Gerlinde Olvera

The Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) announced in 2000 that even though states and districts are attempting to educate students who will be able to function as contributing members of the 21^st century most are unsuccessful. In fact, according to SCANS, the educational system still adheres to a methodology that was designed approximately 100 years ago (SCANS 2000). Now, fully into the 21^st century, not much seems to have changed since SCANS published the report (Elmo 2006).

This is a disturbing thought, since, without a doubt, our society has changed within the last 100 years. Nowadays it is just as important to know how to access knowledge and where to go for answers as knowing the facts (Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. 2000). Committees on the Science of Learning emphasize that the utmost goal for schools should be to enhance students’ learning so they are able to transfer knowledge gained in school to their everyday environment (Bransford, et al 2000). Meanwhile businesses desperately call for graduates who know how to apply their learned skills to our society’s demands (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2007).

How do we achieve this goal? Suggestions abound; more technology for teachers and students, better access to global issues, involve students in their learning process, include parents and the community; the list is endless. However, I am a realist. I know full well that not all school districts can afford to completely revamp their teaching methodologies and technological equipment. Doing so involves time, a lot of money, and training (meaning teachers out of the classroom).

However, there are simple ways to prepare students to meet the demands of the 21^st century.

1. Challenge students to employ higher level cognitive skills.
2. Prompt students to make the connections between learned materials and our society.

Every teacher can do both in the classroom. What does it take to do so? Think about how students have been taught. How many times can we ask them to learn that 8 x 8 = 64? Instead the teacher could ask, “How could you find out what 8 x 8 equals? How many ways can you think of to produce 64?” (Note: I did not request the number 64 but simply 64. This could include 64 of anything and anyone.) Write down all examples.” Suddenly students are challenged to think on higher cognitive levels. Instead of Blooms Taxonomy 1 or Depth of Knowledge 1 (DOK 1) the required cognitive level has become a Blooms 3 or 4 and DOK 2 or 3 depending on how much guidance the teacher provides. Debriefing should allow students to make the correlation to the real world. For example, why could it important to understand various ways to come up with 64?

Another example may be to encourage students to ponder why learning the parts of an essay can be helpful in the real world and have them write an essay about real life situations of their choice. As a comparison the teacher could prompt students to express their thoughts in writing in any writing style other than an essay. Again the choice should be theirs. Finally, students could compare and contrast essays with other styles of writing and decide their usefulness in given situations. Now a simple Bloom’s Taxonomy level 1 or 2 has turned into Bloom’s 3 to 6 while the DOK level has risen from 1 or 2 to DOK 3 or 4; again depending on the teacher’s involvement in the students’ thought processes. In addition, by allowing students to make the connections to real life, they are already entertaining higher cognitive level thinking skills.

However, we simply cannot assume that our students know how to correlate learning to real life or that they will be able to use higher cognitive levels intrinsically. These are skills our students need to be taught beginning in elementary school so they can meet the expectations of high school and our global society later-on.

Of course there is a time and place for everything. Basics are important. However, learning will become more interesting and real if we teachers allow students to discover, explain, critique and make connections. Suddenly, simple factoids become interesting and valuable, and it doesn’t take any more time than doing times tables or rehashing parts of essays over and over again, because “The kids just don’t get it.”

Bransford , J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R., eds. 2000. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. 2000. The Social Life of Information. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Elmo R. 2006. The Resilience of Teacher Culture. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfQzo5e4iSU

Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2007. The Intellectual and Policy Foundations

of the 21st Century Skills Framework. http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/route21.

The Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, U.S. Department of Labor 2000. What Work Requires of Schools: A SCANS Report for America. http://wdr.doleta.gov/opr/fulltext/document.cfm?docn=6140

It’s all over the news. There seems to be a serious disparity between the success of boys and girls in school. Boys are lagging behind, have a higher dropout rate from high school, and are less apt to pursue college. How can we help our male students become more successful?

One of the more prevalent suggestions to aid boys seems to be gender-divided education or at least partially separate education for boys (Sax 2007). The reasoning behind this theory is that boys need more stimuli than girls, who can sit quietly and read much better than boys (Gurien and Stephens 2007).

Throughout my long teaching career I have come to know many girls who learned best when they were engaged and boys who devoured books like candy. I think it is destructive to categorize children’s learning by their gender. I believe that all children can and are willing to learn.

In order to be able to learn a child must be curious about learning new things. However, traditional classrooms almost immediately squelch this curiosity and replace it with rote memorization, drawing within the lines and prescribed art projects (Thompson 2006). Some children are good at these. I was not one of them. I have always been hands on, outside the lines, constantly forgetting factoids and wiggly when bored. I know for a fact that all girls do not like to sit still and read.

I don’t think the problem is necessarily gender related but how we as teachers present learning. I strongly believe that we need to revisit Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences when we are teaching our students. Not many of our children can be categorized into either mathematical or linguistic intelligences, yet most schools and lessons still focus on those according to Dr. Gardner (Gardner 2006).

Our society is changing and often a strong mathematical/logic or linguistic talent is not at the center of our careers anymore. The Partnership for 21^st Century Skills emphasizes that students must be engaged in the classroom in order to graduate students that are ready to succeed in today’s global society (Route 21).

So how can we make learning more interesting for students? Allow them to use their intelligences by varying lessons to match most of their intelligences. This needs to happen K – 12. Foster their love for learning by tapping into the skills they already love to perform. Success breeds confidence. Consequently students will be more apt to try out skills they are not good at.

Our boys will benefit from such classroom instruction, not from being separated or singled out.

Sources:

Gardner. c2006. Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice. New York: Basic Books.

Gurien M. and K. Stephens. c2007. The Minds of Boys. New York: Wiley, John & Sons. http://www.michaelgurian.com/the_minds_of_boys.html

Gurien Michael, 2008. “Boys in crisis” CBS News Video.

Route 21. Partnership for 21^st century skills. http://www.21stcenturyskills.org

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=1754194n%3fsource=search_video

Sax. c2007.Boys Adrift: The Five Factors Driving the Growing Epidemic of Unmotivated and Underachieving Young Men. New York: Basic Books.

Stahl, Lesley 2003 “The gender gap: boys lagging – girls move ahead”, CBS Evening News, 60 Minutes.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/31/60minutes/main527678.shtml

Thompson, Michael, 2006. “Raising Cain: Focus on Boys” PBS documentary. http://www.pbs.org/opb/raisingcain