Cursive Writing - Is it a skill worth learning?

Purpose & Approach  

  The article I chose to read this week was from Sept/Oct 2011 from Iste.org. It was about learning cursive writing in school and if it was really worth teaching. Each author took a side either yes or no. Lee Ann Potter took the position of Yes cursive writing should still be taught in the classroom.  Lee Ann argued that “learning cursive contributes to our capacity to imagine”. She stated that learning cursive was an artistic skill and by writing on paper connects the reader to that moment in a tangible way.  She also expressed her concern that if we don’t teach cursive writing in school, then many works of literature from the past will be inaccessible to future readers. This is because they would not be able to read them and she feels that soon un-typed words will cease to have any meaning.   

  The other author, Sharon Eilts, stated that teaching cursive writing in school was not worth the time. She argued that why should students take the time to learn how to write all over again, when they could use that time to learn other skills that are more formatted for the 21st century. Sharon also brought up the fact that why should those students who are unable to write be “penalized on some arbitrary standard” that they can’t write in cursive, but they are able to use speech-to-text software to access the curriculum.

  Also at the end of the article there were results from a reader’s poll and 71% of people said yes to learning cursive and 29% said no. The ‘Yes’ group made comments such as: it’s important to learn for global communication since most cultures use predominately some type of cursive handwriting or that it is a great way for students to learn fine motor skills. The ‘No’ group left  comments such as: that class time should be spent on more practical pursuits, that most communication will be device dependant and cursive won’t really be recognizable, and that cursive is becoming more obsolete in the “grown up ‘digital world’”.  

Personal Connection

 This was a very interesting article and I thought both authors made a good argument. But I would have say ‘No’ to teaching cursive writing in our schools. The future of communication is not going to be pen on paper and people today don’t even write handwritten letters anymore.  As far as the argument that students need to learn fine motor skills and learning cursive is one way they do that. These days’ kids have access to some form of technology where they learn this skill first hand. Teachers already have to cover more curriculum then they did 20 years ago and to me cursive writing is an old skill where I don’t see the necessity and this time can be used for more up to date skills. Other old skills we once learned in school were calligraphy and short hand. There are now kits in stores or software on the computer that you can purchase now to learn these skills. If parents feel that learning cursive writing is important then their children can learn cursive at home with computer software using a touchpad type device. One of the poll readers made a valid point that cursive writing was developed to make writing pen on paper faster. Well now we have computers, smart phones, etc… Good penmanship is important to learn, but this skill is going to a more digital complex.  My current handwriting is a mixture of cursive and print, but on any document I need to turn in, either being for personal or school, they either require typed or print.

  As far as using cursive handwriting in future classroom instruction, I don’t really see the need. I did read that California mandates to only teach cursive in 4^th and 5^th grade and some states have even abolished this method altogether.  By the time I teach in a classroom setting I believe that this skill will no longer be an option to teach.  Time is so valuable these days especially in a classroom and the last thing we need to focus on is learning an old skill that won’t be applied in the real world.

Conclusion
  So overall I would have to agree with Sharon Eilts and say learning cursive writing is no longer a necessity and we should not take the time in the classroom to teach such a skill. Sharon believes that we need to look forward, not backward when it comes to education. Lee Ann did make some good points as to why cursive is important, because it has impacted our history and on a global point of view other countries do use some type of cursive handwriting.  She pointed out the fact that students would not be able to read old documents and that cursive is not only a communication skill, but also an artistic one. Even though her point of view is valid, learning the skill of cursive writing is just not worth it.

Implication

 This article aligns with the second NET standard ‘Communication and Collaboration’ for student learning.  This article talks about a form of communication that is soon to disappear from our curriculum. These days we want to focus on using digital media and communicating our ideas to solve problems and connect with a variety of digital environments.  As the article stated learning cursive writing is an artistic skill, but it is no longer a tool used to communicate.

APA Reference:

Potter, L. A., & Eilts, S. (2011, October). Is cursive writing worth teaching? Learning and Leading, 39, 6-8. Retrieved March 21, 2012, from www.iste.org

Extra Extra - Grade or No-grade that is the Question?

'A' + LEARN = FAILURE???



Purpose & Approach  

   This article was extremely interesting and defiantly won my vote when it comes to getting rid of the traditional grading system.  The author Alfie Kohn was very persuasive in his writings.  He gave nine reasons as to how grading effects students. He mainly focused on a top three and provided some good examples. The first one was that “grades tend to reduce students’ interest in the learning itself”.  He argues that when a student is told that they would need to know something for a test then their focus changes. The material is then viewed as a chore and this is neither motivating or captures the student’s interest. He stated that research has shown that “grade orientation and learning orientation are inversely related”.   The second effect grades have is that they “tend to reduce students’ preference for challenging tasks”.  He made a very valid point in that students are not being lazy when they chose to cut corners, but they are being simply rational.  The fact is students are focused on getting a good grade and not on “intellectual exploration” of their project.  The third effect was that “grades tend to reduce the quality of students’ thinking”.  Alfie argues that when a student is given numerical grades then they show significantly less creativity in their work. I would have to agree because students who worry about their grades are also worried about how the teacher will view their work. If the student goes outside of the teacher’s parameters then they make get marked down to a lower grade.  I think this is why when a student knows they are not getting an actual numeric grade, but rather constructive feedback from the teacher then they tend to open up more and show more creativity in their assignments.

   The concerns that some of the teachers have about getting rid of ‘grading’ include either the unwillingness to give up that “instrument of control”, perhaps they think grades are needed to ensure the students show up to class, or that grades motivate students to do better. Some also say that colleges demand them.   Alfie argues that as long as students focus on only grades, then their learning will be affected. He states that by abolishing grades will “open up possibilities that are far more meaningful and constructive”.  

Personal Connection

   I could really relate to what the author was saying in this article.  I was/am one of those students that worry about their grade. All the way through high school I was always asking the teaching where I was at in reference to my letter grade. I wanted to make sure I did whatever it took to get that ‘A’. I could see how the focus on a grade can cause someone to lose their creativity on an assignment.  If you give me a rubric or a check list for an assignment I will make sure I hit every point in order to reach the top grade. Some teachers would even say that if we went beyond their list then we would get marked off points. I am also am a student whom values a teacher’s opinion and I enjoy getting constructive feedback far more than any letter grade.  There have been many instances when I got an ‘A’ on an assignment, but I had no idea why. There was nothing to learn from that experience. Another reason I don't like grading is I personally generally like to go above what the assignment is asking for, but I know that if I put all of the extra work into my assignment. I will get the same grade as someone who just met the minimum for that grade.  The motivation is not there.  I understand the concern that if we didn’t have grades then it would cause laziness and students to not want to do work. I think there should defiantly be a grade at the end of the class and some accountability, but I defiantly think that traditional grading is old school and we should encourage creativity.
Conclusion
   There have been many research studies that support the author’s point-of-view when it comes to how grading effects learning.  Bottom line is that they both cannot exist in the same learning environment without one being ineffective.   If you want a student to truly learn a topic and explore outside the parameters you set then give them the opportunity of learning without the burden of getting a letter/numerical grade. So how does this change take place? First, by having an open conversation of the pros/cons of traditional grading and make this a topic for discussion for the first year.  Also the students should be able to participate in how they will be assessed for their assignment. Let them set the standards of their assignment and give up some control. Not only will this free of time of having to log grades, but also will encourage less cheating and provide a more reliable objective way of assessing what the student’s have actually learned.

Implication

    This article aligns with the first NET standard ‘Creativity and Innovation’ for student learning.  The argument from this article is that by having a non-traditional way of grading in place will encourage more creativity and innovation in the classroom.   According to this article research has shown that learning and grading are “inversely related” meaning you can also focus on one in order to get a positive result.

APA REFERENCE:

Kohn, A. (1999, March). From Degrading to De-Grading. High School Magazine. Retrieved March 9, 2012, from http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/fdtd-g.htm

Here is the link:http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/fdtd-g.htm

A Common Core Movement

In class we discussed the topic of Common Core Standards and what we thought they were.  I defined them as common frameworks and standards that are the same across the entire nation where we teach to the same standards and the students will learn from the same standards. With all states having to meet this certain criteria for curriculum (per grade level) provides a consistency in the classroom to prepare students for their future.

After viewing the YouTube video, Elementary School CCS, and reading more on the Common Core Initiatives I am very excited to be part of something I find to be revolutionary. Finally, education is going to become more streamlined across the country so that everyone will benefit the same. With teachers and educators having that solid framework and a better understanding of expectations for teaching, this can only benefit students in the preparation for success in college and their future careers. Having these standards not only allow career readiness, but also provides more focus and a solid base to make learning a subject, like math, more interesting and fun. As I have read there are a variety of advantages to this movement. Having a ‘common standard’ and a ‘unifying theme’ across the country will not only bring people together across districts, but can also reduce costs because a collaboration between states will allow the ability to pool resources. Another advantage to these new standards is the fact that technology has been incorporated into every strand of education. So now not only will a student from California have the same learning objectives as a student from Wisconsin, but also both will learn a very important skill and that is Computational Thinking. I spoke about this term in an earlier blog. One road block is the fact that implementing these standards nationwide does take time and just like our students learn at different speeds so does our teachers. It is very important that all educators understand and are confident in their ability to implement these standards in their classrooms; they do not want to rush this process. For this reason the implementation of these standards for nationwide effectiveness will take some time.

April E.

Resources Used:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/

http://www.scoe.net/castandards/multimedia/common_core_faq.pdf

 (Video) Elementary School CCS:  http://youtu.be/1IPxt794-yU 

What is Computational Thinking?

Purpose & Approach  

    The article I read from L&L was “Computational Thinking: A Digital Age Skill for Everyone” and the main focus was about defining the term Computational Thinking (CT). Through out the article the three authors answered three questions: How can we make CT accessible, how is CT different, and why is CT important. The article first explains how CT lacked a clear and practical definition for educators to use in the classroom.  Three organizations (NSF*, ISTE, & CSTA*) came together to develop/fund a project called Leveraging Thought Leadership for Computational Thinking in PK-12.  All three authors were all once educators in classrooms and were part in the decision process of the CT project. They argued that before this project educators who were advocates for CT and saw its importance was given a definition that did not truly help implement CT in a classroom environment:

Computational Thinking was “a way of solving problems, designing systems, and understanding human behavior by drawing on the concepts fundamental to computer science.”

The projects goal was to make CT more than a concept and through practices and strategies have an “operational definition, shared vocabulary, and relevant examples of CT to current education objectives & classroom practices”.  From surveys and feedback from educators they developed a definition that includes six skills and five attitudes that are essential dimensions of Computational Thinking (CT). One skill included to have the “ability to formulate problems that enables us to use a computer or other tools to help solve them”. Two essential attitudes included “having the confidence in dealing with complexity and ability to deal with open ended problems”.

The authors then shared how CT is different from critical thinking or mathematical thinking and answered why CT is an important skill for students to have.  They explained three reasons as to how CT was different.  Computational Thinking (CT) is considered to be a problem solving process with a “unique combination of thinking skills” that when combined provided “a new form of problem solving, its more tool oriented, and make use of familiar problem solving skills (trial & error, guessing, etc) that were once impractical”.  

So why is Computational Thinking important? As the authors explained in the article the application of CT has changed all aspects of how we do work and has affected every field of study. It is important because we need to learn and understand how, when, and where we can use computers and digital tools to help solve everyday problems and find working solutions. I could not word it any better when the authors stated that Computational Thinking (CT) gives us the “ability to extend the power of human thought”.  They argued that it is important to ensure all students have the same opportunity to learn these skills and they can apply these skills to solve different problems and use them in a variety of contexts.

* NSF = National Science Foundation

* CSTA = Computer Science Teachers Association            

Personal Connection

 I would have to agree with the authors and say Computational Thinking (CT) is a very important skill to have and it is just as important to ensure all students obtain this skill as CT is becoming more and more evident in our everyday lives and careers. I would be sure to become familiar with the six skills and five attitudes that are essential dimensions of CT. The article also provided examples of how CT has been used in a classroom across a variety of grade levels and I found them to be very informative. They were great ways to give students the opportunity to not only learn a subject, but also bring technology into the learning process. One example I found to be a great idea was the study of the Roman Empire for a sixth grade social studies class. The students had to compare their own life experiences with the life of a Roman child’s life. They would write their responses on a Blog and then were asked to reflect on two terms “modeling” and “simulation” and how these concepts can be used in the future and their careers.  I discussed in an earlier blog post how blogging could be used in a classroom. This does provide a way to implement Computational Thinking in a classroom.

Conclusion

In conclusion this article did make important points on why Computational Thinking (CT) is an important skill to have. One main reason is because it affects our everyday lives and it will only become a bigger impact as technology advances and becomes more mainstream.  Problem solving is something we do every day and because CT uses a combination of skills this process is even more important. We must give students the opportunity to not only learn such an essential skill, but also how to apply it in context with the real world. Before this article I was unaware of the term Computation Thinking and now that I am I will take into consideration how to make sure my students have the opportunity to learn this skill.  

Implication

    This article aligns with the forth NET-S standard ‘Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, and Decision Making’ for student learning.   This article talks about Computational Thinking which is a process for problem solving.  This skill is a combination of all other skills with the implementation of a computer or some form of a digital tool to help solve the problem at hand.

APA Reference:

Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011, March). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for   

      everyone. Learning and Leading with Technology, 38, 20-23. Retrieved March 1, 2012, from 

      http://www.iste.org/Libraries/Leading_and_Learning_Docs/March-2011-
     Computational_Thinking- LL386.sflb.ashx