Online Pre-School

If you are like me, you will have a knee-jerk reaction to the concept in the above title. A while ago, I was reading a tweet from Royan Lee, and over my morning tea skimmed the article he had linked to. I believe I also offered a comment on the topic. My first thought was that this was a pedagogical travesty of the highest order! But then as I contemplated the article during the course of the day, I thought I remembered a mention of Utah.

And that made me reconsider my original opinion.

Readers, have you ever been to Utah?

Although I am not that well-travelled, I have visited this state. It is right at the top of my list of the most spectacularly beautiful places on earth.

It is also filled with great big areas of absolutely nothing. We once got lost in a huge expanse of desert for about an hour-and-a-half, while attempting to follow an incorrect map leading from a National Monument to the Interstate. It was so hot we couldn’t take the dog out of the truck to pee in the middle of the day because he would burn his feet. The only person we saw while lost was in a grader moving drifts of sand off the gravel road. The only wildlife we saw was a herd of deer motionless beside a small mud hole. The only reason I didn’t panic is that we camp in the back our truck so we had shade and accommodation at all times, not to mention a large water container.

So, when it comes to pre-school in this part of the world, I can only imagine that there are many families for whom an online option would be helpful. I am also sure the good parents of Utah would happily take their kids to a face-to-face pre-school if they had one close by. But in the meantime, kids could go online for all kinds of activities and interactions.

I also started thinking about the launch of Sesame Street, and wondered if it had been whole-heartedly approved back in the day. In fact, it was not. The Wikipedia article on the iconic educational kids’ show says, “According to writer Michael Davis, Sesame Street is ‘perhaps the most vigorously researched, vetted, and fretted-over program’.[1] By 2001, there were over 1,000 research studies regarding its efficacy, impact, and effect on American culture.”

Without doing any extensive research on online pre-school, whether mandated or optional, I am still interested in the topic, and feeling positive about its application in rural and remote areas. And maybe I should add “northern” to that list…

Modern Learning

This term has been used quite widely to describe educational goals during the past few years. I think the first place I saw the term was in some great resources published by York Region DSB. Usually when people describe their big goals as Modern Learning, they are trying to avoid the use of other terms such as “21^st century learning” (used a lot by the Ontario Ministry of Education, back in the good old days when the ministry was open-minded and forward-thinking. Oh, did I say that out loud?). Michael Fullan has given us another suite of terms such as “New Pedagogies,” “Deeper Learning,” “6 C’s,” and more.

My personal favourite is 21c Learning. It is short and to the point and I don’t mind that we still use it when we are well into the 21^st century.

But my main objection to the term “modern learning,” is that the word “modern” has a pre-existing definition. My knowledge of this was hard-won, and I am loathe to give it up!

When I started university, I did not do well in first year English. This was a big crisis for me, as I love literature, reading and writing and was an English major from Day 1. Mid way through semester 1, I realized that my casual and colloquial definitions of words such as “modern,” “medieval,” and “romantic” were part of the problem. I literally had no idea that in many fields these are technical terms with very defined meanings. I vividly remember going to the library at the University of Windsor. Lacking the Internet and Wikipedia, I took down a volume of an encyclopedia and turned to the section on Literature, and found part of my answer.

For example, the Romantic period of literature refers roughly to writers and their works from 1790-1830, and the Modern, 1910-1945. There are many views on these exact dates, but nevertheless… I learned that the same kinds of terms apply in art and architecture. What a world of understanding opened up to me as a result of half an hour with the encyclopedia!

Three years later, in grad school, I met my friend Robin who had joined us from Scotland. I found out that throughout his high school years, the eras of literature were broken down and taught grade by grade. I was so upset that in Ontario that was (and is) not a part of what we learn.

But having learned first-hand the importance of the terms, I am reluctant to abandon them! So I am all about “21c learning,” thank you very much!

ACSE Gmail Chat

-->

The ACSE gmail group recently erupted with dozens of wonderful discussion posts on a variety of computer science curriculum, staffing and policy ideas. It has taken me a little while to read through all the many informative and thoughtful emails. But, of course I wanted to chime in with my own views!

Refreshing curriculum

As others have noted, we have had a relatively large upswing in computer science learning at elementary. This has been boosted by two years of The Learning Partnership support and this year by other additional organizations accessing CanCode funds.

On the one hand, I think we are finally getting past the questions on “How can I teach this, it is not in the curriculum,” with a strong emphasis on subject integration, and acceptance of creative coding platforms such as Scratch and the many robotics devices that bring learning to life. We also have the provincial resource, Coding in Elementary, that is housed on Edugains. It takes a strong integration approach.

In our board for example, we just concluded offering PD to all Kindergarten teams on Coding and Computational thinking using BeeBots. We also have K classes using Scratch Jr. I think we need to be planning for learning pathways for these students.

The end result is that students will come to high school with a good foundation in drag-and-drop programming. Some will have more. For example, Swift Playgrounds reveals the actual code. So does the Codesters Python environment used by Hackergals. App Inventor also offers a more sophisticated environment for elementary students.

This winter I was conducting a workshop in a borrowed classroom. It happened to be used mostly for BTT and CS courses. The poster on the wall included success criteria for using Spheros to code commands, loops, etc. These same assignments could be completed successfully in many junior classes, that is Grades 4-6.

So, when I looked at the call for writers for refreshing the Science and Technology curriculum, I wondered two things.

First, are we at the point of incorporating these skills into the actual elementary curriculum? That would be great as it would lead to broader PD opportunities and therefore more equity for our students.

As well, I couldn’t help but think back to that BTT poster. Surely it would be a good thing if the province would look at the continuum of age-appropriate computer science learning and adjust both the elementary and secondary expectations to match what is truly the reality in many schools in 2018.

Qualifications

I have been weighing my views on the level of rigor needed to qualify secondary teachers to teach CS. Naturally I have identified with the group of self-taught CS teachers, as that is the category I fall into. However, I know my limitations and if I had to teach Grade 12 tomorrow…

You know what? I would. I do not have the background today. But I could build my skills based on where I am now. I could also access a wide variety of learning platforms to gain proficiency in a given language. I could reach out online or in this ACSE group for resources and project ideas, which everyone is so willing to share. I think we are entering an age where proficiency or even mastery in a subject are freely available to those who are willing to inquire, persist and work hard. To quote my computer science teacher (from one of my two CS credits): “To get better at coding… you need to code!”

I believe that the issues identified by others about the two-year program, industry salaries, etc. are hugely important and should be addressed. But I think even more important is the vision of where Ontario will go with the curriculum. That framework would lead to an examination of needs across the province…