The world lost a giant of an educator on July 26th when Vivian Paley passed away at age 90. Paley was the only kindergarten teacher ever named a MacArthur genius. Her example as an educator, documented in her numerous moving and inspirational books, gave voice to young teachers. Her poignant shared self-reflection tackled poverty, racism, gender, power, peace, community, rejection, literacy, democracy, fantasy, play, and love in the classroom and beyond. Paley led through kindness, common sense, and an affection for the inner lives of children. Her work is relevant for educators and parents, regardless of the age of child you support.

“To her, teaching was not about meeting a bunch of core requirements that you can quantify; it was about being a human being.” – John Hornstein in the NY Times Obituary of Vivian Paley

I tried in vain to convince Ms. Paley to participate in Constructing Modern Knowledge, but she saw a photo of a computer on our web site and declined. My powers of persuasion were unpersuasive, even when I listed all of her friends who had participated in the past. I sure wish I could have shared Ms. Paley with our community.

In The Children’s Machine, Seymour Papert stressed the importance of sharing learning stories as a way of reforming education in a humane learner-centered direction. Vivian Paley was a master of documenting and sharing learning stories.

I strongly urge you to read several of the books listed below, but if you are allergic to books, listen to Vivian Paley on This American Life talking about how she allowed five year-olds to address issues of friendship, empathy, and even bullying with one simple rule, “You can’t say, you can’t play.” (11 minutes)

In The Classrooms All Young Children Need: Lessons in Teaching from Vivian PaleyPatricia Cooper authored a terrific analysis of analysis of Paley’s work as a “pedagogical model organized around two complementary principles: a curriculum that promotes play and imagination, and the idea of classrooms as fair places where young children of every color, ability, and disposition are welcome.” (Cooper, Patricia M. The classrooms all young children need: Lessons in teaching from Vivian Paley. University of Chicago Press, 2009.)

If you are an educator unfamiliar with the name Vivian Paley or her work, that is a great shame and diminishes your craft.

 

Vivian Paley authored thirteen books, here are my top five favorites.

Here is one more for good measure, A Child’s Work: The Importance of Fantasy Play.

“She helped children use the tools they have, which are imagination, sympathy and make-believe, to understand themselves and each other,” said Dr. Joshua D. Sparrow, executive director of the Brazelton Touchpoints Center in Boston, which studies child development. – NY Times Obituary of Vivian Paley

Check out all of Vivian Paley’s remarkable books on Amazon.com


Veteran educator Dr. Gary Stager is co-author of Invent To Learn — Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom and the founder of the Constructing Modern Knowledge summer institute. He led professional development in the world’s first 1:1 laptop schools and designed one of the oldest online graduate school programs. Learn more about Gary here.

Either the principal IS a holocaust denier OR a cowardly knucklehead trapped in a zero-tolerance school setting where a misguided quest for “balance” is king.

If he is just an ignoramus (there are plenty of them with jobs), I might ask this hypothetical question. If the principal had refused to allow a debate on “slavery reparations” or “climate change,” would he lose his job?

Oh, and don’t pretend that schools don’t teach about the holocaust. In many cases, the subject receives so much instructional time that students (perhaps teachers too) just zone out. The teaching about the holocaust is just another example of the limits of instruction.

I wrote this article warning about the downside of “balance” 5 years ago. At the bottom of it is a link to an essential book chapter, “Extreme Ideas,” by Jonathan Kozol. I recommend both. I also recommend not contorting yourself into a pretzel to avoid all controversy in the classroom. This serves no one.

Note: If the principal is anti-semitic, a racist, or holocaust denier, then we should discuss his job security within the constraints of the First Amendment.


I’ve never been good at ice-breakers or getting-to-know-you games. If I am being paid to teach, whether it be children or adults, that’s my focus. I never worry about classroom management because I never enter a classroom thinking I need to manage it. “Hi, I’m Gary. We’ve got stuff to do!”

I take seriously the Reggio Emilia inspired notion that the primary responsibility of a teacher is to be a researcher – one who makes private thinking public and invisible thinking visible. Teachers should work* to understand the thinking of each student and identify what they can do in order to prepare the learning environment for the next intellectual development.

During my educator workshops around the world I often find that the best engineers are preschool teachers, the best mathematicians teach P.E., and the most natural programmers teach 5th grade (or vice versa?).  I have certainly found plenty of veteran teachers to be much more sophisticated technology users than their younger peers. Starting the workshop with preconceived notions of who the participants are or what they think they know only narrows the possibilities for serendipity and exceeding expectations.

This is the time of year when teachers meet with teachers of the next grade level to discuss the students they are about to receive. Perhaps this common practice is counterproductive. A student’s “file” can be a life sentence. Why be prejudiced about a student  before you meet her? Why not start every class with fresh eyes, an open mind, and open heart? Ask yourself, “How do I make this the best seven hours or forty-three minutes of a kid’s life?”


Footnote:

It's a lot less like work than it about caring for each student or getting to know them on a collegial level.



Long ago, a wise friend told me that 90% of education research is bullshit. As I mature, I realize that estimate is far too modest. Social media and the nonsense masquerading as education journalism have become inundated with a flaming brown paper bag full of articles out to prove that phonics[1]and penmanship instruction[2]are crucial 21stCentury skills[3], class size does not matter[4][5], constructivism is a failed pedagogical strategy[6], there are no learning styles[7], not everyone “needs to code,”[8]all kids need to be above the norm[9][10], and that standardized testing is objective, reliable, and valid[11].

If you believe any of these things, then I would love to tell you that the Common Core State [education] Standards were “written by the nation’s governors.” No seriously; they expect us to believe that crap. I for one would love to see Chris Christie’s notes from his curriculum development meetings. “Time for some BrainPop on the GW Bridge!”

When brightly colored infographics and Venn diagrams with nothing in the intersection of the rings fail to convince you to panic, the purveyors of hysteria wave their interactive white board pen and recite the magic word, “SCIENCE!”

SCIENCE is the new FINLAND!

Wish to justify the curious epidemic of learning disabilities, just yell, “SCIENCE!” Want to medicate kids when your curriculum fails to sedate them? SCIENCE! Care to cut salaries and slash electives? SCIENCE will prove that playing the bassoon will never get you a high-paying job at Google passing out t-shirts at tradeshows like the niece of your mom’s hairdresser. (Someone should set that last paragraph to music. Lin-Manuel, call me!)

Aside from the ISIS-like fanaticism defending phonics or penmanship systems, two recent “studies” reveal the quality of SCIENCE rushing through the body education like sugar-free gummy bears. “Study Shows Classroom Decor Can Distract From Learning,” about the value of bare walls on kindergartener’s recall, and “Kids perform better during boring tasks when dressed as Batman.” No, seriously. Those are real. Someone undoubtedly earned an EdD and parking space at Southern North Dakota Community College for such drivel.

The mere stench of SCIENCE associated with such studies goes unchallenged and serves as fantastic clickbait for a myriad of school discipline conventions. (Seriously, this is a real thing.) Why doesn’t anyone ask why babies are taking bubble tests or should be subjected to ugly classrooms? Surely, the National Science Foundation is funding replication studies to determine if five-year-olds dressed as Superman or Queen Elsa are more easily tricked into wasting their formative years on meaningless tasks? [12]

It just isn’t sufficiently SCIENTIFIC for children to enjoy happy, healthy, creative, productive, and playful childhoods. Move along young Batman. Nothing to see here. Wet your pants again? You might be dyslexic.

SCIENCE is only ever used to sustain the mythology or comfort of adults. The only time educators are ever asked to provide “evidence” is to justify something kids like – laptops, recess, band, making things…

The burden of proof is quite different for defending the status quo. What was the last time you heard anyone ask for evidence to support homework, 42-minute class periods, Algebra II, AP classes, textbooks, worksheets, times tables, interactive white boards, or the countless forms of coercion, humiliation, and punishment visited on students daily?

You know where else you find very little actual science? In Science class where the vast majority of the curriculum is concerned with vocabulary memorization or historical reenactments and very few students do science by engaging in the habits of a scientist.

At a recent gathering, three generations of people shared what they remembered from their high school science classes. The most vivid memories consisted of starting fires, causing explosions, noxious fumes, throwing test tubes out a window while exclaiming, “I’m Zeus,” or killing things (plants, the class rat, time). In SCIENTIFIC terms, 0.000000003% of the official science curriculum is retained after Friday’s quiz.

Another way of providing nutrients to the sod of education rhetoric is to sprinkle highfalutin terms like, metacognition, everywhere. This form of scientism takes a little understood concept and demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of it as a vehicle for justifying more memorization, teacher compliance, or producing the illusion of student agency. Don’t even get me started about the experts incapable of discerning the difference between teaching and learning or the bigshots who think learning is a noun.

Free advice: Forbes, the McKinsey Group, anyone associated with Clayton Christensen, TED Talks and EdSurge are not credible sources on education reform, pedagogy, or learning theory even if they accidentally confirm our own biases once in a while. They are libertarian hacks hell-bent on dismantling public education. It is also a good rule of thumb to steer clear of any source containing “ED,” “topia,” “mentum,” “vation,” “mind,” “brain,” “institute,” or “ology” in their title.

When you get right down to it, many of the questionable educational practices seeking justification from SCIENCE seek to promote simplistic mechanical models of complex processes that are in actuality much harder to distill or even impossible to comprehend. To those seeking to justify phonics instruction, a simple input-output diagram is preferable to the more likely hypothesis that reading is natural. Learning is not the direct result of having been taught.

Note: This is a deliberate provocation intended to challenge a phenomenon in education rather than engage in a hot-tempered battle of dueling research studies. Don’t bother to ask me for evidence to support my claims since I’m trading in common sense and honestly do not care if you agree with me. Seriously.

Of course, there are studies widely available to validate my outrageous blather, but I am under no obligation to identify them for you unless you grant me a cushy tenure track position, medical insurance, and a pension. If this article upsets you, my powers of persuasion are inadequate to change your mind anyway.

Endnotes:

[1]If everyone learns to read through the direct instruction of a fixed sequence 43 different sounds, how do you explain students learning to read in China, Japan, Israel or any other language without phonemes?

[2]These studies always “prove” the importance of medieval chores by pointing to test score increases (memorization). How many children are misdiagnosed with learning disabilities for confusing the ability to express themselves (writing) with the way in which they use a pencil (writing)? If penmanship is so precious, teach it in art class as a craft or as a PE activity prior to the prehistoric high school IB exams.

[3]I refrain from citing the pernicious and ubiquitous “studies” I mock with such utter contempt because I do not wish to give them any more oxygen.

[4]See the amoral work of John Hattie. He also determined that desegregation doesn’t matter for student achievement. Basic concepts of right and wrong are of no consequence for such purveyors of SCIENCE!

[5]Bill Gates loves larger classes too (except for his children) – https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/02/bill-gates-big-idea-to-fix-us-education-bigger-classes/71797/

[6]Constructivism is not a pedagogical trick, it is a scientific learning theory. Those who doubt constructivism are like flat earthers or climate change deniers. Science has nothing to do with their beliefs.

[7]Go ahead; argue that humans do not learn differently. The anti-learning styles crowd confuses teacher intervention with learning.

[8]Addressed this issue in this podcast.

[9]Hillary Clinton promised to close all schools below average – https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/23/hillary-clinton-may-want-to-close-every-public-school-in-america-according-to-math/?utm_term=.623a9f0ad161

[10]No Child Left Behind demanded that all schools meet norm-reference standards by 2014 – [10]https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/10/11/354931351/it-s-2014-all-children-are-supposed-to-be-proficient-under-federal-law

[11]See all education policy

[12]My friend Alfie Kohn does a fantastic job dismantling the quality of such “SCIENCE” in this article. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/06/05/the-education-question-we-should-be-asking/


Veteran educator Dr. Gary Stager is co-author of Invent To Learn — Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom and the founder of the Constructing Modern Knowledge summer institute. He led professional development in the world’s first 1:1 laptop schools and designed one of the oldest online graduate school programs. Learn more about Gary here.

In August 2018, I delivered the opening keynote address at the Constructionism Conference in Vilnius, Lithuania. When invited to speak at the conference nearly eighteen months earlier, I felt pressured to share the topic of my address quickly. Since I do some of my best work as a wiseass, I offered the title, “Making Constructionism Great Again.” Over the ensuing months, my tongue-in-cheek title began resonating and formed the basis for what I believe to be one of my favorite keynotes ever. (Sadly, I will unlikely ever give the presentation again. Therefore, I will not have the opportunity to improve upon my performance)

Despite the title I selected, I accepted the sober challenge of making an important contribution to the conference. After all, this is a community I care about, a topic I have dedicated my adult life to, in the home of my ancestors. Due to a family emergency, the speaker scheduled before me had to fly home and my talk got moved earlier in the schedule at the last minute. That meant that some of the people I hoped would hear my message, missed it. I rarely write a speech with specific audience members in mind, but I did in this case.

A bit of background

The Constructionism Conference is held every two years, almost always in Europe. The conference prior to Vilnius was in Thailand, but that was the only time the conference was outside of Europe. For close to three decades, the conference was called, EuroLogo, and was a biennial event celebrating the use of the Logo programming language in education. In 2008, the long-time organizers of the conference worried that interest in Logo was waning and that shifting the emphasis to constructionism (1) would broaden the appeal and attract more participants. It has not. Communities begin to die when they become self-conscious. There is nothing wrong with “preaching to the converted.” There are quite successful institutions that preach to the converted. Its members find strength, nourishment, and purpose in gathering.

In my humble opinion, the problem lies within the fact that the European Logo community, and this is a generalization, focused more narrowly on the fascinating mathematical or computational aspects of the Logo programming language separate and apart from its more radical use as an instrument of school reform, social justice, and epistemology. Logo’s father and inventor of “constructionism,” Dr. Seymour Papert was a noted mathematician and computer scientist who did invent the first programming language for children, but limiting the enormity of his vision to that would be like one of his favorite parables about the blind men and the elephant.

To me, the Constructionism/EuroLogo community has been focused on what is measurable and earns academic credit for those seeking job security in university systems proud of their ongoing medieval traditions. Although I have great friends who I love, respect, and adore within this somewhat dysfunctional family, I am never sure what they make of the loud American kid who works with thousands of teachers each year and doesn’t give a damn about publishing journal articles read by 3.1415927 people.

I go to the Constructionism Conference every two years because it is important to sustain the community and ideally to help it mature. If it became more popular or influential along the way, that would be a bonus. This speech was intended as a bit of unsolicited tough love, but love nonetheless. In fact, love is a big theme in this address. That is one of the most important lessons I learned from Seymour Papert and this Constructionism Conference was the first since his death.

I hope you will watch

Thankfully, I grabbed the SD card out of the video camera sitting in the theatre pointed at the stage following the talk so there is a video documenting a talk I am proud of and wish I could give many more times. The audio quality isn’t perfect and there is no camera work (except for a couple of quick edits I made). That said, if you want to understand who I am and why I do what I do, I hope you will watch this video. It was quite an emotional experience.

If you wish to listen to it while deep sea folk dancing, please WATCH from about the 46 minute mark. You need to see, hear, and feel what great teaching and learning look like.

(1) For those of you interested in learning more about constructionism, you could read our book, Invent to Learn: Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom or Edith Ackermann’s splendid papers, her Constructionism 2010 paper, Constructivism(s): Shared roots, crossed paths, multiple legacies or Piaget’s Constructivism, Papert’s Constructionism: What’s the difference?


Veteran educator Dr. Gary Stager is co-author of Invent To Learn — Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom and the founder of the Constructing Modern Knowledge summer institute. He led professional development in the world’s first 1:1 laptop schools and designed one of the oldest online graduate school programs. Learn more about Gary here.

Why the tech movement is on life support
January 2005 issue of District Administration Magazine

The educational computing movement, once led by educators inspired by the transcendent power of the personal computer to revolutionize the learning process and transform schools, is near death. The sad state of affairs is based on a profound lack of imagination and issues unrelated to the goal of offering the greatest range of learning opportunities for every child.

My diagnosis transcends the boundaries between private and public, rich and poor schools. There are too few models of excellent practice. This column will attempt to support my strong generalizations while next month’s edition will offer prescriptions for nursing classroom computing back to health.

When many of us first worked with children and computers two decades ago, we were excited by the renaissance of learning demonstrated by all sorts of learners. At-risk kids exhibited extraordinary mathematical intelligence and shy kids found a voice through all sorts of expressive media. Teachers awoke the learner within and collaborated with students on mutually interesting learning adventures.

Why do we celebrate computers most trivial, mundane and incomplete usage?

In the 1960s Alan Kay invented the personal computer with the desire for every child to have a knowledge machine. Nobody could have predicted that in 2005 the computer would be touted as a prop for teachers masquerading as game show hosts or for data disaggregation. The classroom has co-opted the computer, rather than the computer transforming the classroom. So, where are we now?

I recently keynoted a national conference on educational technology. The corridors of the convention center had display boards featuring student work. The majority of samples on display consisted of three or four bubble mind maps. What do plants need? Light, soil and water.

I agonized over asking my audience about these displays since I did not wish to impugn the efforts of teachers or kids, but I was compelled to bring it up. “Is this the best work done with computers in your nation’s schools?” The exhibits were the high-tech equivalent of publishing the first three words of a writer’s outline.

Countless trees have given their lives for innumerable volumes of tech standards. These standards are unimaginative, unnecessary and unenforceable. Ohio’s K-12 technology standards are 350+ pages and list 74 authors.

It requires students to demonstrate that they know how to turn on and off the computer; prioritize and apply appropriate safety measures when working with agricultural and related biotechnologies; calculate quantitatively the resultant forces for live loads and dead loads; etc.

A document so broad and verbose easily descends into self-parody. Teachers are frustrated and confused and any reasonable action plan is impossible. The result of unattainable standards, limited computer access and over-zealous policies: most American students touch a computer for just a few minutes per week in school.

Conducting surveys must not be confused with educating children. Pennsylvania recently published the results of an exhaustive study of how computers were used in its classrooms. If we stipulate to the principle of NCLB, “you teach what we test,” then Pennsylvania, like most states, teaches very little with computers.

All five of the student survey questions are concerned with seat-time, communication and information retrieval. The dominant paradigm for classroom computer use seems to be finding answers to simple objective questions and then displaying the “research” in four slide presentations.

Our public school systems are littered with Potemkin Villages labeled “schools of the future.” In far too many cases, hanging plants and carpet represent the future. Most of these schools are indistinguishable from schools 100 years ago, except for the addition of computers and an increasingly vocational curriculum.

It is easy to sell this mirage. The November 2004 issue of Wired features an ultra-groovy account of IBM’s top- secret design for a school of the future. In it children sit at desks, arranged in rows while responding like rats in a Skinner box to multiple-choice questions displayed on high-tech blackboards. The school also hopes to take attendance via handprint scanners. Yippee!

We can do better. We must.

Gary Stager, gary@stager.org, is editor-at-large and an adjunct professor at Pepperdine University.

For decades, I have marveled at the vehemence with which seemingly reasonable adults defend not teaching kids to program computers. Aside from the typical (and often dubious) justifications popularized by politicians, Hour of Code, and the Computer Science for All community, I know how learning to program in the 7th grade was an intellectual awakening that has served me well for more than four decades.

So, when #1 Canadian, Dean Shareski, posed the following tweet, I decided to take “his” question seriously and offered to speak with him about the top online. Then another person I don’t know, Shana White, called in.

I hear some suggest everyone should learn to code. Ok. But should everyone learn basic woodworking? electrical work? cooking? plumbing? automotive? Those are all good things but is time part of the issue? How do all these good things get taught? Just thinking out loud.— Dean Shareski (@shareski) September 10, 2018

For what it’s worth, some of y0u might find the conversation interesting or just use it to lull yourself to sleep.

You may listen to or download the podcast here.

#basta


Veteran educator Dr. Gary Stager is co-author of Invent To Learn — Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom and the founder of the Constructing Modern Knowledge summer institute. He led professional development in the world’s first 1:1 laptop schools and designed one of the oldest online graduate school programs. Learn more about Gary here.

Following speaking at the prestigious WISE Conference in Qatar (November 2017), Gary Stager delivered a keynote address on learning-by making at a conference held at The American University in Cairo. The video is finally available. Enjoy!


Veteran educator Dr. Gary Stager is co-author of Invent To Learn — Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom and the founder of the Constructing Modern Knowledge summer institute. He led professional development in the world’s first 1:1 laptop schools and designed one of the oldest online graduate school programs. Learn more about Gary here.

In May 2018, Gary Stager sat down with Change.School founders, Bruce Dixon and Will Richardson for their Modern Learners Podcast, to discuss learning, teaching, school improvement, and a host of other provocative topics. The title of the podcast is “The Lost Art of Teaching with Gary Stager.”

You may listen to the conversation or download the audio podcast here or watch the Zoom video below.

The heartbreaking tales of teachers earning $320/week and buying classroom supplies or feeding students should finally lay to rest the lie that teacher unions are all-powerful and have a stranglehold on American democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth, as evidenced by the pay and funding crisis rolling across red state America.

Arizona teacher: Daughter makes more as a nanny — CNN Video

The only way Americans will wake up to the American crisis in funding and teacher pay is for every teacher in America to go on strike. Yes, I mean it. Shut the sucker down!

In 2012, I wroteabout how the Education Minister in an Australian state said something that offended teachers and how the entire system went on strike and took to the streets until he apologized.

25,000 teachers stayed home, 10,000 marched on Parliament and they closed 150 public schools. Parents were politely alerted in advance to make other plans for the day. Many principals supported the strike and even marched with their colleagues.

Click above for news coverage of the strike

Teachers in Australia are not human piñata or professional victims. They don’t fundraise for crayons. They stand up for themselves, their students and their communities. Aussie educators enjoy medical insurance, secure pensions and enjoy long-service leave.

(Read Throw a Few Million American Teachers on the Barbie)

Don’t you dare tell me that it is illegal for teachers to strike. One thing I learned working in civilized countries, like Australia, is that there is no such thing as an illegal strike. It is a basic human right to withhold one’s labor, otherwise we are slaves.

It is time to fully wake up!

At the risk of being accused of blaming the victim, teachers have brought some of this upon themselves. Every time a teacher dismissed the role of organized labor, begged for a freebie, just followed orders, was a cheerleader on standardized testing day, failed to question the Common Core/Race-to-the-Top/No Child Left Behind, held a fundraiser for copy paper, enforce a zero-tolerance policy, or dress unprofessionally, they contributed to the neglect that America is finally becoming aware of. When teachers send their own kids to a charter school or believe that they are just like public schools, only better, they contribute to $320/week salaries. When teachers allow their voices to fall silent on matters of curriculum, assessment, calendar, or working conditions, they create the conditions for classrooms that insult the humanity of their students.

Fight, damn it! You are all that stands between kids and the madness! If you won’t fight for your own dignity and paycheck, how can we trust you to create the most productive context for learning? Go to a damned school board meeting and speak up! It is literally, the least you can do.

Normalizing deprivation

Over the past several years, I have written several articles about how common practices contribute to normalizing educational deprivation and impoverishment. We live in the richest nation in the history of the earth. Our students deserve better. So do their teachers.

Re-read and share…