Web 2.0

         Docsteach or Docsteach.org is a website that allows a teacher to create unique lessons using primary source documents.  The website has several different lesson formatting tools that allow a teacher to start discussions, highlight facts, compare and contrast primary source documents, view primary source documents spatial and chronologically, weigh options, etc.  The website has pre-formatted presentations that a teacher simply needs to drag and drop primary sources into.  There are many primary source documents available on the website that make for quick, easy and pain-free lessons planning.  This tool is designed for education and it seems like it work great.
      There are a few drawbacks. The primary sources available are limited and adding outside source seems to be complicated.  Since the resources are pre-formatted it is very easy for the final product to become boring and repetitive.  The tool could also pose problems for a middle school teacher because the activities created by the tool are online and require students to view them on their own.
      This tool could be used in many different ways.  It could be used to create an online presentation that students could view to prepare them for an in class discussion.  It could be used to create a format for students to compare and contrast two primary source documents in a structured online environment.  The tool could also be used to help students use specific primary source documents to create an argumentative research paper.
      This web 2.0 tool relies heavily on being able to access the activities the teacher creates. If there is limited internet access or computer trouble many hours worth of work creating activities could be wasted and the teacher could be required to come up with something completely different on the spot.

Professional or Hobbyist?

I've been doing a lot of menial tasks in the last few weeks and I cannot stop thinking about ways to improve the American Educational system.  I've mulled over a lot of different scenarios, but the one that keeps reoccurring in my thought process is heavily centered on teacher education.  In America we expect high school teachers to have a degree in the discipline that they will be teaching and we also expect them to have some background in educational instruction.  We expect teachers to learn everything they're going to teach and more plus educational methods all in a four year undergraduate course.  I can't help thinking that educators, secondary educators in particular, would benefit from a full bachelors degree, four years in their specific discipline, plus a separate certification in teaching.  I think we put too much emphasis on time spent in a classroom learning how to teach during undergraduate education.  I think all teachers should be required to have a "masters" or separate certification in education before they set foot in a classroom.  Education specific graduate degrees would limit the number of people qualified to teach and hopefully this limitation would allow only the best of the best into our nations classrooms.

Americentrism: Not only a problem for Petrolheads...

         There is a strong emphasis on American history, American government, American economics, and American sociology in the American public school system, but is it too much?  Public school districts start teaching American history as early as 1st and 2nd grade and they continue teaching often until 11th or 12th grade.  Often times students will only get on grading period worth of world history and often that is only ancient European history  I will not argue the importance of teaching this the American way of life to students, but is this encouraging Americentrism.  I don't mean strong American nationalism, I mean ethnocentrism and xenophobia toward any other culture.   Should we be teaching East Asian, African, Australian, and European History at the same time to the same extent as American history?  I don't know the answer to this question, but I do know we are living in increasingly globalized world.  Many people say China, India and Brazil may be the new world superpowers within in the next one hundred years.  If this is case are we as teachers responsible for educating the American youth about these cultures as well as our own?  I think so.

Have we lost our way?

Like all preservice teachers, the idea that middle school students cannot possibly listen to a forty-five minute lecture has been continually hammered into my head since my first day of class.  I would agree wholeheartedly that middle school students cannot listen to a traditional, overhead projector style fact filled lecture, but I don't think we should abandoned lecture entirely.  The modern interpretation of middle school education is more similar to elementary education then it is to high school and I don't know if that is the right approach.  I think that middle school should be a time to transition between the two opposing teaching styles.  I think that instead of emphasizing on activities and a hands on approaches to learning supplemented with lectures and presentations, I think that middle school teachers should be consciously aware of what their students are capable of learning and focus on teaching at the highest level possible.  Activities and hands on approaches should be used as aids, not as the focus of a lesson.  Activities can be used to illustrate points and to make connections to learning, but if the only focus of the lesson is the activity, valuable connections will be lost.  Limiting a lesson to ten minutes of teacher lecture is a slippery slope that new teachers should avoid, because it can seriously cripple a lesson.  The most important parts of activity driven lessons are the briefing and debriefing otherwise valuable learning and long hours of planning are completely wasted.

Alignment: What is Important?

Social studies education to tends to be taught from a historical perspective that focus on facts and figues, and names and dates.  Though this information IS very important, the chances that students will retain information taught in this way is very unlikely.  It is far more likely that students will recall patterns, social implications, and associations with current events if that becomes the focus of teaching.  Instead of saying there was a Native American uprising in August of 1862, known as the Dakota War and there were intense battles between Dakota Indians and Minnesota militia for several months.  History teachers need to focus on the implications of events for future generations of Minnesotans.  The Dakota War of 1862 was a defining moment in Minnesota and federal government policy regarding Native Americans, because it caused tension and distrust between both groups of people.  The locations of current reservations, the names of streets, towns, and parks all come from this time period.  Basically, history taught as a series static events that took place hundreds of years ago simply isn't interesting to many kids.  Kids need to be taught that everything is interconnected and that events in history aren't separate from things today.  Making connections should be the MOST important aspect of every lesson taught in a history classroom.

Grinding Gears

        Natalie Monroe has been in the news a lot recently for alleged teacher misconduct.   This alleged misconduct took place on her blog where she anonymously referred to some of her students as being "lazy whiners" who were often quite "annoying."  According to an article by Patrik Jonsonn published on the Christian Science Monitor's website, Monroe wrote all of these things anonymously and didn't refer to any students by name.  Teacher's and others who support Monroe argue that she should be allowed to vent by blogging about what life is actually like in a classroom.  By doing this she can give a better perspective to those who have never actually sat at a teachers desk.  Those apposed to Monroe's actions feel that it is unprofessional and degrading to students.
       As a future teacher I'd like to be able to think there is place where I could go to vent my frustrations, but I also understand there is a fine line to toe when it comes to discussing matters within a classroom.  I think teachers should be allowed the same courtesies as other professionals.  Doctors for example take a Hippocratic oath to do no harm and a sworn to maintain a level of doctor patient confidentiality, but on the other hand, how would doctors ever become better if they weren't allowed to study previous cases or discuss current cases with their peers?  I think educators should be able to take these same liberties.  If certain students are causing problems in the classroom or are refusing to do their school work, teachers can very quickly run out of ideas on how to motivate them.  How else other than peer resources can teacher learn new strategies or ideas to deal problem students?  A teacher should be able to discuss matters of classroom management in a public forum, but at the same time that teacher needs to know, as state by Jonsonn, that sooner or later someone, probably a parent or administrator, is going to find his or her blog.  Teacher blogs need to be written as if the administration is reading every post.  Singling students out is inappropriate and teachers need to take a positive approach to blogging.  Blogging can be a useful tool, but it can also be a dangerous.

The Check Engine Light is On!

     In the spring of 2010, the state of Texas was going through the common practice of curriculum revision for Social Studies in the state's public schools.  Instead of simply deciding to update the curriculum to include events and ideas that have changed since the last revision, the Texas Board of Education made changes that were clearly more political than educational.  For example, the Board had qualms with the theory of Evolution and made it mandatory that creationism be taught as well.  The Board also decided that a larger emphasis on capitalism had to be made.   These changes are very political and in my opinion really  have no place in a high school.  That being said, as teachers our main goal should be to provide information and let students choose the opinion they see fit.  The problem I have is that creationism is a religious doctrine and the United States Constitution clearly states that church and state be must be separated.  Constitutionality aside, history should be about history, and economics should be about economics, but if I had to guess I'd say that politicians will be politicians and they will never understand the true impact of their decisions.

Here is a New York Times article related to the subject for your reading pleasure.