Group items tagged

"Higher-level thinking has been a core value of educators for decades. We learned about it in college. We hear about it in PD. We're even evaluated on whether we're cultivating it in our classrooms: Charlotte Danielson's Framework for Teaching, a widely used instrument to measure teacher effectiveness, describes a distinguished teacher as one whose "lesson activities require high-level student thinking" (Domain 3, Component 3c). All that aside, most teachers would say they want their students to be thinking on higher levels, that if our teaching kept students at the lowest level of Bloom's Taxonomy-simply recalling information-we wouldn't be doing a very good job as teachers. And yet, when it's time to plan the learning experiences that would have our students operating on higher levels, some of us come up short. We may not have a huge arsenal of ready-to-use, high-level tasks to give our students. Instead, we often default to having students identify and define terms, label things, or answer basic recall questions. It's what we know. And we have so much content to cover, many of us might feel that there really isn't time for the higher-level stuff anyway. If this sounds anything like you, I have a suggestion: Try a curation assignment."

"Our recent article on reading levels and the dangers of using strictly prescribed leveling systems in libraries for young readers sparked much dialogue and debate. One of the most popular and widely used reading systems is the "A to Z" gradient, developed by Irene C. Fountas, professor in the School of Education at Lesley University in Cambridge, MA, and Gay Su Pinnell, professor in the School of Teaching and Learning at Ohio State University. Both researchers have been adamant that their leveling system was designed as "a teacher's tool, not a child's label." We caught up with Fountas and Pinnell, who jointly gave their perspective on leveling, libraries, reading comprehension, and what they say to districts mandating leveled collections. "

"Last month I shared some of the great features from News-O-Matic's new update and there is one more you are sure to love.  Teachers using this app can choose between different reading levels for students.  Each article is adapted by News-O-Matic's editorial team to fit three reading levels (400L-600L, 600L-750L and 750-1050L).  These categories are connected to ranges of Lexile levels - a readability measure that helps measure text complexity. Teachers can assign different reading levels to each student in their class so they automatically receive news articles on their tablet that are the right level for them."

"Need a reading comprehension tool to simplify texts for students? Something practical, along the lines of our "How To Google Search by Reading Level," and Conversion Chart For Reading Level Measurement Tools? You may find some use in rewordify. In short, you copy/paste text to be "simplified," and it does its thing. It attempts to simplify the text at the vocabulary level (as opposed to syntatical, structural, or idea level). Nonetheless, when vocabulary is the barrier, it does the trick. The replacements don't always do what they should-simplify the text to make it more readable for struggling readers, or students reading beyond their natural level. Sometimes the definitions are themselves confusing, as they add an additional cognitive movement the student has to make, internalizing this now sterile definition back into some kind of meaning."

"The integration of technology in learning is not new. In the 1980s, many schools had fancy calculators, Macintosh computers, and were even teaching students basic coding. This kind of integration often happened at the lesson or activity level, meaning that it was often surface-level, tacked-on, and perhaps a bit superficial. The power of technology is difficult to fully leverage without curriculum-level integration. This means choosing tools, platforms, and policies based on standards, assessment, and instruction. A side benefit to this approach is the possibility of teacher collaboration and "same-pageness.""

"Literacy Leveler is a an iOS app (iPhone and iPad versions available) that allows you scan a book's ISBN barcode and discover the reading level of the content of that book."

"Book Wizard is a Scholastic service that allows you to create and organize book lists according to reading levels and students' interests. Book Wizard Mobile is a free iPad, iPhone, and Android app that you can use to scan a book's barcode to quickly discover its lexile measurement, grade level equivalent, and guided reading level. Within the app you can create book lists and edit the existing book lists that you have created in your Scholastic.com teacher profile."

"Bloom's Revised Taxonomy breaks each learning stage (remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate and create) into four separate levels of knowledge. These levels include the factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Together the levels of knowledge are making incremental movements from a factual understanding, to the personal command and realization of the learning process. The revised taxonomy also lists two cognitive processes within the applying stage: executing and implementing.1 These two processes illustrate the range of thinking skills possible within a stage. Executing requires the application of factual knowledge and refers to the ability to carry out learned procedures such as solving a long division problem. On the other hand, implementing reaches up into the metacognitive level and demands that students be able to apply learned skills to a task that initially appears to be an unrelated to prior learning experiences. "

"Current events articles are a great choice for informational text.  Students can learn all about news stories and practice reading skills at the same time.  If you have a class full of students reading at different levels you'll definitely want to check out Newsela.  This fantastic site contains brand new articles everyday.  The best part is that you can change the Lexile level of each article by clicking on the one that's right for your students.  You can share the same article at a few different levels with each of your reading groups."

"Root looks like a smoke detector but is actually a sophisticated robot. A magnetic surface, wheels, and an impressive arsenal of sensors allow it to navigate a classroom white board. But Root isn't actually programmed to do anything. Its tasks and functionality hinge on a child's imagination. To operate - Root needs instructions, a line of code. Zivthan Dubrovsky of Harvard's Wyss Institute recalls testing out Root with kids for the first time. He asked them this: "Can you make a text based java script line follower? They go 'no that's hard, can't do that', but we can put level one in front of them and they can do it in minutes." Level one introduces kids to principles of programming using an interface of simple instruction and pictures. As they become more adept, they jump to levels 2 and 3, at which point writing computer code becomes second nature, according to Dubrovsky."

"After posting about Digital Taxonomy for iPad, today we are sharing with you the web version. We tried to come up with web tools that go with each of Bloom's thinking levels. Some of these tools can fit in different levels, however, for practical reasons we limited our selection to five tools per level. You can print, share and embed the visual the way you like as long as you credit us as the source. The Android version is coming soon."

"After posting about the "10 ways to get your students engaged" here is another good visual I learned about from Mindshift and which outlines different levels of engagement. As I have already argued elsewhere here in this blog, getting today's students deeply engaged (the first level of engagement below) in the learning experience taking place in class is not an easy task. Unless students see a direct relevance between what they are going to learn and how that information will help them them in their actual life , it becomes hard to hook and maintain their attention. Proponents of socio-cultural linguistics emphasize the importance of "context" in learning. Learning materials that are contextualized and tailored to speak to the immediate context of the learners are more likely to get students engaged and hence increase their rate of retention and comprehensibility."

"So this collection wasn't as easy to curate as it'd seem. It wasn't a matter of simply choosing the best apps across content areas-math, science, social studies, etc. The title says "every iPad," which seems to imply universal needs. Every. iPad. Same with age and grade level, reading level, and gender. So we took at look at apps that could be used in any content area, and at (almost) any grade level K-5. (Phonics Genius likely wouldn't be as necessary in later elementary grades as it might in K-3, for example.) The focus is on literacy, content, and play. An argument could be made that elementary school students may be better served with an Encyclopedia app rather than Google Search. You almost may want something with a subscription as Brainpop has, or a slightly more child-friendly word processor than Pages. Substitute away!"

"Admit it: you only read the list of the six levels of the Taxonomy, not the whole book that explains each level and the rationale behind the Taxonomy. Not to worry, you are not alone: this is true for most educators. But that efficiency comes with a price. Many educators have a mistaken view of the Taxonomy and the levels in it, as the following errors suggest. And arguably the greatest weakness of the Common Core Standards is to avoid being extra-careful in their use of cognitive-focused verbs, along the lines of the rationale for the Taxonomy."

"Instructional rigor is a concept we can agree is important, despite the debate about the use of the word itself. Rigor is "creating an environment in which each student is expected to learn at high levels; each student is supported so he or she can learn at high levels; and each student demonstrates learning at high levels (Blackburn, 2008)." But how does technology relate to rigor? As with any instructional tool, educational technology is critical to increasing rigor in the classroom.  There are five ways technology can be used to increase rigor."

"Studies have shown that typing notes requires shallower levels of cognitive processing than handwriting, as subjects often tend to type verbatim what they hear without really engaging with its substance to the level that is required for greater understanding and better recollection. In contrast, handwriting appears to be more cognitively demanding. According to these studies,  subjects who use handwriting are generally forced to rephrase what hear into their own words, thus creating "more effective memory cues by recreating the context (e.g., thought processes, emotions, conclusions) as well as content (e.g., individual facts) from the original learning session". The evidence against typing your notes is pretty compelling. And then there were tablets Tablets introduce another level of complexity to this problem, since they can be used both to type and handwrite notes. So what are we to do? Are we to avoid using the tablets and stick to pen and paper? If we do use tablets for note taking, are we to force students to handwrite notes on their tablets using a stylus? And are we to ban students from typing up notes on their tablets? After all, that is what the research appears to suggests."

So the question is, how do you ensure that students are truly taking their writing to a new level? How do you make sure that instead of just participating in low-level recall, students are moving on to the higher levels of analysis and reasoning that we want them to reach? One way is to rethink how you pose your writing topics. Here are some ideas and examples:

"One of the most common criticisms leveled at teachers who do attempt to integrate technology into their classroom environment, is that this often results in a lot of 'faffing around' or time wasted while struggling to get the technology to work properly. To some extent I feel that this criticism is fair, but I don't think it's a criticism that should be leveled at teachers, but would be better directed at the people who control the way technology is layered onto the classroom environment, so lets look at that."

ne of the most common criticisms leveled at teachers who do attempt to integrate technology into their classroom environment, is that this often results in a lot of 'faffing around' or time wasted while struggling to get the technology to work properly. To some extent I feel that this criticism is fair, but I don't think it's a criticism that should be leveled at teachers, but would be better directed at the people who control the way technology is layered onto the classroom environment, so lets look at that.

"In my last post I talked about the ability to transform what we do in the classroom using technology as opposed to simply substituting what we do as teachers in the classroom. Of course, students can use a word processor instead of writing out by hand, or they can use email to submit work or they can do their research using google or safari instead of a book. This is the first level where technology can play a part. However, technology can do more than just substitute and in order for it to impact more effectively we must look at how technology can augment, modify and redefine tasks in the classroom. The top level of the SAMR model calls for redesigning tasks where what can be achieved goes beyond traditional and takes tasks to a new level allowing students to go further in their studies and thought processes. The other key, in my opinion, is to remember that technology is not the star of the show but is there to enable teachers to move learning on beyond traditional expectations and help students construct knowledge in a way that they might not have been able to before."