About Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell is an educational scholar who focuses on curriculum within an international context. He has as Master of Education (M.Ed.) degree from the University of North Georgia and has experience teaching from early through higher education. Brad is an active member in three academic honor societies (Phi Kappa Phi – Interdisciplinary Honor Society, Pi Lambda Theta – Education Honor Society, Phi Alpha Theta – History Honor Society) and was the president of the University of West Georgia’s History Club. He was born and raised in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and has volunteered for such projects as the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program and Relay for Life. Along with his teaching experience, he has spent summers instructing disadvantaged youth in Chattanooga and metro Atlanta. Currently, he is serving as a committee member for the University of North Georgia’s United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Exhibition.

What We Can Learn From Finland: Students Are More than Test Scores

Finland has become an unlikely beacon of academic success through its reforms over the past few decades.  The country’s success is well documented and has been proven by its stellar performance in the PISA.  In the 2009 tests, Finland ranked second in Science, third in Reading, and sixth in Mathematics.

Perhaps the best indicator of the overall ability of Finland’s academic achievement is their equitable education throughout the country. The between-school variance for Finland in the PISA was just 5% compared to the OECD average of 33%.  In Finland, the schools are equal in their performance, flexing their muscle to ensure equitable education.

The first (wrong) assumption people have about Finland is that the country is a homogenous group of blonde haired, blue-eyed, Nordic people.  That is anything but true.  Finland has immigrants coming from a wide array of countries including: Afghanistan, Bosnia, India, Iraq, Turkey, Thailand, and Vietnam with this influx of newcomers to Finland speaking more than 60 languages.

So what makes Finland so special?  How does this small European nation excel where most of the Western World is faltering?  In a nutshell, Finland has initiated radical reforms since the 1970s leading it away from a highly centralized system emphasizing external testing to a more localized system in which highly trained teachers design curriculum around very lean national standards.

The country’s school-based, student-centered, open-ended tasks embedded in the curriculum are often touted as an important reason for its success on the international exams.  With that being said, there are three major areas to look into when discussing the dramatic success in Finnish education.

As seen earlier, the between-school variance in Finland’s test scores is at a staggering five percent, a minuscule number compared to the OECD average.  What that number indicates is that Finland’s schools are able to perform at this high rate across the board.  But how do they make this possible?

Among the many reasons for the equality in academic performance is the funding and care that Finland places upon its students.  All students receive free health care, transportation, learning materials, and counseling from the schools.  Also, the state subsidizes parents 150 euros a month for each child until he/she turns 17.

One would think that they are simply putting more money into education than other countries, but that is simply not true.  Compared to the United States, Finland spends 30% less per student.  Furthermore, 98% of costs in all levels of education are covered by the government, rather than private sources. This is in stark contrast to the more privately funded educational programs by billionaires such as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.

In Finland, unlike the United States, funding and resources are distributed evenly and NOT based on competition.  In the United States, rigorous testing and achievement marks indicate how much a school will be funded.  This flawed logic perpetuates poor performances from lesser funded and equipped schools.

As seen with their equitable funding, testing does not play a significant role in Finnish education.  While many countries use testing to spur competition between schools to perform, Finland opposes such measures.  Instead, all schools receive equitable funding no matter their performance, although schools with the most need for funding do receive it.

Standardized testing is extremely rare.  In fact, apart from Finland’s matriculation exam, there are no state mandated tests.  There are no rankings or competition between schools or students.

“We prepare children to learn how to learn, not how to take a test”

– Pasi Sahlberg, Finland’s Ministry of Education and Culture

This does not mean that Finland does not take standardized tests.  Samples of 2nd and 9thgrade students take exams meant to inform curriculum.  The exams are open-ended focusing on providing information to support learning and problem solving, rather than allocating sanctions and punishments.Finland’s tests are not given statewide.  Instead, they are at a local level and created by the schools and teachers to inform their own pedagogical approaches.  Similarly, it is not until sixth grade where kids have are given the option to sit for a district-wide exam.  But they will only take this exam if the classroom teacher agrees to participate.

The most significant exam Finnish students are able to participant in is the Ministry of Education’s matriculation exam where the scores are used by most universities in their admissions process.  The tests, created with input from teachers, are a set of open-ended questions, with between 6 to 10 questions on each test.  Instead of a multiple choice test requiring students to recall information, Finnish students are asked to answer a few questions which require in-depth thinking and analytical skills.

Finland views testing as a way to guide student reflection and self-assessment, mirroring the message from a previous post.  Test results are used to improve learning and motivate students, rather than driving competition and building disparity.

A keystone in Finland’s educational success lies in their lean national curriculum.  It provides teachers with endorsed assessment measures as well as the final overall assessment at the end of the year to mark the students’ progress.

These stripped guidelines are then adopted by local schools and teachers where they craft their own, individualized curriculum and learning goals.  For this strategy to work, Finland has placed a great deal of trust and faith in their teachers.  It is fortunate that their teachers are well-trained and equipped to innovate.

To be a teacher in Finland, one must complete 2-3 years of graduate level education.  To be able to receive this education, many students apply but roughly 15% of those who apply are admitted.  In Finland, being a teacher is a prestigious form of employment and the state takes care of their own by paying for the education of those admitted.

Teacher education focuses on pursuing innovation and new measures of learning.  Educators are encouraged to experiment with their curricular approach and learning outcomes.  In their investment in well qualified teachers, Finland is able to give local schools more autonomy in how they wish to teach their students.

Small class size and student-teacher collaboration permits many schools to allow students to set their own weekly targets and tasks to perform.  Local autonomy in curricular decisions creates independent programs designated to bring the best possible results to each individual school or classroom.

It is hard for a single educator to implement much of Finland’s successful reforms.  They are at a national stage requiring the United States to drastically alter their approach.  But there are still some ways teachers can produce better learners.

Teaching strategies such as experiential learning and differentiated instruction have the ability to bring individualized educational programs promoting self-assessment and metacognitive development.  For veteran teachers who are unwilling to adapt and innovate, programs must be put in place for continuing their education as educators.  Teaching constantly evolves, for better or worse, but without experimenting with new ideas how will teachers know they are doing their best?

School systems should look into who they are hiring.  Many schools place too much weight in hiring coaches for sports over qualified teachers.  There are many benefits of athletic programs but a line must be drawn.  Many teachers with graduate level education are overlooked when schools want to fill a coaching position.  At what point does the United States realize that this hiring fallacy is ill-affecting its students?

For some teachers, there is hope.  Grass-roots movements are springing up in public schools where administrators promote and advocate experiential learning as well as nurturing altruism within their students.  Educators who are able to successfully incorporate diverse lesson plans and assessment can springboard future legislation in their philosophy’s favor.  Of course, this would be a hard fight to win because the most problematic issues in teaching come from the national and state levels.


5 Tips to Effectively Show Historical Films in Class

The practice of showing historically-based films in class has been scrutinized by scholars as a “double edged sword” of opposing positives and negatives.  Films can be beneficial through their use as a visual aid and supplemental resource for the students’ acquisition of knowledge.  But on the other hand, films can provide fictional information which students may take as fact as well as placing students in the position of being passive participants in the learning process.

There are ways to effectively implement the use of historical films to bolster the class’s understanding of the time period and themes being discussed in the course.  Films can be a powerful tool for teachers if they are used correctly and efficiently.

1. Provide the Students with the Proper Context

Any competent teacher should already know this and probably tell the students what they are about to watch.  But sometimes that is not enough.  The film should not be used as the students’ primary form of understanding the content, nor should it be their first.

Teachers should work up the context of the film at least a day before the class watches the movie.  Films are better understood and can be viewed more critically AFTER the students understand the overarching themes, conflicts, and customs of the period and setting.

2. Don’t Show the Whole Film

This is especially true if you are showing a monstrosity of a movie elapsing over two hours.  There are a lot of negative consequences to showing a long film for over one class period.  Student attention and retention declines especially if they know they will be sitting in the dark going into class that day.

The visual element in films is great in a Differentiated Instruction sense, and to accomplish this teachers do not need to show the entire film.  Certain scenes can illustrate the period’s theme, customs, and setting. For example, Monty Python and the Holy Grail has great isolated scenes depicting feudalism, serfdom, and the plague.

Scenes can provide their own context to the teacher’s lesson to the class, but it remains important that the students must have a basic understanding of what they are about to watch for them to possibly gain a higher level of understanding of the content.

3. Stop the Film periodically for Class Discussion

If showing the film in its entirety is the most effective way for the class to understand the message you want to understand, then the movie should be a point of continuing discussion rather than an uninterrupted sitting.  Similar to what was previously mentioned in “not showing the entire film,” students can become apathetic and disassociated with the material if there is no stimulation for a lengthy period of time.

To remedy this dilemma, teachers should stop the movie after pivotal moments and allow the class to discuss what they just saw.  The benefits in doing this cannot be overlooked.  Along with breaking up the monotony and providing much-needed stimulation, students have a chance to analyze the important concepts as well as updating struggling students who may be lost or didn’t understand prominent facets essential to understanding the course content.

4. Proper Note-Taking

Many teachers require students to perform some act of note-taking to confirm both their understanding of what they’re watching and that they were watching in the first place.  Possibly the worst way this is implemented is by teachers handing out sheets with completed sentences where the students must fill in the missing words which they learn through watching the film.  This is incredibly ineffective because students listen for key words rather than thinking critically about the content.

Another poor strategy to avoid is that of assigning a minimum requirement for note-taking for students to complete during films.  This is especially problematic when students fulfill their quota within the first 10-15 minutes of the film then fade into a more passive role for the remainder of the film.  Quota systems are also flawed because the students don’t have any direction in what they should be looking for and analyzing.

For the teacher to promote critical thinking about the material, the students should take notes which straddle a middle ground between overly controlled fill-in-the-blanks and an aimless quota system.  This can be best achieved through giving the students a limited amount of questions which not only require them to focus on the entire film, but also guide their attention to the most pivotal aspects.

“In Casablanca, how does the change in Rick’s actions mirror those of the United States in World War II?”

A limited amount of questions allows the class to evaluate the film as whole and to draw their own connections.  For maximum potential, questions should not be based on rote memorization.  Instead, the questions should require students to make connections to previous lessons, analyze character developments, and synthesize plot points and conflicts.

The benefit of utilizing film is in its imagery and re-creation of events.  Students should be asked to interpret images, icons, costumes, and settings, to connect these concepts to the content in general.

5. Emphasize the Distinction between Fact and Fiction

Outside of documentaries, films are hardly historically accurate.  This deficiency in film is one of the strongest arguments against their use in the classroom.  Studies have been conducted illustrating poor student performance based on their retention of fictional elements in films presented to the class.

This is where all the aforementioned ideas correlate to bring forth a solution to this problem.  Students must have an understanding of the film’s context to be able to properly decipher fact from fiction.  Before the class is shown the film, some of the more glaring or detrimental fictional elements should be addressed in order for students to not misread the story and context of the film.

The Amount of Historical Inaccuracies in this film would be too much

If the film is being watched in its entirety and the film is divided into sections for discussion, the teacher should facilitate an analysis of factual information with the class.  Students should be encouraged to look for and write down elements in the film which appear dubious or inaccurate.  By having the class look for historical inaccuracies, they must first know what is accurate in the film, establishing an analytical theme in the film.

Similar to discussing inaccurate elements in the film, students should be encouraged in their film notes to periodically describe an aspect of the film which they believe to be untrue and to write down what would have made it historically accurate.  It is important for students to understand what WOULD be true and to emphasize fact over fiction.

In short, the value of films in the classroom can be seen in the process of requiring students to think critically about the content presented to them.  Films can be beneficial in developing learning skills and in exercising students’ analytical abilities, which is a cornerstone of the social sciences.

Assessment For Learning

In the history of education, assessment has always played a vital role in determining student achievement.  While the advantages of gauging achievement are strongly pronounced, there are still plenty of negative consequences of assessment which dictate student performance, most notably long after it had taken place.

I am not writing this as an attack on current educational policies and standards-based curriculum.  Rather, this is a discussion pertaining to how educators can use assessment to encourage, not discourage, student learning.

No matter the form of assessment, students are heavily affected by their performance.  Poor results can produce a sense of hopelessness and negative self-fulfilling prophecies, while student success brings forth confidence and motivation.

The mission of educators in general is to facilitate student learning and academic growth within the classroom and beyond.  This mission is challenged by discouragement derived from poor student performance on assessments.   And this is why “Assessment for Learning” is so important and can be used as an invaluable resource.


Assessment for Learning (AFL) is a collaborative effort between teachers and students in the learning process.  It begins when teachers share achievement targets with students, illustrating what is expected from them in a way students will understand and supplemented with examples of exemplary student work.

In this process, the students work undergoes a multitude of self-assessments as well as teachers providing descriptive feedback.  The key here is not to bombard students with an overload of self-assessments and criticism.  Too much of anything is never a good thing, and too much feedback can easily overwhelm them.

The point in doing all this is to give students the ability to chart their development towards achievement targets which the teachers have established.  With examples of strong performances on future hypothetical assessments (or examples similar), students can strive to understand what success looks like.  Combining the encouragement provided from understanding achievement goals and the understanding of sampled student achievement, student motivation will rise and student accountability begins to be established.

Student failure can be contagious, and so can student achievement.  Providing models of success to students gives them an understanding of what is expected of them.  Complemented with feedback from assessments and their own evaluation, students will have a clear track towards how to perform better the next time.

In essence, AFL provides students (as well as teachers) with relatable information which can be used immediately in an effort to improve student performance.  As students acquire the experiences and understanding for improvement over time, they will begin to grasp that success can be easily attainable.


Of course the main objective is to increase student performance and self-esteem.  It is not to eliminate failure, but instead to stop the spread of repeated failure and demoralization.  Students will not always perform at their peak potential.  It is the teacher’s duty to have the students question why they did not do so well and for them to understand how to be successful once more.  Restoring confidence and building these critical thinking skills outline the essential points of AFL.

Within the context of self-assessment and descriptive feedback is the process of metacognition.  This is readily seen through their pursuit of understanding where things went wrong.  Having the students understand the information is one thing (and should be a primary objective for increased motivation and achievement) but having them question their own thinking is a totally different field of thought.


The development of metacognitive thought is a very important thinking skill and developing this frame of mind will only increase student understanding of the entire educational process and beyond.  Regarding AFL, a benchmark goal would be for student proficiency to rise allowing them create their own feedback and set their own goals for the future instead of the teacher.


The samples which the teacher displays for the students should vary in quality of performance.  There are plenty of advantages in allowing students to see stellar work and strive to produce similar results but there is also a wealth of knowledge and understanding which can be attained through critiquing and scrutinizing poor performances.  Students can produce their own feedback on manufactured assignments or even create their own rubric.


The class can make their own practice tests for an upcoming assessment to find out their strengths and weaknesses.  When teachers believe that their class has a firm understanding of AFL, students can begin to narrowly critique each other’s work and provide descriptive feedback.


Assessment for Learning is a great tool to increase motivation and strengthen student achievement.  Feedback, self-assessment, and models give students an understanding of expectations and what they need to do in order to achieve positive results.

Teachers and students should maintain an open dialogue concerning achievement targets with the teacher producing frequent (but not overwhelming) descriptive feedback on student work.  Increased communication and understanding between the two can develop even more learning successes as well as more amiable parent-teacher conferences.

Educators must understand the impact of assessment on the student’s mind.  Winning can beget more winning, while losing can beget more losing.  Success may not occur every time, but teachers must find a way to end the losing streaks.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Facebook: The Unlikely Union of Teachers and Social Media

Oh, that loathsome Facebook, the great distractor of students.  It is difficult for teachers to facilitate a classroom when the students are preoccupied with liking status updates or looking at pictures of their friends from last weekend.  Whether in the computer lab or on smartphones, Facebook continues to be a technological threat.  It is a sworn enemy to  educators.

But what if Facebook and teachers were able come to some form of truce?  What if they could join forces and somehow learn to love each other?  For tech-savvy history teachers this notion can easily become a reality.  Signs of this lesson could be seen in College Humor’s Facebook History.

The idea is simple; maybe even a little too simple.  What if students were not just allowed but encouraged to use Facebook to chat with classmates?  Their response would be predictable although it is not clear how teachers would benefit from this allowance.  And this is where we see the catch…students would not be allowed to chat on their personal profiles, but rather a fictional profile of the historical figure they were assigned!

To put it more clearly, students would all be using Facebook under their fictional historical profiles.  For those who ever wondered how King George III would have reacted to Thomas Jefferson’s status update stating, “My draft of the Declaration of Independence has been ratified by the Continental Congress.  America is now free and independent from Great Britain!”  Or what about Pope Leo X’s reaction after looking at his news feed and seeing that Martin Luther had posted the Ninety-Five Theses and already has thousands of likes?

Along with Facebook (which most responsible schools have banned), a more responsible and adequate resource is blogging websites.  I can imagine WordPress or Blogger would make ideal substitutes.


I see this type of lesson working great with history teachers who are entering a unit which has a wealth of important figures (i.e. American Revolution, World War II, The Protestant Reformation, The Fall of the Roman Republic, etc.) for the students to be assigned.  Throughout the unit as the class learns the material in whichever fashion the teacher deems fit, the students will continue to chat and possibly battle on Facebook.

My preferred method of implementing this strategy is using it as a complementary piece to the core unit and instruction.  Students (either assigned or having signed up for a figure) are then to make a Facebook page about them.  Initially, the students fill out the information on their figure for a grade.

Students explain their figure’s biography, quotes, location, and time period.

As the unit progresses, students are required to comment on classmate’s status updates or photo albums.  This requires them to understand their character, what their motives/objectives are, and who they see as a friend or foe.  Communication is based on what their figure would say in a situation, not them.

Of course, the instructor will have his/her hands full with this assignment.  Along with proctoring the language/ content between students and ensuring they have met the requirements, teachers must instigate conflict.  This is where (for some – hopefully all) teachers get to have their own personal fun and be creative.

Say you are teaching a unit on the American Revolution and the class is at the Declaration of Independence.  The teacher can create their own page (or have a student assigned to it) called “The Second Continental Congress” and assign the class to chat on this page as their characters, asking “What would John Adams say about loyalty to the British?” or “What would George Washington say?” then abruptly scold the student who spoke on the page as him since Washington did not participate in the Second Continental Congress.

That latter part of those questions holds weight.  Playing off the theme of Assessment for Learning (this will be highlighted in my next post) for any student who mistakenly appears in a location they were not meant to or an uncharacteristic comment is provided by a figure, the class (and most importantly the student who committed the error) must understand WHY this was wrong and understand what could have been used in its place.

Teachers can make pages concerning battles, events, conferences, treaties, or any other important element related to the unit.  The Facebook discussion can continue throughout the unit through time allotted during class and (if possible) for homework.  I understand that there are multiple ways in which this lesson would be prohibited in schools, so an alternative is detailed later.


This project-based assessment (or assignment if you wish) involves a great deal of time and energy from the teacher for the assessment/assignment to be productive, but the benefits which it could produce are well worth the effort.  “Historical Facebook” is an ongoing portfolio-based body of work which evolves during the unit.  The student can be graded on multiple levels and at various times for their work on their figure.

The initial grade comes from a completion of their page and its info section.  Each character’s url address is sent and monitored by the teacher.  Weekly marks can be made by evaluating student effort and performance.  Perhaps a minimum of two posts and four comments each week based on their character’s involvement and portrayal would suffice, depending on the class.

The students’ overall performance can be evaluated by the teacher in accordance to the rubric.  Hopefully by the end of the unit, a vast collection of exchanges and events will allow the class to look over their fictional Facebook universe and see which characters said or did what.


For many schools or even teachers, the prospect of using Facebook within the classroom is heavily frowned upon.  I respect this viewpoint and suggest an alternative.  Instead of using online media to facilitate discussion, teachers could have students create physical forms of their status updates through poster boards or large sheets of paper from the art room.

Classmates can walk around and look at other poster boards commenting on status updates in their character.  Although this prohibits multimedia and centrality of content, the use of physical displays of content over using social networking has many benefits.

Students are not tempted at the chance to surf the internet or go on their personal Facebook profile, is the most obvious advantage.  The class is less tempted to say something crude or insulting if they must write their words in the middle of the class instead of behind a computer screen.


This lesson strategy is an acquired taste.  Not all history teachers will be persuaded to participate in this time and energy draining exercise.  But nonetheless, the incorporation of Facebook and education is not just a reality, but an outlet for creativity and fun.

Students are required to think critically, engage in historical dialogues, and embrace the mentality of their figure, all while using social networking media.  But the ultimate question which needs to be answered before any of this happens Is if this a strategy teachers should invest in or is it asking for trouble.

The (Flawed) Culture of Education Today

The cartoon above depicts one of the most troubling aspects for educators today.  Teacher accountability is spiraling out of control; from parent blame for their child’s poor grades to pressure from administrators and government officials who decide how much funding the school receives based on student test grades.

Fifty years ago teachers worked in a simpler educational system; corporal punishment did not carry the stigma it does today (although I do not condone the practice) and the curriculum did not have to be altered in an effort to produce better test scores.  Today, technology-driven students are driven by instant gratification while being over stimulated through smartphones and social networking.  This, in turn, has led to a culture of youth entitlement and parents adhering to their children’s every need, however ridiculous.

What this means for teachers is that their class’s attention span continues to wane, forcing them to be more like “edutainers” than educators.  While not all teachers subscribe to this ideology, most if not all are affected by their students’ behavior.

To find some form of solution, as minimal as it may be, teachers must first look towards their administrators.  As mentioned in a previous post, the culture of education in America is lacking and parent involvement continues to dramatically decline when it is the most needed.  That is not to say all parents fail to play an active role in their child’s education.  Many parents are very outspoken and critical of schools and educators.

In many cases, if a parent is upset by the way a teacher is conducting their class or their child is receiving poor grades, they by-pass the teacher and go straight for an administrator.  This is where steady communication between teachers and administrators is essential as it eliminates doubt on both ends, producing a singular narrative.

The problems with some children today are their growing dependency upon their parents, shortening attention spans influenced by instant gratification and stimulation overload and overall apathy towards learning.

How do teachers combat this new breed of student?  That is a great question.  Technological approaches never hurt as teachers use one of their most prominent barriers in reaching students and use it to their advantage.

My teaching philosophy has always focused on a student-centered, expeditionary learning model with differentiated instruction/assessment, so developing lesson plans that are stimulating and diverse is a necessity.

Some teachers, disenchanted with the prospect of change, are not willing to conform and remain conservative in their philosophical approach.  It is usually this type of teacher who gives the anti-tenure argument strength and validity.

To use another political cartoon, the one above shows how teachers continue to be stripped of leverage and authority within the classroom.  As hard as any teacher attempts to adapt to this generation of student, the politics are grossly one-sided and not in their favor.

I ask again, what can teachers do to not be the punching bag for both parents/students and administrators/school boards?  Does reinvigorating your lesson plans and catering to the students’ un-quenching desire to be electronically stimulated help?  What about basing their pay on student performance on standardized tests?

Quite honestly, there is no definitive answer.  The debate between merit pay and tenure is for another post, but the sheer existence of merit pay illustrates how teachers are under fire from every angle.

Both of the cartoons portray explicit messages illustrating the low respect shown towards teachers.  Students will not, and cannot, accept blame nor take any responsibility for their actions, parents refuse to believe that collaborating with teachers will help their child succeed, and administrators expect high test scores because they are instrumental to the school’s flow of revenue and prestige.  It is worth noting that the United States is not alone in this problem.

France is going through this same stage of change in parent attitude towards their partnership with teachers.  The emphasis on preserving the child’s self-esteem while sacrificing their fortitude and ability to accept failure is a major concern for the United States and beyond.

Do parents over-protect their kids?  How bad off are teachers really?  How can this be remedied?  Please share your thoughts.  And remember, when I explain students, teachers, parents and administrators I do not use absolutes.  By mentioning a group I do not imply every single teacher or every single student.  There will always be exceptions to the rule and in this case there are plenty.

What We Can Learn From China: The Family Matters

It is often noted that China’s educational success has heavily contributed to the country’s emergence as a world power.  China’s academic achievement is most notably found in their international test scores.  In its international standardized testing debut, Shanghai dominated the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) sweeping the three content areas of reading, mathematics and science.  But how did the United States do?  Mediocre at best.  Out of the 65 countries which participated in the PISA, the United States ranked closer to the middle than they did to the top.

So what makes China’s education so great?  Is it because they implement innovative lessons and alternative assessments?  Do they focus more on building the individual than acquiring knowledge for the test?  Nope.  Instead, China is a high-stakes testing juggernaut with more pressure on exams than the United States if you can believe it.

The capstone of China’s testing is their National Higher Education Entrance Examination, or the College Entrance Exam (CEE).  The CEE is the ultimate indicator on the student’s future both academically and professionally.   School curriculum is at the mercy of this test and most of the Chinese dictate their early lives preparing for it leading to many dramatic and extreme consequences.

Since China promotes high-stakes standardized testing just like the United States, the most pressing question is why is there such disparity in test scores?  The answer is simple and embarrassing; the culture of China emphasizes academic success with multiple social pressures with the most notable one for this discussion being family pride.  The families of Chinese students rigorously work to ensure their children are being properly educated around the clock pressuring them not to bring shame upon their family.

This may sound like a simplified answer, but it is geared to illustrate how students in the United States need to understand consequences while also demonstrating that parental involvement is an absolute necessity.   Within the United States, and especially in rural areas, the percent of parents involved and invested with their children’s education has dropped.  A key cause for concern is the nearly absent presence of foreign-born parents.


How can educators fix this endemic?  Schools continue to incorporate technology to bridge the gap between themselves and parents with online grade books and homework schedule while giving the parents a direct link to communicate via e-mail.  These are all excellent ways to promote closer communication but if the parents are unwilling or unable to speak English then it is all for nothing.

Teachers need to take advantage of any resources their school, district, and/or community can offer.  ESOL teachers, bilingual colleagues, or even grant proposals to the district International Review Board can be used to bridge the language barrier and make the parents feel as though they are not being ignored or isolated.

But this does not solve the dilemma found in teachers trying to reach out to apathetic parents who are not concerned with their students’ academic wellbeing.  Strategies for this particular issue are vast.  Parent-teacher collaboration is a delicate relationship with many partnerships failing due to perceived animosity or indifference by one or the other.

Collaboration strategies deserve their own post (which will happen in due time) but here are some basic understandings necessary for positive parent-teacher relations.  Initially, teachers must find a way to get them into the school.  The teacher must be understanding of the parents’ culture and mentality but at the same time they must be persuasive (but not aggressive) in convincing parents of the importance of a proper education.

If possible, assignments can be given to students which involve parent input such as interviews concerning the parents’ interests, hobbies and jobs, or have the students create a piece of art or story illustrating their parents’ family story.  Of course these examples are geared towards a younger audience, but this concept is not limited to them.

Teachers can always utilize the cornerstones of parent-teacher correspondence of letters home, e-mail exchanges, newsletters, and mailed letters to the household, but this will most likely not affect the apathetic parents.

Please share any strategies you have used that have produced stronger parent involvement in their children’s education.

Differentiated Instruction

Since this is my introductory post on “The Art of Education” blog, I feel some specification is in order.  The main writer of this blog focuses primarily on the benefits of technology within the classroom which can prove to be incredibly useful, but I plan on discussing topics directed more towards teaching theory and philosophy.

With that being said, I wish to look into differentiated instruction (DI) first.  For me, DI is dichotomized by the ever-growing emphasis on high-stakes testing and its effect on the curriculum.  The problem with today’s measure of academic success is that achievement is rooted in the quality of test scores leading many teachers to alter their pedagogical approach towards “teaching to the test.”

Of course educators are well-accustomed to this trend so no explanation or insight is necessary, but a discussion of alternatives should be conducted.  I found myself among the many disenchanted teachers who converted a once diverse lesson into a rudimentary mechanism to produce bare fact-regurgitating student robots; all to produce better scores.  At the end of the day, students may be able to shout out arbitrary names but it is without a narrative or the least context.  This is where DI and its ability to enhance a diversity of students comes in.

Unfortunately, the United States pressures both teachers and students to understand a wide array of facts spreading both groups thin in ability to elaborate in minute facts and anecdotal details to give the content the much needed context.  A simple lesson (geared towards topical over procedural units) is to implement a simple DI strategy.  Here are the steps:

  1. Depending on how you approach the content (i.e. chapter, performance standard, and bench marks) set aside the next full unit of study.
  2. Break it down into sections, preferably four to six, which will be incorporated into the upcoming lesson(s).
  3. Once the class has reached this unit, break the class into the number of groups equal to how many unit sections you have created.
  4. With the class dispersed in their groups you assign them a certain section for them to be responsible for.  This is where things get more complicated with the introduction of multiple variables.  Each student must be able to display their mastery of the section you gave them but it is up to them on how they wish to show it.  It is best to have the students base their evidence on Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences to ground them and give them ideas.
  5. Within their groups, students should be given the luxury of choosing how they are to acquire the knowledge in their assigned section.  For example, a student may just wish to read their textbook while a pair could read it to each other.  Ultimately the students are to be on task and using whichever way (intrapersonal or interpersonal) to accomplish this assignment.
  6. Once the students understand what they are assigned to learn, they must demonstrate their understanding to the class.  Each student can do this through whichever way they feel the most confident (i.e. poster board presentation, written essay, performance either alone or with partners within the same section).
  7. Once everyone is completed, you now begin the unit starting from the beginning with the students coming up and presenting their content to the class.  The benefits derived from this part are where the strengths of DI can be found.  Say you have 4 students in each section and each one takes a different approach towards presenting to the class.  You have one student teaching the class through a dramatization of events, another reading their essay, one with a picture-laced PowerPoint presentation, and another presenting musically through a song from the time period or one of their own.  Of course there are a myriad of different ways for these students to demonstrate their knowledge but the emphasis should be on them picking the form they feel the most comfortable with.
  8. Now by the time every student has presented to the class, the rest of the students will have experienced the section through their classmates’ differentiated approach.  And as the teacher, you are more of a mediator and coach during this time instead of tirelessly lecturing.  But after each section, you should ensure the students understand what was just presented to them and fill in the holes which may have been left by the student presenters.

Naturally, this lesson format is not suitable for every subject or grade level.  It is also just one approach among many in which teachers can incorporate DI to the class.  Teachers still need to monitor the class and make sure time is not being spent socializing or being off task, but I strongly believe the pros outweigh the cons in this scenario with factors such as motivation, variation, and stimulation being involved.

They are motivated by feeling that they are in control of their learning by deciding how they will present to the class.  The variation in ways their classmates present the material allows students to be introduced to the content in new and different styles.  Students experience a wealth of stimulation through the diverse experiences of group work, multiple presentations, and a new approach towards learning the material over the redundant teacher-centered lecture format.

Like I previously stated, this is just one form of DI among many.  Rob Baker’s posts provide another great alternative which can create similar results.  Technology is an essential tool for DI but that is for another post.