Millersville University Matthew J.

Monahan
EDFN 545 Summer I, 2016

WEEK 1 (DUE MAY 12, 2016)

Module 1 “How People Learn”

For the first discussion prompt, please focus your discussion on what you observed in the
assigned video lesson. Approximately 10 minutes into the video, one of the teachers (Ms.
MacLean) says, “Some of them just are just plain drawing. Some act them out. You know,
they’re going down or sliding down themselves, pretending they’re sliding down with
their drawing. Whatever will let me show, will let them show that they understood the
concept that we are trying to learn.”

1) How does Ms. MacLean know that her students have learned?
2) How do you know when your students have learned?
3) How do you think Ms. MacLean’s strategies for having students show what they know
enhance her students’ learning?

Please make sure to support your response above by also incorporating information from
the Willingham article.

Ms. MacLean is far more articulate that I in the reasoning behind her planning. I
am impressed that she is able to, as she says, “visualize herself as a kid.” My training
and experience is at the secondary level, so the concept of having students measure the
time of the ball’s journey (sledding activity) in counted numbers rather than precisely
measured time in fractions is not something that I would have considered. Her use of
tracing cans to measure the distance that the balls displaced them is outstanding. These
seem to me to be hallmarks of an experienced, well trained, and observant elementary
school teacher. Aside from the ways previously mentioned, I believe that Ms. MacLean’s
strategies for having students show what they know enhance her students’ learning
because they are not required to focus on achieving the knowledge “destination” by
taking the same path. She is a student advocate, finding reasons to say “yes” to student
displays of learning. Daniel Willingham supports this focus on memory and learning in
his article “Students Remember…What they Think About” when he states, “one factor
[that] trumps most others in determining what is remembered: what you think about when
you encounter the material.” (Willingham, 3). Ms. MacLean’s approach is valid,
according to this cognitive scientist, because she cares less about the how questions of
student display of knowledge than the what and why. She states that she tries to focus on
where students are going and tries to provide them a way to get there. Students in this
lesson verbally hypothesized an outcome based on prior knowledge (kids who live in
Michigan are likely to have been sledding) and then carried that into a new concept.
Whether students spoke, wrote, or physically acted out the concept, the learning was
clear. Willingham states, “memory is not simply the material presented—it is the product
of what the learner thought about when he or she encountered the material.”
(Willingham, 2.). Ms. MacLean’s students were thinking about the ball in terms of time,

1
speed, momentum, and displacement rather than speaking or writing. This lesson will not
miss the mark like the one about the Underground Railroad, referenced by Willingham,
in which students ended up focusing on biscuits rather than escaped slave experiences.
I try to gauge student learning in several ways. When introducing knowledge I
employ think, pair, share discussion formats. By listening to the pair conversations and
the comments in the class sharing, I can get a basic sense of student learning through
body language, facial expression, and observed conversations. The class sharing can
sometimes entail what Willingham calls “shallow knowledge,” but can also allude to
more rich learning. To gauge student learning I do employ some traditional formative
and summative assessments like tests and quizzes, and those scores can be a valuable
piece to an overall learning “puzzle.” In many of the formative and summative
assessments that I employ, however I have been making an effort to give students more
choice as to how they decide to demonstrate learning. For example, in a group activity
about Landmark Supreme Court cases I gave groups the options of creating an iMovie, a
live skit, or creating a visual presentation. The rubric for each demonstration provided
the potential for an equal amount of points, but I did not tell them how to complete the
activity.

Module 2 “Constructing Knowledge”

Approximately 22 minutes into the video, we see how one of the teachers (Sandi Gilliam)
attempts to foster deep thinking among her students. She says, “The person at the board’s
gotta think, the students that are sitting back have to think, because they know those
questions aren’t going away and I’m not answering the questions.”

1) What do you notice about the kinds of questions Ms. Gilliam asks?
2) How can such questions provide information about how students are processing
information?

The humanities tend to make sense to me. Math does not, especially algebra. A
friend, who teaches math across the hall from me, thinks that I’m trying to be funny when
I tell him that I don’t understand algebra because I don’t know what all of those numbers
and letters are doing, but I’m serious! For this reason I appreciate Sandi Gilliam’s
approach to teaching math, graphing in this case, by finding a “hook” for students to
engage prior knowledge. Perhaps students may not appreciate the intricacies of plotting
points at the intersections of axes, but they can understand coffee and water consumption.
By placing the variables in the context of the overland trails to the West, she engages her
students in a conversation about what the math is doing. This lesson likely builds on
students’ prior knowledge of westward expansion. Even if students are hazy on those
details, all students should understand the concepts of consumption and resupply. As her
co-teacher explains, they provide students with a list of supplies that they can understand,
with a requirement to do something with those supplies.
Mrs. Gilliam shares, “I don’t like to ask kids one answer questions. I like to ask them
deep questions: what do you notice, why do you think that happened?” Such meaningful
thinking questions allow students to construct knowledge in ways that are valuable to
them. As mentioned, they build upon prior knowledge. Perhaps even more valuable for

2
learning, these questions do not ask students to become lost in the details. She has
formatted her instruction in a way that makes it possible to remove the data and focus on
the concept. This would have been extremely helpful for me as a math student. This
instruction also provides information about how students are processing the information
because they engage in a class conversation about concepts and scenarios. The students
in this video challenged and supported each other.

Module 3 “Learning Styles”

1) Given the history of mixed and frequently negative research findings, what explains
the persistent popularity of ideas about adapting teaching to students’ supposed
cognitive styles, learning styles, brain hemisphere preferences, or multiple
intelligences?
2) Are there productive ways to use some of these concepts to improve instructional
planning?
3) What negative effects might they have if used inappropriately?

The concept of teaching styles has been part of the educational conversation since
before I began my formal training as a freshman in college. Before this week I would
have been a bit reluctant to admit that I don’t attempt to tailor my instruction to
individual students based on learning style. Now that I’ve been introduced to the work of
Daniel Willingham, a cognitive scientist from Virginia University, I can strike that from
my list of sins for which to atone! According to Willingham, learning styles do not exist.
He argues in an article titled “Do Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners Need
Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic Instruction?” and in a video clip titled, “Learning Styles
Don’t Exist,” that the concept of learning styles has endured because most people believe
that they do. It is notable that Willingham admits that, “it is impossible to prove a
negative: We cannot be certain that modality theory is incorrect.” (Willingham, 7.).
However, research has not sufficiently supported the effectiveness of learning style-
focused instruction. Harold Pashler, Mark McDaniel, Doug Rohrer and Robert Bjork
conducted a meta analysis of the existing research on learning styles and conclude that
much of the research does not even follow an experimental methodology that could be of
value for determining such instruction. (Pasher, Et.al. Learning Styles: Concepts and
Evidence, 105). Aside from the fact that the modality approach seems to make sense, and
that teachers and students believe in the concept of learning styles, Willingham suggests
that educational companies can, and do, profit greatly from tools for assessing, and
teaching to, learning styles.
The value in teaching practices focused on varying learning styles is a variety of
instructional techniques. A teacher hoping to reach visual learners through an activity or
example is likely helping all students understand the concept better. In the video titled
“Building on What We Know” Sandi Gilliam, a high school math teacher, mentions
learning styles in her post-lesson interview. She seems to believe that her instruction
targets students with different learning styles. The previously mentioned researchers
would likely disagree with her conclusions about targeting learning styles specifically.
They would likely argue that her instruction was effective because it worked for all
learners, not that parts of the lesson worked better for some students. If used improperly,

3
teachers might embark upon a fool’s errand to match each lesson to each student’s
learning style. Not only might this entail an extraordinary amount of time spent on
planning, but also the end result would not likely be more effective instruction based on
planning for learning styles. Teachers may also end up teaching the skills associated with
learning styles, like listening or visual observation, rather than the concept. A teacher
who focuses on the meaning at the center of a lesson is more likely to achieve favorable
learning outcomes.

Module 4 “Social Learning”

1) Question 1: Yvonne Scott wrote down the children's questions about butterflies but
did not specifically ask about the children's prior knowledge of butterflies. Why did
she take this approach? What if their prior knowledge is confused or incorrect?
2) Question 2: What if a child is reluctant to participate in a project because she feels
she doesn't know anything about the topic?
3) Question 3: After a hands-on activity, what if the student is still confused or simply
doesn't grasp the concept being taught?
4) Question 4: Is managed dialogue an effective learning strategy? If everyone doesn't
participate in the conversation, does that mean they're not learning?
5) Question 5: When a teacher uses group discussion, how do you know whether or not
individual students are learning?
6) Question 6: How does the culture of a classroom change when students' learning
happens in the context of social interaction – for example, projects or cooperative
learning activities?
7) Question 7: Recent research has largely supported a cognitive approaches to
explain learning (as seen in the last 3 videos and in the Willingham article), yet many
principles of behaviorism are alive and well in classrooms. Can you provide
examples of how behaviorist theory is often reflected in classrooms today?

Yvonne Scott’s approach to questioning provides a safe environment in which

students can become involved in the conversations, and learning, of a lesson from the
onset regardless of prior knowledge. This is an excellent way in which teachers can
combat student reluctance to participate. Perhaps not all students have prior knowledge,
but all students likely have some questions or a desire to learn new concepts. I also find
it insightful, and accurate, that asking students what they know may yield a combination
of accurate and inaccurate information. The risk of students offering inaccurate
information, or feeling reluctant to participate seems reasonable in situations where the
learning will represent new knowledge, or a new concept. Intimidation may threaten
enthusiasm in those instances. Yvonne Scott’s focus on answering student questions,
especially “I wonder” and “I think” inquiries, rather than a predetermined list of
questions by the teacher, provides students with a high degree of agency in their own
learning.
If students don’t grasp a concept after a hands-on activity, or are still confused, it
may be necessary for the teacher to spend more time on the concept. This may include
modalities that were not stressed in the activity. For example, of the hands-on activity
required students to direct their own learning to a degree that left them feeling confused

4
or underprepared, more teacher explanation might be necessary. As a high school social
studies teacher, this may mean that I should engage students in a teacher-led discussion in
which I do a bit more explaining to establish background knowledge, context, or clear up
the story. Additional reading, or extending activities could help students understand the
concept that the teacher is attempting to drive at as well. The teacher should also take
note of the nature of student confusion so as to plan future instruction more effectively.
The teacher must build professional academic relationships with students to get a
sense of their personality, strengths and areas for improvement. It has been my
experience that, in classes of 25-30 students there tend to be 6-12 students who account
for the bulk of verbal participation. Another 4-5 are involved verbally with less
frequency. Others are not voluntarily verbally involved in the conversation. One way in
which I attempt to engage all students in these discussions, and extend the learning is
through online discussion boards. These boards require students to submit an original
post and respond to classmates ideas (to a less involved degree that we are doing now,
obviously). It becomes quite clear when nonverbal students have been actively engaged
in a conversation. For discussion boards I often ask students to use a statement by a
classmate as a departure point for their own comment. Often I pose this question using
the phrasing, “What did someone say during this conversation that made you think, and
why?” This way, students can chose a statement with which they agreed or disagreed as
their departure point.
The culture of a classroom changes when learning happens in the context of social
interaction. Some students are excited to learn in groups and some dread these learning
opportunities. Students who enjoy group work can be motivated by the potential to pool
resources, increase learning, and create a high quality finished product. Some students
are more excited about the group than the work. Other students may feel some sense of
social anxiety, or fear that group members will not participate equally.
Two ways in which I believe that behaviorist theory is reflected in education are
the concept of the mind as a “blank slate” and that learning can be a objectively and
scientifically measured. A common Yeats quote among educators is “Education is not
the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” I believe that Willingham’s cognitive
thesis would support this, as would the teaching of Ms. MacLean, Sandi Gilliam, and
Yvonne Scott. It has been my experience that many educators are skeptical that they can
take the sort of risks that this teaching style implies while continuing to do their jobs
effectively. A cognitive approach implies that this change would make those teachers
even more effective. The second way in which I believe the behaviorist theory is still
present in education is through state testing. Educators, anecdotally and through
research, seem to agree that a formal assessment through a state examination is likely not
the best gauge of knowledge and skill. In addition these tests, which are supposed to be
scientific, standard, and observable, may not serve their purposes. Considering the
amount of instructional time, stress and financial resources that go into these “high
stakes” tests, it would be nice if their effectiveness as tools was clearer.

WEEK 2 (DUE MAY 19, 2016)

Module 5 “Introduction to Motivation”

5
Please focus your discussion on the following questions. You don't have to answer each
question, but select one or two that are particularly interesting to you. When possible,
please refer to examples from the video or research that you read about in the text.
Question 1: As students work on the "expert jigsaw" activity, each student is supposed to
have a certain assignment within the group. How does the teacher really control that
when some kids want to "show off" their abilities beyond their assignment? Others in
such a group may become less motivated when that happens.
Question 2: The biology teacher allows students to truly experiment – that is, she allows
failures and helps students learn from them. How does she prevent students from
carrying the "failure is fine" to an extreme – where students accept, and even aim for,
failure because it might be "cool?"
Question 3: The biology teacher seems to be pushing the students with the broken egg
pretty hard toward a correct answer – even dismissing one suggestion about "using a
microscope." How does that fit with the suggestion that students be given a lot of leeway
to come up with their own hypotheses or solutions to problems?
Question 4: The eighth-grade technology teacher said each student had a specific task in
building the bridge. What happens when one student just doesn't hold up his or her end?
Or worse, tries to cover a failure by talking down the whole activity?
Question 5: The high school students in the writing class were working on essays that
appeared to be based on their personal experiences. How does the teacher motivate
students to get past the surface – that is, to overcome their resistance to sharing their
personal feelings or what might be embarrassing experiences?
Question 6: The high school history teacher tried to ensure that every student felt that his
or her ideas counted – that was an important motivator to participate in the
discussion. However, not all students come to class equally prepared. Some will have
studied the text closely, and others, perhaps, not at all. If all ideas expressed are
considered equally valid, what's the motivation to prepare for class, and how will they be
prepared for other activities or assessments?

Question 6, about the high school social studies teacher (Expectations for
Success) engaging his students in a group discussion, intrigues me. It intrigues me, not
because I also teach social studies, but because of the ways in which the teacher uses
questioning and discussion techniques to provide all students with a chance to express his
or her own voice. One of the planned benefits of these class discussions, expressed by
the teacher, is that any student can make a valuable contribution to the class on any given
day. Any student can use his or her own opinions to inform a comment that may make
classmates think. This discussion method can be an important motivator because
students understand that their ideas will be heard. As a side note, I did not necessarily
like the teacher’s “shushing” of students, but I understood that his reasoning for doing so
was to be sure that the speaker had the floor.
As mentioned in the video, curricula exist for valid reasons. However if teachers
treat a curriculum as a set of boxes to check, student motivation, “the degree to which
students invest attention and effort” can suffer (Wentzel and Brophy, p. 3). The group
discussion technique employed by this teacher works well with diverse students and those
of different ability levels because they can offer an idea and defends it regardless of their

6
reading, writing or test taking abilities. This can boost student confidence, competent and
engaged. Students in the clip were passionate and emotional about their own comments,
and those of others. They were encouraged to take risks. I believe that Ramsey
Musallam, of the TED Talk labeled “3 Rules to Spark Motivation” would appreciate the
learning in a format that certainly seems to “embrace the mess” of student inquiry. Some
of the best conversations that I have facilitated as a social studies teacher have been those
that have strayed from my lesson plans, but not the curriculum. To an outside observer
those conversations seem messy, but valuable learning is taking place because the
students drive the conversations with their questions and comments.

Module 6 “Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic”

Please focus your discussion on the following questions. You don't have to answer each
question, but select one or two that are particularly interesting to you. When possible,
please refer to examples from the video or research that you read about in the text.
Question 1: Does motivation come solely from the student, or do other variables
influence academic motivation?
Question 2: How much autonomy do you think students should have and how will
autonomy affect student motivation and learning?
Question 3: Will you seek to motivate your students using rewards or incentives? Under
what conditions. What consequences might you consider?

Questions #1 and #3 stand out to me in this module. Wentzel and Brophy, Alfie
Kohn, and Ramsey Musallam would certainly argue that teachers can, and do, effect
student motivation through instruction and personal approaches to school and students. It
is fascinating, and frustrating, to me to conceive of Kohn’s assertion that educators and
other adults accuse students of lacking creativity and critical thinking when it is the
classroom teacher who has the greatest control over instruction. If ever there were a case
for the “don’t hate the player, hate the game” concept, it is here! Even outside of his
satirical instruction manual for creating nonreaders, Kohn clearly states his belief that
people cannot motivate each other, but teachers can crush student motivation.
For me last week’s “aha” concept was Willingham’s assertion that learning styles
don’t exist. This week’s is that rewards not only fail to improve performance, but
sometimes hinder performance. In Dan Pink’s Ted Talk “The Puzzle of Motivation” he
cited research indicating that reward systems improved performance on mechanical
skills, but thwarted cognitive skills. Pink’s mantra is that “there is a mismatch between
what science knows and what business does.” Traditional styles of management work if
the goal is compliance, but not if the goal is engagement. Educators seek student
engagement, and Pink argues that self-direction is more effective in eliciting engagement.
This is where many of the authors, and speakers, with whom we have become familiar
here stress student inclusion in certain instructional decisions. Kohn laments missed
opportunities to offer students choice, referring to a “working with” approach. Pink’s
mantra about outdated management practices, and Kohn’s support of more student input
seem to echo the work of Mary Parker Follett, on whose philosophies of leadership the
Millersville University’s Leadership for Teaching and Learning program are firmly

7
constructed. Follett offers, “it is possible to develop the conception of power-with, a
jointly developed power, a co-active, not a coercive power.” (Graham, ed. Mary Parker
Follett: Prophet of Management. 2003. p.103). It would appear that thinkers,
researchers, and speakers are all calling for more engagement and collaboration across
the board. I personally know some teachers who are reluctant to give up the level of
“control” necessary to increase student engagement because of habit or fears of failure.
Those teachers might be encouraged by these readings and videos from module 6.
Teachers are in a position to remove ourselves as obstacles to student motivation by
placing less of the focus on ourselves and offering students more choice in their learning.

Module 7 “Interest and Socialization”

Question 1: Why is it that individual interest in a topic will not necessarily translate into
attainment of curricular goals?
Question 2: Do you agree with Kohn’s position on ways to create "non readers"? Why
or why not? How are his ideas compatible with the research that you've read in chapters
5 & 6?
Question 3: In his TED talk, Mr. Mussalem encourages educators to leave behind the
simple role as “disseminators of content” and embrace a new paradigm as “cultivators
of curiosity and inquiry”. How does this message complement the ideas in chapter 5 &
6?

I agree with Kohn’s positions on ways to create nonreaders. One of his most
jolting revelations is that teachers who criticize a lack of student motivation are likely
creating a learning environment that is detrimental to motivation. His assertion that “The
hunger to ‘really teach something’ has probably derailed more student-centered
innovations than administrative cowardice and textbook company co-option combined,”
is somewhat amusing and completely challenging. My formal schooling featured
educators, many of whom I liked very much, doing much of the “doing.” They were the
experts, so it only seemed right that they guided the instruction. I don’t remember much
of what I “learned” in those years. I was by no means the “apathetic student” to which
Wentzel and Brophy refer. My learning may have been more meaningful, and lasting,
had I been more involved in the decision making process of my own education. My own
vision for educational leadership, which I formulated during my first course in this
program, stressed a democratic approach to education. While my instruction, and
approach to collaboration, has become more democratic, Kohn’s work reminds me that I
still have room to grown regarding student engagement in their own learning. This is a
concept with which both teachers and students must become more comfortable in order to
maximize effectiveness.
Wentzel and Brophy refer to intrinsic motivation as when we “do something not
for its sake but for our sake—because doing so provides us with enjoyable stimulation or
satisfaction.” (Wentzel and Brophy, p.99). It interests me to apply Dan Pink’s assertion
that rewards are largely ineffective when engagement is the goal. A school in which I
worked had a Positive Behavior Support (PBS) system in place based on PRIDE tickets.
The program, into which the district had invested a significant sum of time and money,
largely fizzled out after two years. This is partly because the administrator who led the

8
program accepted a job elsewhere, but more so because this program did not motivate
students. In his Ted Talk “3 Rules to Spark Learning”, Ramsey Musallam encourages
teachers to tap into our greatest tool: student questions. These questions are not obstacles
to getting to some correct point in the lesson plan, but rather genuine opportunities to
engage students in their own learning and gauge their status on thinking and content.
Student questions are opportunities to tap into the individual interest to which Wentzel
and Brophy refer. If students are actively engaged in questioning, Musallam clearly
states “curiosity comes first.” Why work to engage students who are already actively
engaged? Doing so requires a certain comfort, on the part of the teacher to relinquish
some control of the flow of the class session, but also a keen ability to facilitate
questions, conversations, and academic arguments that happen organically. This is what
he refers to as “embracing the mess.” Teachers who foster student curiosity will have
less to worry about regarding content because their students are primed for learning. This
messy student curiosity is more likely to bear quality learning than more traditional
teacher-centered models.

WEEK 3 (DUE MAY 26, 2016)

Module 8 “Beliefs and Discouraged Students”

Please focus your discussion on the following questions. You don't have to answer each
question, but select one or two that are particularly interesting to you. When possible,
please refer to examples from the video or research that you read about in the text.
1. How might you try to shift students' entity theories of ability to incremental theories?
2. Would it be a good idea if teachers could give A's to all of their students? Why or why
not?
3. Why might some students consider effort a risk rather than an investment?
4. Why are "coping" models generally more successful than "success" models in
attribution retraining?

Carol Dweck’s belief in the power of “yet” is outstanding. It challenges me as a

teacher because I don’t believe that the way in which I approach grades embraces the
power of “yet.” It has been my experience, and my observation, that teachers at the
secondary level are quite concerned with classroom management. And rightfully so.
Articles by Daniel Willingham and Caskey & Anfara, and the video titled “Born to
Learn” clearly outline the predisposition of adolescents toward rebellion. Teachers tend
to perceive that rebellion and pushback as a challenge to their “place” in the educational
framework, because that’s just what it is. It is very easy for teachers to “lament
adolescence” because secondary aged students can be disrespectful and irresponsible.
Many teachers, myself included in all honesty, have used grades at times in attempts to
teach responsibility. On the other hand, I currently teach honors students. Some are
fixated on grades, which is a waste of energy. The traditional industrial model of grading
does not seem to serve students with a genuine inclination toward inquiry either.
I do not believe that it would be beneficial to students if I awarded them all grades
of “A”. That grade implies a level of performance above mastery. Grades of “A” would

9
seem to be counter to the “growth mindset” that Dweck espouses. “A” students can be
led to believe that they are finished learning, and that they have proved it. If our grading
system was based on a pass/fail model, with no implications for grade point average, I
could see the value in impressing upon students that they will pass if they can show
growth through making new connections, asking insightful questions, and working to
solve problems. The conversations between teachers and students may then
fundamentally shift from the discussion of a number or letter to a discussion of much
deeper substance. Our social studies department is in the process of transitioning from a
grading system based on content knowledge to a grading system based on student display
of skills. The premise is that we aim to assess students on what they are able to do rather
than what facts they know on a given day. These department level conversations are
important, but can be frustrating as we attempt to express what learning and skills we
hope to assess, and how we plan to do so.

Module 9 “Motivation to Learn”

Please focus your discussion on the following questions. You don't have to answer each
question, but select one or two that are particularly interesting to you. When possible,
please refer to examples from research that you read about in the text.
question 1: Why do Wentzel & Brophy emphasize motivation to learn over intrinsic
motivation?
question 2: Why do students need to be taught what it means to engage in learning
activities with motivation to learn?
questions 3: Why can’t the value and dispositional aspect of motivation to learn be taught
directly?

The affects of instruction, at a psychological and motivational level, has been

fascinating for me to learn and read about so far. Daniel Willingham’s argument that
students learn what they think about makes sense as he presents it, especially because he
has backed up his thesis with research. In a similar way Wentzel and Brophy argue that
teachers must explicitly teach students what it means to engage in learning opportunities
with motivation to learn. The bottom line is that students should be let in on the purpose
of instruction as explicitly as possible. When students are aware of a lesson’s goals,
specifically regarding content (big ideas are best) and skills, they may focus on
developing both. They define motivation to learn as “a cognitive response involving
attempts to make sense of the activity, understand the knowledge that it develops, and
master the skills that it promotes.” (Wentzel and Brophy, p.217). Teachers must clue
students into what they will learn, why they will learn it, and how to go about doing so.
This whole concept, like some other psychological concepts, seems like common sense
when explained by experts. However, I was surprised to read in the research that the
authors presented how few teachers explicitly mention those three essential elements of
instruction to students beforehand. This caused me to reflect upon the instances in which
I have stimulated my students’ motivation to learn, and the many instances in which I
have failed to do so.
I was glad to have an opportunity to put this concept into action this past week in
a lesson on 9/11 within my U.S. foreign policy unit. My current students are freshmen

10
who were born in the years 2000 and 2001. The timeline of their lives may include
September 11, 2001 but they are too young to remember the events of that day. At the
same time they have heard people discuss that important day for their whole lives without
a personal experience of it. The general flow of my lesson was as follows: 1) draw upon
their own knowledge of the War on Terror through brief conversations with peers 2) brief
teacher-led discussion establishing basic and general facts about the attacks, including a
four minute video from history.com 3) brief teacher recall of my experiences on 9/11 4)
individual student experience with 9/11 Memorial website timeline. The premise of my
lesson was that these young people have been hearing about 9/11 for their whole lives,
but have not experience of the day. I explicitly told them (after having read the Wentzel
and Brophy chapters) that the most important outcome of this lesson was for them to
begin to develop a sense of what that day looked and sounded like. They were to do so
by experiencing photographs, sound recordings and video clips from the 9/11 attacks. I
asked students to separate their desks as if they were taking an assessment and to use
headphones if they had them. I encouraged them to find a physical location, whether in
the classroom, the hallway, the student work area, or the stairwell, in which they could
insulate themselves from distractions as much as possible. I believe that this lesson,
which included no formative or summative assessments, achieved its purpose partially
because I was able to stimulate students’ motivation to learn prior to their experience
with the 9/11 memorial timeline. It was important for me to explain to them why I
wanted them to work as isolated, and insulated, as possible. It was also important for me
to explain to them that this lesson was designed to give them an experience rather than
produce some sort of final product. I hope that I was able to engage students in what
Wentzel and Brophy refer to as “exploratory orientation.” My students were making 9/11
more relevant to them through a primary source-based learning opportunity.
The concept of “Modeling Your Own Motivation to Learn” outlined in chapter 10
stood out to me as well. My father, who was a career educator, has always said, “If the
teacher is having fun, the kids are having fun.” Rather than advocating teaching as
entertainment, he is speaking of the teacher’s unique position to model a love of learning
and an inquisitive approach to questions and problem-solving. I believe that it is
important to for teachers to model these concepts and, as Wentzel and Brophy advocate,
give students some insight as to their own personal interests and inclination toward civic
duties such as staying informed and voting. As a social studies teacher, however, I feel a
real responsibility to keep my own political opinions in check. I try to be very careful to
present both sides of political and historical arguments so as not to unduly influence how
students form their own opinions. I firmly believe that my role as a teacher, especially as
a civics teacher in an election cycle, is to teach students how to learn, not what to think.
Here’s why: students always ask me who I voted for, who I will vote for, and with which
political party am I registered. To their surprise I won’t tell them. When they as why, I
explain that if I tell them, “You may think that I know what I’m talking about, or you
may think that I don’t know what I’m talking about.” At the risk of sounding like Yogi
Berra, I explain. Some students without formed opinions may think that my opinions are
right because I’m a social studies teacher. That may encourage students to agree with me
politically without any real basis for that agreement. On the other hand, students may
already have formed some political opinions. If a student disagrees with my politics it
may be detrimental to my ability to teach him/her because they might view everything

11
that I say through a distorting lens of, “Well he’s just a liberal/conservative.” Teachers
have important opportunities to stimulate students motivation to learn, but we should be
somewhat sensitive about just how powerful our modeling of enthusiasm can be.

Module 10 “Development”
Please focus your discussion on the following questions. You don't have to answer each
question, but select one or two that are particularly interesting to you. When possible,
please refer to examples from research that you read about in the assigned readings or
videos.
Question 1: All three teachers start their lessons with real-world examples. They all say
students need to have things they can see, touch, and feel. What are the developmental
differences, then, among these three lessons?
Question 2: At the end of the eighth grade lesson, the teacher seems to go very quickly
over the demonstration of crashing into barrels. Shouldn't students be collecting and
analyzing data about that the same way they did measuring time and distance?
Question 3: Why does Dr. Tharp say that understanding the zone of proximal
development (ZPD) helps the teacher understand the basic art of teaching?
Question 4: How do you plan for different levels of student ability and knowledge when
organizing a group activity or project?
Question 5: All three teachers had their students formulate and organize their own data.
Why is it important that students do this? What do you do if they get it wrong – for
example, what if they organize the data in a way that doesn't reveal the concepts they
need to understand?
Question 6: What are some of the challenges in working in the zone of proximal
development with a child from a different culture?
Question 7: What do you do if you have a child in your class that has had no previous
experience with hands-on learning?
Question 8: Do you agree with Willingham's positions on developmentally practice.
How do his ideas relate to other content from this module?

Here goes Daniel Willingham again! Hey, you know that educational/psychological
phenomenon that has been uplifted as truth for decades? Yeah, the one that every teacher
and psychologist knows is true? Well, it’s wrong. It seems amazing to me that
Willingham can toss the concepts of learning styles and Jean Piaget’s theory of Four
Stages of Development out as inaccurate. It seems, to me, equally amazing that he is able
to provide such compelling arguments in so few words. After reading his article “What is
Developmentally Appropriate Practice?”, I agree with his thesis that using the concept of
developmentally appropriate practice as a guide for instruction misses the mark. In short,
Piaget’s theory implies somewhat clearly delineated stages of development through
which the typical child passes on the way to adulthood. Willingham’s most convincing
metaphor, to me, is the varying topography that one would experience on a trip from east
to west in the United States. The topography, and climate, would change over the course
of hundreds of miles, but the changes would not be labeled like state borders. The
topography would change gradually. A child’s psychological development also changes
gradually rather than in clear stages. Therefore the idea of teaching what’s “appropriate”

12
for each age, or grade level, is not necessarily appropriate. Willingham argues “Children
have multiple cognitive processes and modes of thought that coexist, and any one might
be recruited to solve a problem.” (Willingham, What is Developmentally Appropriate
Practice, 2008). It should not be surprising, after reading some of Willingham’s work in
week 1, that he views the cognitive processes of children in this way. After all, his
argument that learning styles don’t exist features the assertion that there are appropriate
situations in which learners must engage different intelligences to most effectively solve
problems or complete tasks. The central thesis of Willingham’s approach to cognition
argues that it is much more fluid, and much less rigid, that educators and psychologists
had previously believed.
When viewing the “Born to Learn” video, I initially felt a bit discouraged. My
reactions ranged from, “Here’s another example of how we’re teaching children
incorrectly,” to, “Oh yeah, just let kids do whatever they want. That will make
everything better!” As these course readings, viewings, and discussions continue to
stretch my understanding of how students’ minds function, I am appreciating the great
potential for instructional and relational improvement if educators better understand the
minds of learners. If we can, as the video suggests, honor adolescence for its potential
instead of lamenting adolescent energy and tendency toward rebellion, we may learn to
“pick the right battles” pedagogically. If educators provide students, as Caskey and
Anfara suggest, with “frequent opportunities to explore and experiment with various roles
and experiences within the classroom context,” the quality of instruction must improve
(Caskey and Anfara. Developmental Characteristics of Young Adolescents). The high
school science teachers in the “Learning As We Grow” video illustrated excellent
examples of those challenges, as appropriate at the 8th grade and 12 grade levels.
Students listened, but listened as they did. They also listened because they were seeking
answers to their own questions as opposed to questions posed specifically by the teacher.
I would like very much to incorporate more of this type of inquiry and problem solving
into my own instruction.

Module 11 “Exceptional Learners and Special Education”

The materials in this module ask you to explore many different materials related to
understanding exceptional learners and the special education process, procedures, and
instructional methods. Please identify one or two ideas from the videos or readings that
resonated with you as particularly important for working with this population.

There is a student in our hallway that gives the best high-fives I have ever experienced.
He eyes me up, lines his elbow up with my hand as if to aim, and comes with the
hammer! The only words spoken are by me as I greet him; he says nothing flashes an
enormous smile. As the sting of those regular interactions stays with me, I cannot help
but think of Faith Jegede’s words in her TED Talk “What I’ve Learned From my
Brothers.” She insists that her autistic brothers are exceptional because of their capacity
for love, joy, and the truth. I do not know the student that I mentioned above very well,
but the fact that he seeks out others for this personal interaction is exceptional. I don’t
know very many students who are as outwardly outgoing as this young man, and he
cannot even speak!

13
 This student takes classes in a self-contained classroom for autistic students at
Central York High School. It is clear that they enjoy being in the high school and to me,
as an untrained and somewhat casual observer that all members of our school community
benefit from the presence of the autistic education room. The autistic students benefit
from the social interactions associated with high school and regular education students
benefit from exposure to autistic students especially in terms of awareness. I have been
very pleased that regular education students have reacted positively to the presence of
autistic students, and I have not noticed inappropriate or insensitive behavior toward
them as I had feared. Teachers benefit from exposure to autistic students and an
increased awareness. The district has also benefitted because it is able to provide quality
services in-house rather than seeking out appropriate services outside of the building.
The autism spectrum is something about which I really need to learn more. The
statistics contained in Wendy Chung’s Ted Talk “Autism: What We Know and Don’t
Know Yet”, indicate that many educators will encounter students on the autistic spectrum
in our careers. I certainly cannot speak to the hope contained within the spectrum of
autism to the level that Faith Jegede is able, but I do agree with her assertion that
“Normality overlooks the beauty that difference gives us,” and “The pursuit of normality
is the ultimate sacrifice of potential.” Autistic students may not be able to learn in the
same ways as “normal” students…but what is “normal”, anyway?

Module 12 “Classroom Management”

Please focus your discussion on the following question:
What do you notice in the Annenberg video that reflects the following course themes that
have been discussed throughout our course?
• Understanding students and their development,
• Building a positive, productive environment for learning,
• Teaching content and skills students will need in life,
• Motivating students, and
• Creating a school culture that supports learning in everything the school does.

The two schools featured in the Annenberg video “Creating Classrooms and
Schools that Support Learning” seem to be outstanding learning environments in which
students are encouraged to embrace learning in meaningful ways. These schools exhibit
an understanding of students and their development by focusing on standards and
outcomes. They encourage the production of student portfolios as meaningful assessment
tools, and adjust techniques as necessary based on student input, feedback, and
demonstration of knowledge and skills. The second featured school’s philosophy
contends that learning is important even if students don’t get it the first time. A strength
of the teaching in that school is that teachers do not stick to a specific timetable of
learning in order to sacrifice student understanding.
The team approach is crucial for the success of the featured 5th-6th grade model.
Having taught in a middle school for a few years, I can certainly attest to the usefulness
of team teaching common students. It is much different for students to “fall though the
cracks” in such settings. The potential for teachers to share students’ strengths and
challenges is high in team teaching, as well as the sharing of techniques that may be

14
successful in working with a particular student or group. I would echo the comment of
one of the teachers that team teaching does involve a considerable amount of time, and
that that investment in time can be frustrating when colleagues do not buy in to the
process. In the successful featured school each adult is continually learning via
conversations with colleagues, experience and professional development. Their goal,
which is outstanding, is to create “whole people.”
The value of interdisciplinary education comes through quite strong in the
philosophies and practices of the featured schools. They strive to ask meaningful
questions that involve all content areas. At the end of a unit the goal is that students feel
confident answering those meaningful questions. These schools motivate students by
giving them “voice and choice” in their own learning. For example, students in the
second featured school choose what they read as long as they can develop and
demonstrate the reading skills that the class is working toward. Students in these schools
are encouraged to have a voice in their learning, in the community and in the running of
their schools. Parent involvement is key in creating such positive and effective learning
communities. With a focus on learning and the best interests of the students, these
featured schools are models of what effective education can be.

Module 13 “Assessment”
The materials in this module ask you to explore many different materials related to
understanding assessment and how it is used for purposes of accountability or as a tool
to support students learning and development. Please identify one or two ideas from the
videos or readings that resonated with you as particularly important for working with
students.

Linda Darling-Hammond’s remarks about testing in her TED Talk “Testing,

Testing” resonated with me. One main reason why these remarks resonated with me is
that I have been teaching for a decade and I am having trouble recalling if I have met a
teacher who advocates for the benefits of high stakes testing. Most of my colleagues, like
Linda Darling-Hammond, understand that standardized tests are not a predictor of future
success. The demonstration of knowledge and skill tends not to have a finite beginning
and end and so the real world application of standardized test-taking skills is negligible. I
have heard the argument that testing prepares students for the “real world” because they
will need to prepare for something important and perform when it counts. This line of
thinking is erroneous, and I am glad to know that some colleges and universities are
encouraging applicants to submit portfolios that demonstrate skills and knowledge. For
several years many colleges and universities have made the SAT optional as well. The
professional world has seen an increase in demand for higher order thinking skills, which
standardized tests do not exhibit.
I believe in the theory of a democratic republic. I see real value in citizens
electing representatives to make decisions for us in many arenas of public life. However
legislators, and legislatures, have real and negative affects on the field of education.
Accountability is important when it comes to decisions to spend taxpayer money, but this
current thrust to somehow empirically prove student and/or teacher performance in order

15
to ensure federal and state funding is problematic. As a social studies teacher I
understand that my subject area is a “non-tested” subject. When push comes to shove I
must defer time with students to “Keystone-tested” subjects. No amount of State testing
could convince me that social studies is less important than any other subject, but my
district (therefore my bosses) is under pressure to show student performance. It seems a
bit unfair that some of my colleagues bear real stress over their tested subjects while I
feel none. Darling-Hammond is quite clear in her assertion that this focus on testing
undermines good teaching and has actually led some educators to leave the field. It’s
easy for me to believe that I would not leave teaching because I love my job too much;
then again, I am not responsible for showing student growth in algebra either. I agree
with Darling-Hammond that we are at a crossroads between the factory model of
education and a model that encourages critical thinking and problem solving. I hope that
we, as a field, chose the latter and that I can play a part in that choice.

Ted Talk “Testing, Testing” (Linda Darling-Hammond)

• 1999-2003 more new knowledge created than ever before in human history
• The tests were use are developing a different type of skills: rote learning and
memorization
• Standardized testing is up 300% since 2002
• Federal mandated testing has increased dramatically and schools face sanctions if
they don’t improve
• Teacher evals have been attached to mandated testing
• Undermines good teaching, has forced some to consider or actually leave the
profession
• Students feel less joy and more fear (stupid class vs. smart class)
• Parents have begun opting out of standardized testing and/or “voting with their
feet” by taking students out of public schools
• Scores have actually dropped in math, reading and science
• We’re at a turning point: A) reinforcing factory system B) critical thinking and
problem solving
• Some colleges and universities are encouraging students to submit portfolios for
application

16