Are we teaching the right skills?

I hold a high school degree, a Bachelor's degree, a Master's Degree, and a Specialist's degree. I hold countless certifications.

On paper, I meet the educational requirements of most jobs I desire. However, that assumes that those degrees and certifications are teaching the skills the job needs.

I have been out of the classroom for six years now, but this year, I'm going back. I'll be teaching high school English again in addition to a cutting-edge, Makerspace course at a college preparatory 6-12 grade school. As I prepare to teach ninth grade English, I'm reminiscent of my own schooling. On paper, these students meet the requirements of most major colleges. In the classroom, they excel.

Yet, we continue to have thousands and thousands of jobs in the U.S. that our students are not qualified to fill. And, it isn't because their paper resumes don't fit. It's because they lack the actual skills to do the job.

I read an article in the Harvard Business Review recently about the skills gap that I've become familiar with. In the graphic design industry, schools teach the current skills necessary to be successful on the job. They don't teach the "future" skills because they don't know them. However, we shouldn't focus on the actual content skill, but the learning skill necessary to be a successful employee. Why don't we focus on teaching students how to "learn on the job," how to search and evaluate? We need to redefine the skills we want students to learn. The major skills employers say students lack? Soft skills. Yes, soft skills, followed by leadership and computing skills.

Not content.

It's a way of thinking. It's a way of innovating.

As I prepare to teach The Odyssey to freshmen in a pre-made curriculum, I question what skills we are engineering in students. What is the end goal? What job do we hope this will prepare them for?

Check out this school that is functioning as a business. Students leave with skills - of all kinds - to start work.

I don't think the education system has failed. I refuse to call it a failure. But, I don't think it's working as well as it needs to be.

It's time to step back and assess where are our jobs? What skills are our students lacking? Do we all need to go to a four-year university? Do all jobs require a four-year university? Is there anything wrong with going to technical school instead of a four-year university?

Right now, I hear speeches on making college free for all, but nothing to change the effectiveness of college. If you went to college, did the four-year university prepare you more for your job than a technical school would have? Where did you learn most? For me, it was on the job. I loved my time at college, but I'm the first to admit that it could have been done in less time (and I even got out in half the time) with more time spent tinkering, exploring, innovating.

What do we need more of in this world? What problems do we need to solve?

That's what we want to teach.

Jobs are changing fast. I feel it is impossible to keep up with the content changes. But, it is possible to keep up with the learning changes. It is possible to recognize that our students need to learn differently to be successful.

Imagine a world where we could fill the jobs that are open. Imagine the economic boost. Imagine the impact it would have on families, on innovation, on communities.

Education won't solve it all, but it is certainly a great starting place.

EdTech - is it a "thing"?

This post originally appeared in my Chasing Life's Lilies Blog.

Last night, I had the privilege of being a panelist for the General Assembly and Teach For America event (EdTech - Taking Stock and Forging Ahead) at Austin's WeWork Co-working Space.

Prior to attending, we were asked to rate our opinion on five different questions. During the event, the audience was polled on those same questions and we were asked to explain our opinions.

Each time I present or engage in conversation with other educators, I am filled with new questions and arguments. Last night was no exception.

The premise was on EdTech. As the conversation moved forward, it was clear we all have different views of what EdTech is. Is it a business? Is it a way of thinking? Is it a subject? Is it a set of tools? Frankly, I don't know. And, that's why I don't think it should be a "thing."

In every area, there is the mainstream and there are the innovators. Within education, EdTech were the innovators to me. However, the idea of EdTech is no longer new. It should not be considered another pathway. Rather, it is mainstream, regardless of whether or not it is fully integrated. Though we don't all have SmartPhones, it would be unusual to say that SmartPhones were not mainstream. EdTech as a pathway is education.

As a business, edtech has been around for a while and will probably continue to be a "thing" for a while. We use technology for our infrastructure and what better name for it than - educational technology.

We do need to get away from the idea that EdTech is tools. Or, maybe it is...If it is, then we need to get away from EdTech. I'll admit that I've been that company girl. I jumped into various company-given certifications immediately, partly because I love a challenge, but also because I was excited about a product. That was five years ago, though. Now, I'm excited about ideas. I believe in ideas, thinking processes, and pedagogy as the means for change. The technology will fit into those thinking processes. Unfortunately, when I attend conferences and when I listen to others, I hear tools mentioned. I don't see as much on thinking processes. I see limited information on how to change the way we ask students to think. We forget that technology is already there. It continues to change. As it changes, the way we interact with it changes. The way we need to think about it changes. Yet, we continue to teach the same thought processes. This is what we need to focus on.

Companies like Google have created services on some of these thought processes. In fact, Google offers a computational thinking course that is completely free. There are Maker Faires across the globe. There are even maker schools - or design-based schools. These thought processes do exist in schools, but they are limited. Rather than focusing on these processes, we look for tools to fix them.

There is a huge push for computer science in schools. And, I am one of the ones trying to making computer science and STEAM programs available to more students. However, last night, my boyfriend who has a computer science degree and is a Web Developer for a living, told the panel audience that he is not a supporter of making computer science mandatory for all students. Several gasped at the "absurdity" of his statement. His point - not everyone loves it. You could argue that not everyone loves science or English, but they are required to take it. But, instead of making it a separate course - another thing to find time for - integrate the principals of computer science, the thought processes behind it, into other classes. Use computational thinking methods in English; in history. What are the reasons making it mandatory? Can they be solved by integrating it into the curriculum, by changing the way we think?

There is no tool that will solve it all. There, I said it. There is no magic tool. Last night, I brought up my belief that it is the pedagogy that surrounds education that glues it together. So, an audience member asked if there was a tool I'd recommend for easing the demand of teachers in pedagogy. My answer - no. We need to stop looking for tools to fix education. We need to look at educators, parents, students. We need to ask who is making the tools? Are we adopting tools that have been created for us and then, figuring out how to use them in the classroom? Or, are we making solutions for our needs?

This is a hazy area. I'm a Google Ninja (or Google Nerd - probably the latter), but I admit that they are a company. They created a product and I found a way to use it in the classroom. They need educators to survive (GAFE does, at least). Yes, they are responsive to teacher requests, but they are the ones who developed it. Educators fit it into the curriculum. We need to provide more support to grassroots change. The more we ask educators to take a product and fit it into their curriculum, the more we make this about tools and not about people.

My former girls coding club decided they were not satisfied with the girls coding programs around the globe. So, they made their own non-profit and are now providing training to area elementary schools. This is a needs-based edtech company. They have a need and they are providing support for it. One trend is classroom teachers moving out of the classroom to train for edtech companies or start their own. And, while this is needed for the best training, they can also lose relevancy. So, who do we look to - we look to our students. What are the needs they have? Let's support those needs.

Another audience member brought up a point I've noticed after switching to a private school this year. At first, I was shocked by the lack of technology at my private school. I thought they would be in abundance. But, they were not. The focus is different than that of the previous schools I worked at. Disparity in income - disparity in how tech is used. His point - lower-income schools throw a lot more technology at students in a consumption-manner than higher-income students. At first, I disagreed because my private school is lacking in technology. But, after thinking - I believe the difference is not in the tools; it's in the community. At my current school, many students come from households where the parents are heavily involved in their education. The parents understand the technology and the material their children bring home. In lower-income schools, this is not always the case. Parents may be working more, which makes them less involved. They may also not know how to use technology in creative ways. Most students have access to a SmartPhone at home - regardless of income - but in lower-income homes, the devices are used in a consumption manner far more frequently. Therefore, when those students enter school, they are lacking the creative thinking that goes with those devices. This is the backbone of the disparity. We need to find more ways to support communities.

So, is EdTech a "thing"? What is it? Our communities have advanced enough to where EdTech is just education. We are not all there yet, for sure. However, that doesn't mean that it is not education. Even though we have not all caught up, there is no denying that it is not a necessary part of the education umbrella. So, rather than treating it as separate, let's accept it. Let's change our way of thinking. Let's work on the pedagogy and focus on humans.

A reflection on my education

I was a good student...or so I was told my educational career.

This year marks my 10th year in high school education. And, after 10 years, I've had a moment of clarity: what is a good student and what is a great teacher? I'm sure some of you came to this conclusion long ago, but I've not hit my revelation.

So, I'm taking a journey down my educational career.

When I look back on K-12 school, I don't think about it fondly, despite being an honor student the majority of my education. I was quiet and many teachers took that as a sign I was content. I was not. In fact, it was not until college that I felt I blossomed; that I felt a love for school.

I knew I like to learn, but that passion for learning, that belief that I could do anything with that passion, did not set in until my junior year of college. And, I have a few professors to thank for that.

When we think about how we educate students, we must think about those students - you know, the ones who make the grades and don't get into trouble. I think I'd just be filling out papers behind a desk if I had not met a few very important teachers who pushed that passion out of me.

Can you teach passion? No. Can you lead others to it? YES.

Third grade: Up until this point, I hated school. I don't remember anything fondly. Third grade was a hard year in many ways. My mom, only 28 at the time, was diagnosed with a more severe form of cancer. I started another new school (as I would do every year until 9th grade), and my little brother was entering kindergarten. But, then I met Mrs. Estes. I've looked for her for years, but have never been able to find her, sadly. At the time, I was just starting to be competitive in road races. She noticed this and made me a class celebrity. I was, then, the go-to person for all things running. It made me confident in something for the first time. I didn't think I was a great reader until that point. However, she showed me books on running and, within the year, I was three grade levels ahead. I was afraid to write or express my feelings. She gave me a pencil and paper and had me voice my concerns to the President, President Bill Clinton. And, Yes, he responded. That began a series of letter-writing campaigns to various political figures and celebrities. She was passionate about me. I can't remember the actual subject matter of third grade, but I can say I jumped to the head of my class. And, I became confident in my skills as a student.

8th grade: I discovered I loved English and I was fairly decent at it. In late elementary school, I started a newsletter for my grandmas. I updated it every month and included newspaper-style articles. But, I never thought I was good at it in a school setting. Ms. Marshall let me know I was good. It was at that point I decided I wanted to become an English teacher. She was confident in my abilities.

Junior Year College: Professor Joanna, professor of Native American Women's literature. By that time, I knew I had a love of women's literature. However, I struggled writing essays. I struggled expressing my creativity. I was afraid to ask for help. She made office hours and paper reviews mandatory. She made me speak up. And, since this point, I have felt confident writing.  I have spoken up in class. I have challenged the norm. She made a "creative" out of me.

When I think about the three things that I remember most in my education, I think of creativity. Though standardized tests don't measure this, it was the one thing that propelled me as a student. Not only did I perform better because of it, it made me responsible for my learning.

So, the question I ask of all educators is: how are you encouraging confidence and creativity in your students? I'm an edtech ninja, but these two values are mandatory for anything else to work. In fact, innovation (my chosen word over technology) stems form this.

Be creative. Be confident.

An epiphany at #SXSWedu

Last year, I attended and presented at SXSWedu for the first time. I left feeling let down on all of the hype. It seemed very theory-based and more about discussions, less about action.

So, this year, I decided to come back, but with different expectations. I can't say that I saw any more focus on action, but it did cause an epiphany in me.

I attended a session yesterday about Hacking school - creating non-traditional school models. One of the panelists had a makerspace environment for an after school club, one was a non-profit, and the other was a charter school here in Austin. They shared the success of their students - the learning successes - not the test scores. And, though these successes are awesome, they are not always able to replicate in public school during the school day.

A man sitting next to me came to the mic at the end and asked the best question of my SXSWedu experience: how can we make these ideas work in public education. He wanted to take action. He wanted to start making change.

Another participant joined him and brought up the point that we have parallel schools going on right now. Her school in South Bronx was closed due to poor performance. In its place, a charter school was opened. Her point: is this our solution to public education - tearing it down and replacing it with charter schools? Or, do we have a plan to take what we've learned from charter schools and implement it in public education.

This made me think and want to take action. It raised the question: do we need public education? And, my answer: Yes. In its most basic form, it is a communal space. It should represent the learning of the community. We should be able to provide our community with education. Does this get in the same argument we are always in ? Yes. However, it brings urgency to the issue.

We need a solution for public education. Another participant compared it to a pinterest project. You know all of the "nailed it" memes going around...When you start out on a project and you are trying to replicate someone else's project, it usually does not turn out the same and you think you failed it. However, if you start a project from scratch with an open view of its end vision, you won't have something to compare it to for failure. Let's put this in education: when we try to make it fit something it's not, we will find failure. When we make it open, we find innovation.

My answer: more creative environments within the classroom and school. Makerspaces and making equal the playing field. They provide an opportunity to create without a model of comparison.

My action: to work on creating maker environments within my school. Does this stop state tests? No. Does it fix every issue? No. But, it does give us a starting place. Right now, we just need to start.

And, on that note, I finally took the plunge and made my first sketch note, documenting this idea.

What action will you take as a result of SXSWedu?

And, kudos to TES Global for providing so many teachers the chance to attend SXSWedu for free. Five of my teachers got to attend and were exposed to a different type of conference and new ideas. Now, that is change-making.

Fennovation.org 3.11.15

An oldie, but a goodie, App #2: Audacity

Audacity: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/beta_windows (Click here for downloading the Beta version--only version Windows 7 can use).

Note: When downloading, you must download the Audacity file AND the LAME MP3 encoder (also available on the Website above) in order to export MP3 files. It runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux.

Synopsis: Audacity is a great example of open source software. It is free for the public and it only asks that the public use it for the common good. It has all of the capabilities of Apple's Garage Band, but without the Apple requirement. Its features include:

• Record from microphone, line input, or other sources.
• Dub over existing tracks to create multi-track recordings.
• Record up to 16 channels at once (requires multi-channel hardware).
• Level meters can monitor volume levels before, during, and after recording.
• Easy editing with Cut, Copy, Paste, and Delete.
• Use unlimited Undo (and Redo) to go back any number of steps.
• Very fast editing of large files.
• Edit and mix an unlimited number of tracks.
• Use the Drawing tool to alter individual sample points.
• Fade the volume up or down smoothly with the Envelope tool.
• Change the pitch without altering the tempo, or vice-versa.
• Remove static, hiss, hum, or other constant background noises.
• Alter frequencies with Equalization, FFT Filter, and Bass Boost effects.
• Adjust volumes with Compressor, Amplify, and Normalize effects.
• Other built-in effects include:
• Echo
• Phaser
• Wahwah
• Reverse
• Record and edit 16-bit, 24-bit, and 32-bit (floating point) samples.
• Record at up to 96 kHz.
• Sample rates and formats are converted using high-quality resampling and dithering.
• Mix tracks with different sample rates or formats, and Audacity will convert them automatically in realtime.
• Spectrogram mode for visualizing frequencies.
• “Plot Spectrum” command for detailed frequency analysis.

Audacity offers everything from the most technical skill to the beginner skill. When done editing Audacity files, users can choose from a variety of export options including MP3 format. The MP3 formats can be inserted into a Windows Movie Maker movie, iMovie, or another digital storytelling creator. Tracks can also be shared on RSS feeds. 

Integration: Think of Audacity as the backbone for digital storytelling and the backbone for any assignment or application that involves auditory skills. Audacity can be used in any class and in any grade level. And, though, students in the younger grade levels may not be able. When I taught high school English, my students used Audacity when working with Windows Movie Maker and Premiere. Since Movie Maker only allows two tracks to play simultaneously, users cannot have narration going while a song is also running. Therefore, my students used Audacity to mix the audio tracks into one file for an easy import. They did this from simple voice narration over song to a mixing of various songs and interview clips. Students were able to trim out background noise and accentuate voices over background sounds. Through Audacity, I was able to teach my students how to tell a story and how to communicate with only sound: audio literacy. And even though elementary students may not be able to manipulate sounds on their own, they can all record sounds and choose sounds for the class to mix into one.

Another application that produces a similar product is Aviary, free for Google Apps for Education users. However, it allows users to generate an embed code for the audio file when it is generated. This code can be embedded within school Websites. For instance, students can compose an audio file highlighting the upcoming school play. Then, they can embed that file into the district Website for all viewers to hear.

Audio literacy is at its finest with Audacity.