweetFrog. Sabrina explains that frozen yogurt had its first popularity in the U.S. in the 1970s and '80s - but it waned. Sabrina speculates that for all sweetFrog's delights - it may wane again.
Reed Davis investigated his father's brokerage house, Thomson Davis Asset Management. Reed reports that his father was able to largely anticipate the housing crash in 2007 and was able to protect the better part of his clients' assets. (Wish I'd had his advice then!)
Ollie Felton delved into the world of healthy potato chips - reporting on upstart PopChips' brave attempt to take on the giant in the field - Frito-Lay. Ollie brought in samples of the healthy baked chips during his presentation. (They tasted a little chalky to me.)
Max Frankel presented an ambitious description of the rise and fall of Richmond's own Circuit City. Max asserts that their big mistake was...CarMax! Despite the continued profitability of that venture - Max says is siphoned executives and effective mid-level managers away from Circuit City - and left them ill-poised to respond to the challenge from Best Buy.
Max Halbruner chose a challenging topic - the Chinese petro-chemical giant, Simotec. (#7 on the Fortune 500) Max described their aggressive ventures acquiring resources, territory, and parnerships in the U.S. He emphasized that, despite being a state-owned company, they use market oriented strategies to succeed and grow, instead of out-moded Communist methods of central planning.
Rebecca Houck told the story of the Flip camera - a company that rose to market share dominance - an then fell to disconinuation - all in the short space of four years. My how quickly capitalism moves in our 21st century.
Josie Roebuck described the market and strategies of her brother's mobile app development company, Mobiquity. Josie did an excellent job conducting research that one couldn't just find on-line.
Nina Rosenbaum described the rise and fall of Blockbuster - once the dominant giant of retail video rentals - now forgotten. A cautionary tale of how one business ate up all the little fishes in the sea - only to be eaten itself by new fishes.
[Coming next - reports from the 6th grade's papers and presentations on the Gilded Age.]
To evaluate their work - a comparison w/ the 6th grade - who also just completed research papers (on the Gilded Age) is useful. The 6th graders have excelled at digging into and finding a story to tell - telling it coherently and logically - peppered w/ useful detail. But many of the 6th graders - in their first try - have not found it a natural thing to relate or connect their own topic w/ the wider themes of the Gilded Age - westward expansion and the demise of the Indians; the growth of the U.S. economy, population, and contintent; immigration. The first task - telling a rich, meaningful, coherent, logical, detailed story - is valuable - and they essentially have it down. The second task is more analytical and comparative - and cognitively harder. (They'll be a lot more of that as we move into 7th and 8th grade - 6th graders...)
The 8th grade papers demonstrate a similar pattern - though at an advanced level. The 8th graders had little trouble diving into their topics. They easily found the enthusiasm to describe colorful and illustrative aspects of their chosen companies. They often even found some analytical moments to describe and diagnose. Their papers are mostly rich w/ a wide range of sub-themes covered. The 8th graders seemed to have fine radar for this. (The paper requirement was 3-5 pages - so this may have induced searching farther afield.) But the 8th graders - by and large - struggled w/ the final aspect of their papers - explaining in detail the market their respective companies faced. Who were their competitors? How did they gain market share? How did they lose it? The 8th graders struggled especially to find and use statistics - especially market share stats - to illustrate and explain their companies' fortunes.
Dispatches:
John Blue investigated the demise of the brokerage houses during the housing market and stock market collapse of 2007. He chose AIG - but what he really did was learn all about that hardest to understand topic - the financial derivatives reputed to have brought down Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers when the housing market collapsed. No time to read Michael Lewis? Ask John to tell you all about collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps. He'll whip out a piece of chalk and have you to up to speed in no time. Hungry for more? Dare - if you will - to ask him about synthetic CDOs! He will.
Ava Cocagna described - in concise and effective detail - how Howard Schulz rescued Starbucks from overreaching and too-fast growth and restored Starbucks to profitability in 2008. ("It's all about the coffee," reports Schulz.)
Séarlait Coffey learned about her cousin's start-up in Silicon Valley - an on-line used women's clothing company called twice (as in "twice liked"). Séarlait reports on some of the doings of the young entrepreneurs out there. ("It's all about getting capital," Séarlait learned from her cousin.)
Sabrina Daglish dived into the world of retail frozen yogurt - detailing the strategy and prospects of sweetFrog. Sabrina explains that frozen yogurt had its first popularity in the U.S. in the 1970s and '80s - but it waned. Sabrina speculates that for all sweetFrog's delights - it may wane again.
Reed Davis investigated his father's brokerage house, Thomson Davis Asset Management. Reed reports that his father was able to largely anticipate the housing crash in 2007 and was able to protect the better part of his clients' assets. (Wish I'd had his advice then!)
Ollie Felton delved into the world of healthy potato chips - reporting on upstart PopChips' brave attempt to take on the giant in the field - Frito-Lay. Ollie brought in samples of the healthy baked chips during his presentation. (They tasted a little chalky to me.)
Max Frankel presented an ambitious description of the rise and fall of Richmond's own Circuit City. Max asserts that their big mistake was...CarMax! Despite the continued profitability of that venture - Max says is siphoned executives and effective mid-level managers away from Circuit City - and left them ill-poised to respond to the challenge from Best Buy.
Max Halbruner chose a challenging topic - the Chinese petro-chemical giant, Simotec. (#7 on the Fortune 500) Max described their aggressive ventures acquiring resources, territory, and parnerships in the U.S. He emphasized that, despite being a state-owned company, they use market oriented strategies to succeed and grow, instead of out-moded Communist methods of central planning.
Rebecca Houck told the story of the Flip camera - a company that rose to market share dominance - an then fell to disconinuation - all in the short space of four years. My how quickly capitalism moves in our 21st century.
Josie Roebuck described the market and strategies of her brother's mobile app development company, Mobiquity. Josie did an excellent job conducting research that one couldn't just find on-line.
Nina Rosenbaum described the rise and fall of Blockbuster - once the dominant giant of retail video rentals - now forgotten. A cautionary tale of how one business ate up all the little fishes in the sea - only to be eaten itself by new fishes.
[Coming next - reports from the 6th grade's papers and presentations on the Gilded Age.]
Friday, December 7, 2012
Synergy in the Pool House (update)
Why did condoms show up in the 7th Grade presentation on the Over Arching Question in Geography? Ask your 7th grader.
(Hint: The OAQ was: Why are there so many people in the Indian sub-contintent?)
**
And is it true that 6th graders re-enacted a scene from the Godfather II in Theatre class? Ask your 6th grader.
(Think Emma Lazarus...)
(Hint: The OAQ was: Why are there so many people in the Indian sub-contintent?)
**
And is it true that 6th graders re-enacted a scene from the Godfather II in Theatre class? Ask your 6th grader.
(Think Emma Lazarus...)
Monday, November 26, 2012
Exercises in Depth III: Inequality Paragraphs (8th Grade)
3. Refining Paragraphs on Inequality
Finally, now that the election is over the 8th graders have turned from their study of the Constitution, have stopped reading and discussing articles and editorials from the newspapers to gain a rudimentary understanding of economic questions, have stopped watching and parsing the Presidential debates, and have knuckled down to do what we might ungenerously call some real work.
I stood at the board and led them thru a brief introduction to the notion of economic inequality. Once they were all conversant w/ the basic concept - and had some familiarity w/ the present issues involved - I gave them a list of introductory links, and a couple of provoking editorials - and asked them to compose a paragraph summarizing and presenting their own opinion - their own take - on inequality in America.
In truth their understandings could only scratch the surface (although when some of these kids scratch the surface they get deep quickly) - but I wanted the exercise to provide an opportunity for revisions - in writing and thinking. As it has in fact turned out - w/ some unexpected learning and refinement opportunities.
In the run up to the election there were many accounts in the press summarizing the present state of inequality in America. It has gotten worse in the last 12 years. (One of the most oft-quoted statistics is that 93% of economic gains in the last 5 years went to the top 1% of the population.) Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has even written a book explaining how economic inequality hurts the economy. So there is plenty there for the 8th graders to absorb and explore.
Most students started by explaining why inequality is natural - or why some inequality is OK. (Hey, we're not Communists here, right?) Some of these students got into trouble if they spent most of their paragraph theorizing or hypothesizing - making deductions based solely on what they already knew (or thought they knew) - rather than assimilating or drawing from the material in the article links. I quickly sent them back to the drawing board to read more quickly, locate some statistics, so they could actually know what they were talking about.
Some students bought the current lament in toto - and their paragraphs reflected this. Paraphrases, if you will. I asked these students to look more closely at a controversial editorial in the Wall Street Journal which explains that while inequality has gotten worse - the actual (average) standard of living of people in the poor or working classes has continued to rise. (People in the lower class usually have TVs, for example.) This was conscious provocation on my part - but some students (e.g. Josie Roebuck) really embraced the opportunity and ended up writing more nuanced paragraphs - longer paragraphs in which they asserted, countered, and qualified. To their credit.
Many students assumed because they'd chucked some statistics in - they were just fine. To most of these students I asked them to look more closely - to ask about the utility of their statistics - to see if the stats needed more information to give them context - to ask if the stats were convincing on their own or if more information (more stats, more context, a broader range or look) would make them more convincing. To many students - this did not come naturally. For many students this was hard - a pain. I can't say that all students met my objectives completely here - but I can say that the paragraphs by and large are all better - in some cases much better - because of this process.
If you ask the students - they'll probably say (in regard to this exercise) - oh, Mr. Coffey is never satisfied. For some reason recognizing that some stats need more context is something most students do not yet recognize on their own. (I will make it my personal campaign to change that.) But I do know that nearly every student's 'paragraph' was enriched and improved by having to go thru the statistical ringer w/ me 2-3 times.
Some students needed help wielding economic vocabulary more effectively. (e.g. using "assets" where "wealth" would do better.) This, of course, is why we're here. Students seemed largely eager and open-minded about improving their paragraphs this way. They recognize when they are tossing around sophisticated words - and seem eager to gain a surer, firmer understanding.
Some students I pressed by asking them to question or prove or better exemplify the information they were quoting. Some students relied on Stiglitz to claim that inequality hurt the economy. I asked them to show me how or where. Other students had issue w/ logic or inadequate comparison. When I pointed this out - they (by and large) were grateful and made effective corrections.
The inequality paragraph is largely over. (Thankfully, some might say.) But we will wield the premises learned again. We are just getting started in Economics.
Finally, now that the election is over the 8th graders have turned from their study of the Constitution, have stopped reading and discussing articles and editorials from the newspapers to gain a rudimentary understanding of economic questions, have stopped watching and parsing the Presidential debates, and have knuckled down to do what we might ungenerously call some real work.
I stood at the board and led them thru a brief introduction to the notion of economic inequality. Once they were all conversant w/ the basic concept - and had some familiarity w/ the present issues involved - I gave them a list of introductory links, and a couple of provoking editorials - and asked them to compose a paragraph summarizing and presenting their own opinion - their own take - on inequality in America.
In truth their understandings could only scratch the surface (although when some of these kids scratch the surface they get deep quickly) - but I wanted the exercise to provide an opportunity for revisions - in writing and thinking. As it has in fact turned out - w/ some unexpected learning and refinement opportunities.
In the run up to the election there were many accounts in the press summarizing the present state of inequality in America. It has gotten worse in the last 12 years. (One of the most oft-quoted statistics is that 93% of economic gains in the last 5 years went to the top 1% of the population.) Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has even written a book explaining how economic inequality hurts the economy. So there is plenty there for the 8th graders to absorb and explore.
Most students started by explaining why inequality is natural - or why some inequality is OK. (Hey, we're not Communists here, right?) Some of these students got into trouble if they spent most of their paragraph theorizing or hypothesizing - making deductions based solely on what they already knew (or thought they knew) - rather than assimilating or drawing from the material in the article links. I quickly sent them back to the drawing board to read more quickly, locate some statistics, so they could actually know what they were talking about.
Some students bought the current lament in toto - and their paragraphs reflected this. Paraphrases, if you will. I asked these students to look more closely at a controversial editorial in the Wall Street Journal which explains that while inequality has gotten worse - the actual (average) standard of living of people in the poor or working classes has continued to rise. (People in the lower class usually have TVs, for example.) This was conscious provocation on my part - but some students (e.g. Josie Roebuck) really embraced the opportunity and ended up writing more nuanced paragraphs - longer paragraphs in which they asserted, countered, and qualified. To their credit.
Many students assumed because they'd chucked some statistics in - they were just fine. To most of these students I asked them to look more closely - to ask about the utility of their statistics - to see if the stats needed more information to give them context - to ask if the stats were convincing on their own or if more information (more stats, more context, a broader range or look) would make them more convincing. To many students - this did not come naturally. For many students this was hard - a pain. I can't say that all students met my objectives completely here - but I can say that the paragraphs by and large are all better - in some cases much better - because of this process.
If you ask the students - they'll probably say (in regard to this exercise) - oh, Mr. Coffey is never satisfied. For some reason recognizing that some stats need more context is something most students do not yet recognize on their own. (I will make it my personal campaign to change that.) But I do know that nearly every student's 'paragraph' was enriched and improved by having to go thru the statistical ringer w/ me 2-3 times.
Some students needed help wielding economic vocabulary more effectively. (e.g. using "assets" where "wealth" would do better.) This, of course, is why we're here. Students seemed largely eager and open-minded about improving their paragraphs this way. They recognize when they are tossing around sophisticated words - and seem eager to gain a surer, firmer understanding.
Some students I pressed by asking them to question or prove or better exemplify the information they were quoting. Some students relied on Stiglitz to claim that inequality hurt the economy. I asked them to show me how or where. Other students had issue w/ logic or inadequate comparison. When I pointed this out - they (by and large) were grateful and made effective corrections.
The inequality paragraph is largely over. (Thankfully, some might say.) But we will wield the premises learned again. We are just getting started in Economics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)