by Andrew K. Miller | Jan 16, 2012 | Blog
This post originally appeared at KinectEducation, a community that works on resources from not only effective use of the Kinect in the classroom, but also creating connected and engaging classroom.View Original >
Part of education reform is about terminology, but more importantly it is about being on the same page as other educators. Once on the same page, we can “speak the same language, and make a collective, cohesive argument for what’s best for students. At KinectEd, we want to provide resources, lesson plans, and also these tools for advocacy. I hope to write blogs to give educators the tools to articulate why using games in the classroom can be effective, how to ensure good implementation, and how to advocate to stakeholders how and why it works. Thus, I want to arm us all with clear language about Game Based Learning (GBL).
Our good friend Wikipedia, gives a good overview of GBL, and summarizes it as “a branch of serious games that deals with applications that have defined learning outcomes. Generally they are designed in order to balance the subject matter with the gameplay and the ability of the player to retain and apply said subject matter to the real world.”
Serious games are not a new thing. I think iCivics is a prime example of this in terms of learning Social Studies and Civics content. In many of these games, players and engaged in a game, but must learn content in order to succeed at it. In order to progress, the player must learn. All players learn, regardless of the game being played, but here the content being learned might be consider for mainstream “academic.” In the classroom, teachers can design these sorts of games, but it’s obviously a challenge. Teachers as Game Designers?!? It’s possible, but it takes work. (Looking forward to helping teachers design these games in later blogs).
Related to this, I would argue that GBL and Gamification of Education overlap in many ways. You are taking game design elements and applying them to your instruction. However, Gamification is more “global” in that it is applied to the overall classroom structure, rather than simply creating a serious game for the classroom. However, if you are gamifying your classroom, aren’t you in essence creating a serious game, the serious game being the entire structure of learning? Something to think about, as this conversation of Games for Learning and GBL move forward.
In addition, besides creating serious games as a teacher for learning, GBL is also balancing a game that might be unrelated to the academics, with academic learning. For example, you might take World of Warcraft and use it a method to integrate and engage learning in English Language Arts. Through careful lesson design, where gameplay is balanced with more traditional or “academic” activities, the game can create the entry point to learn critical content.
Don’t get me wrong, I personally believe that gameplay is academic. One of my staple books is James Paul Gee’s “What Video Games Have To Teach Us About Learning and Literacy?” In it, Gee expounds about the critical learning that takes place when we game. GBL is about merging this learning experience in gaming with the learning that needs to take place in the classroom subject areas. As you explain GBL to your colleagues, stakeholders, and education reformers, make sure to elicit its complexities in terms implementation and definition, while espousing its critical gains for engagement, learning and student achievement.
by Andrew K. Miller | Jan 13, 2012 | Blog
This post originally appeared on the Gamification Blog, one stop for the latest news, insight, research and commentary on gamification.View Original >
As the debate and discussion for games and learning continue in the field of education, there needs to be some clarification in terminology. Educators and Advocates may think they are speaking the same language, but this is not certain. When I read the many blogs, articles, and resources on the subject, I see some lack of clarity, as well as oversimplification, when it comes to Gamification of Education and Game Based Learning.
So let’s start with the terms:
Gamification is the process of using game thinking and game mechanics to solve problems and engage users. The key takeaway here is that this is a process. You take something that is not normally a game, and make it so (nerd reference intended.) Gamification of Education is exactly what it sounds like; taking these games elements, from incentives, immediate feedback, rewards, and more to classroom instruction. It requires looking at the full package of instruction and changing the paradigm. In classroom instruction, it takes multiple instances, and a depth of time to see the full extent of gamification. As in, one visit to a gamified classroom will not allow you to see the entire extent to which that class has actually been gamified. You might see a specific mini quest with a formative assessment, but not the entire pedagogical structure, An classroom unit or a classroom in its entirety must be gamified. A prime example of this is Quest2Learn, a school in NYC where the entire structure of learning over the course of the unit, and year, is gamified. From boss levels and quests to avatars and incentives, the entire learning process is a game.
Game Based Learning or GBL is a a branch of serious games that deals with applications that have defined learning outcomes. GBL balances subject matter learning and game play with the objectives of retaining and applying said subject matter in the real world. Things get complex when juxtaposing GBL with Gamification. GBL is using games in the classroom. In a previous post, Andrew Proto, mentioned iCivics and TimeZ Attack as examples of great serious games. These games have clear learning objectives, from civic common core standards to math common core standards. These games can use a high degree of technology or it might be pen and paper.
GBL and Gamification overlap often. In a Gamified classroom, you make be using smaller games throughout the unit. You might, for example, use a game on iCivics to help teach one component of larger unit, to arm students for a boss level. On the flip side of this, if you are creating a intensive Gamified unit, then you are actually creating a large serious game. So we see that GBL can be a small component of the learning, or a descriptor of the entire pedagogical model. Gamification, on the other hand, refers to changing the entire model of instruction to be a game or game-like.
Both GBL and Gamification of Education want the same thing: student engagement. They require students to wrestle with critical content as well as learn 21st century skills. They require a paradigm shift of the educator from “sage of the stage” to “guide on the side.” Regardless of which method or pedagogy you employ in your classroom, you are providing an opportunity for students who may not have been reach to engage in learning that will allow them to achieve success.
by Andrew K. Miller | Jan 12, 2012 | Blog, Edutopia
This post originally appeared on Edutopia, a site created by the George Lucas Educational Foundation, dedicated to improving the K-12 learning process by using digital media to document, disseminate, and advocate for innovative, replicable strategies that prepare students. View Original >
I know many teachers use graphic novels and comics in the classroom. There are amazing books on the subject that include useful tools on how to effectively implement these resources for learning. The main thing teachers need to consider is purpose. I know, we love books and tools, but just like with technology, sometimes we get wrapped up in the tool instead of first thinking about the purpose. Here are some specific strategies to ponder as you select a graphic novel or comic to read, or as you consider how students might create their own. Thinking about them will help you focus your purpose in your instruction. All of them are useful, as long as the purpose is clear to the teacher and the learner.
1) A Tool to Differentiate Instruction
Graphic novels and comics can be a great way to differentiate instruction for learners in terms of reading and also in terms of assessment. Perhaps you want to offer your students a graphic novel to support their reading of a chapter in a rigorous text. If this text is a classic, there are many graphic novel adaptations of classics out there. Maybe you’re doing a project-based learning (PBL) project where you want to provide voice and choice for the student assessment. Students might be choosing between a letter, comic or podcast to answer a driving question, such as: how can we debunk myths and stereotypes about world religions?
2) Build Critical Reading Skills
Reading standards around Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) can be built through the complex analysis and evaluation of graphic novels and comics. Have students look at how the authors and illustrators use colors, textures, words, text boxes, frames and camera angles; then make connections between these elements and evaluated their effectiveness.
3) Assess Student Learning
PBL calls for the creation of authentic products that are useful and credible to the group. You can have students create comics or graphic novels, or components of them, as a useful formative assessment tool to check for understanding of important content. If used as a summative assessment, the comic could be made to combat bullying, such as the suggestion Suzie Boss made in an earlier post. Make the graphic novel or comic a product that students create to meet a need. Don’t just make it a regurgitation of knowledge. Instead, give it an authentic purpose.
4) Study the Genre Itself
Scott McCloud, in his book Understanding Comics, asserts the legitimacy and complexity of comics and graphic novels as a genre. Pairing selections from his work with a graphic novel or comic can provide interesting discussion and inquiry into the elements of the genre itself. Genre study is an easy way to utilize literature circle groups and instructional lessons, where students get to pick from a variety of options.
5) Examine Literary Elements
In addition to traditional literary elements like symbol, character and plot, graphic novels take these elements and modify them, where characters become heroes and villains, where symbols are actually drawn and created. Consider this clip from the movie “Unbreakable,” where the “normal” arch villain and hero confront each other, not in a fantasy, but in real life.
There are many other purposes for graphic novels in the classroom, from looking at different cultures and backgrounds to utilizing technology in authentic ways. Just make sure you select the graphic novel or comic with a clear purpose in mind. Perhaps you have multiple purposes, as there are many instructionally sound purposes out there.
I will leave you with some favorite graphic novels and comics that I’ve used in my classroom! Trust me, I have read plenty more than this list!
Persepolis, a memoir of a girl growing up during the Islamic revolution in Iran, was recently made into a motion picture.
Maus, a top favorite for many, explores themes of the Holocaust through a memoir characterized by mice and cats.
American Born Chinese is the tale of three characters: Jin Wang, the only Chinese-American in the neighborhood; Chin-Kee, the ultimate Chinese stereotype; and the Monkey King, ancient fable character.
X-Men Annual #4 – Uncanny X-Men Volume #3 In this issue, the X-men travel into Dante’s Inferno.
What are your favorites and what are you favorite purposes?
by Andrew K. Miller | Jan 2, 2012 | Blog, Whole Child Blog
This post originally appeared on The Whole Child blog, an ASCD initiative to call on educators, policymakers, business leaders, families, and community members to work together on a whole child approach to education. View Original >
When we ask students to do, perform, and produce, we must ensure that these tasks or assessments demand rigor and relevance. But let’s be honest, sometimes these words are thrown around as buzz words in education or are difficult to truly internalize as teachers when we are design assessments. What does it look like to ask students to do rigorous work? What does an assessment that has relevance look like? I can make my own assumptions, but how do I know if my assumptions are truly asking for depth of rigor and relevance?
I truly believe that one of the invaluable resources and professional development I received in my years as a classroom teacher was around Authentic Intellectual Work (AIW). I was able to take AIW and apply it to the many teaching practices and pedagogy that I was using, from project-based learning to Understanding by Design® methods. AIW focuses on authentic pedagogy and student work.
When developing AIW assessments that are rigorous and relevant, think about
Construction of Knowledge: The assessment should demand that students are doing higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) like synthesis and evaluation. A lower rating in this area would simply be asking students to reproduce. This is pitfall of some performance assessments; reproducing in a new genre. When we ask students to construct knowledge, is the assessment asking for these HOTS?
Elaborated Communication: The assessment should show a deep understanding of the content being explored, and the assessment must explicitly demand it. There should be evidence, which usually requires a complex purpose like persuasion and analysis. Instead of multiple choice, or short answer, ask your students to communicate, which you can choose from a variety of forms and genres, and make sure that there are summaries, examples, samples, and other important pieces of evidence that show deep understanding of the concepts you want them to learn.
Value Beyond School: This is probably the most obvious and most important part of creating a good assessment. Yet, it remains a bit difficult to quantify and measure a good assessment that shows value beyond school. AIW frames it this way: Does the assessment demand students to solve a problem or encounter an issue that resembles one in real life? Does the assessment demand students to make explicit connections to their own feelings and situations? A lower score here might only provide opportunity to explore the real-world connections or provide little opportunity at all. Again, the assessment creates an imperative connection to the real world and values of students’ experiences.
Notice that all these components require explicit direction from the teacher. If you were to hold up the rubric and assessment by itself, it needs to meet the components of AIW. This isn’t about supposition or assumption; it is about transparency with students. Learn more about AIW and peruse resources, including a 2007 publication relating the framework to authentic instruction and assessment (PDF), by visiting the Center for AIW website. The center also offers rubrics pertaining to specific disciplines, including science, literature, math, and social studies.
by Andrew K. Miller | Dec 19, 2011 | Blog
This post originally appeared on Abeo School Change’s blog, an education design and implementation group that partners with schools and systems to make powerful learning a reality for every student. View Original >
In order to effectively change schools, to engage in true reform, and to put students first, the learning of educators must model this process and go through some changes. Education for children has gone through some serious structural changes, from competency based learning and online learning, to emphasis on 21st century skills like collaboration and problem solving. Adult learning can and should mirror these structural changes, but in order for this to happen, there must be power given up by administrators to empower the teachers around them. John Stewart in a conversation with Melody Barnes spoke of this empowerment to change:
“Do you think ultimately we will find ourselves changing our entire model of education? I have always found with education that individuals are the ones that make the enormous difference, and the more that you’re able to empower a great teacher, a great principal, a great superintendent, can make enormous differences. How do we empower the individual to have the authority and the responsibility to make those changes, and not tie them to arbitrary objective realities or goals?”
The big question is how can we use Professional Development to empower educators to better themselves? There are tools out there in professional development that can help with it. The key is protocols, structures, and inquiry. Instead of “workshops” on a regular basis, where it is mostly driven by the speaker, let’s allow for different structures. Workshops must still happen, but only when timely and needed. Not everything has to be workshop. If we want the instruction to be diverse in structure and discourse, then the same must be made for teachers so that they can internalize the practice, and most importantly be empowered to learn.
We should be allowing time for teachers to collaborate on specific objectives, problems and issues. Teachers can be held accountable through a variety of products, from presentations to plans and briefings. If we are allowing for voice and choice in the way students present their learning, we should do the same for teaching. Teachers need to be allowed to delve into in depth inquiry of learning within the framework of the administration, but also related heavily to the practice. Instead of a workshop on culturally responsive teaching, have teachers create driving questions and investigations to explore and apply to their practice around the topic of culturally responsive teaching. When we start to broaden our scope of what professional development is, we can start to differentiate professional development for teachers, from whole school PD, to PLCs, to individual coaching. Allowing teachers to come to the table with their concerns, and then allowing them to explore solutions, we can empower teachers to be reflective and continue their growth.
When we talk about developing the practice of teachers, let’s stop using the word “training” and use the word “empower.” I know Abeo is committed to this model of PD, and all schools should embrace it in order to improve teacher and student achievement.
by Andrew K. Miller | Dec 16, 2011 | Blog, Edutopia
This post originally appeared on Edutopia, a site created by the George Lucas Educational Foundation, dedicated to improving the K-12 learning process by using digital media to document, disseminate, and advocate for innovative, replicable strategies that prepare students. View Original >
With all the education action around Standards-Based Instruction, Understanding By Design, Assessment for Learning, Grading for Learning, Project-Based Learning, Competency-Based Instruction and more, we need to have a frank conversation about formative assessment and grading. This may be a difficult conversation to have.
Educators may end up mourning the loss of past practices and frameworks. It is a paradigm shift, and consequently, we need to have empathy for all stakeholders as transitions occur.
Grades for Everything?
Let me start off by making a clear distinction between two ideas, assessment and grading. They are not the same; they are related. We grade assessments, and assessments reflect learning that has occurred. However, the concept of grading and assessment is complicated, and has further been complicated by the many ways that education reform has manifested itself in the classroom.
Secondly, I want to be honest with all of you about my journey with this concept. When I first started teaching, I utilized both what I learned from my experience in the classroom as a student and from my student teaching. Everything was graded — and I mean everything. Why did I do this? Well for one, that was my leverage to make students do the work I know they needed to do in order to be successful. The intention was good. In addition, this practice was normal for students, and they understood the routine. We know that routines provide stability, so I thought I was doing them a service by continuing to grade everything. I developed an elaborate system of weights to create what I thought was a clear system for parents, students and other stakeholders. Parents understood it, because it was the same system most them had experienced.
So what was the problem? Where do I start? I had no time. I was grading everything. I had so much paperwork because I was trying to give great feedback on everything in addition to grading and inputting the grades. Perhaps even worse, I wasn’t focused on the larger problem. My students cared more about the points than they did about the class. They weren’t engaged, and whose fault was that? It was mine. I was “cattle-prodding” them into doing work. It was punitive. “Don’t do the work and your grade will suffer.” I should have been focusing on my instruction and creating engagement lessons and projects for students to do.
Instead, I was clouding the issue of instruction with grading. I was putting the blame on students rather than on myself. That is a key reflective moment that every teacher should engage in when students are doing the work: What did I instructionally do, or not do, to engage all learners? Not, how can I make them do the work?
Changing the Conversation
What has changed? I don’t grade formative assessments. Yes, you read that correctly. What do I do with them? I document them in the grade book, because I need evidence of progress for students, parents and myself. I give specific, focused feedback on the assignments I collect. I have students reflect on their formative assessments and set goals. I have conversations with students after completing a summative assessment; we reflect on the grade of the summative and how the formative relates to the grade they received on the summative. I facilitate moments where students and I connect a seemingly irrelevant assignment, like a comma worksheet, to a more authentic, relevant and engaging summative assessment. These are all things you need to be doing instead of grading.
Why don’t I grade formative assessment? For one, a grade is supposed to answer the question: “Did the student learn and achieve the learning targets or standards?” If this is the case, then the summative assessment primarily represents achievement. Formative assessment is practice. It is part of the journey. I would feel evil if I punished a kid during practice and then, literally and figuratively, brought that punishment to his or her “A-Game” in the final match (summative assessment). We’ve all seen that happen. A student achieves on the summative assessment, but because of a mediocre performance on the formative assessments, they get a lower grade. Ethically, that is just plain wrong. If a student ended up achieving in the end, he or she should be rewarded for that achievement, not penalized for a failure during practice.
The Payoff
A couple of important notes: I do use formative assessment in two ways. If students don’t do well or complete the summative, I use the formative to create a “progress” grade to input. It is good evidence, and can be used this way. In addition, if I am assessing the 21st century skill of Work Ethic, formative assessment can be utilized as part of that grade. If one of the quality indicators, for example, is “turning in work on time,” then I can leverage formative assessment as part of that grade. You will notice, however, that the intent is different. The learning target is different.
I’m not saying this is an easy transition; it is a paradigm shift for everyone. Parents need to be educated, stakeholders need to be educated, students need to be educated, and teachers need to be educated — and provided the space to wrestle with these ideas. I took a while to get to this place. However, the payoff feels better, both from an instructional and ethics standpoint, and also from a student achievement standpoint. My students often asked, “Wait, so you are only going to reward us at our best, not necessarily when we tried and failed?!?” Then they’d say, “Hmmm, I guess that makes sense” as the idea sunk in.
Is it time your grading practices made a little more sense? Formative assessment is about ensuring equity for all students. Thank you readers for being open to this conversation. Cognitive dissonance is healthy. As I like to joke in my workshops, “If I have made you a little uncomfortable, I’ve done my job.”
This post originally appeared at KinectEducation, a community that works on resources from not only effective use of the Kinect in the classroom, but also creating connected and engaging classroom.View Original >
Recent Comments