Dave Sherman | Parentella

Posts Tagged ‘Dave Sherman’

Preparing Students for the 21st Century Workplace

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

Dave Sherman is principal at South Park Elementary School, in Deerfield, IL, which is a suburb north of Chicago. This is his 5th year at South Park and his 14th year as a principal. Mr. Sherman has a blog called “The Principal and Interest” that shares some of his opinions on being a good educator. In this interview, we are discussing and elaborating on several of the pieces he posted on his site. This is part two of a two part series.

By Christi Grab, Contributing Editor

Read part I of the interview.

—————————–

Q: Going back to the “How to Succeed by Really Trying” article, you mentioned the concepts of “teacher-centered instruction” and “student centered learning”. Could you explain for parents what the difference is between them and what the pros and cons are of each?

A: “Teacher centered instruction” is the more traditional type of teaching methodology. The teacher’s desk is up front and all the students face the board so they can see the teacher lecturing. In this methodology, the teacher is seen as the all-knowing expert and students are the empty vessel being filled by the teacher. This style of instruction encourages rote memorization. “Student centered learning” is more interactive. The teacher guides a discourse and encourages questions among the students to help them figure out concepts. This is an active, constructivist approach where students take more ownership in the learning process rather than simply listening in a passive mode. Student desks tend to be set in groups that help facilitate discussions. This type of teaching helps to develop critical thinking and problem solving skills.

Q: So, let me make sure I understand what you are saying. Rather than having the teacher explain 3 + 2 = 5, you have the kids discuss what the right answer might be?

A: You have the concept right, but this is a bad example. Basic math facts are something that we all need to internalize so they are automatic. In this case rote memorization is important. But in most other subjects, and even basic math to a certain extent, when the curriculum is set to a real-life situation, it will have more meaning for the students and thus they will have a deeper understanding. They will “construct” meaning and learn to apply it to other situations. Let me give you a more appropriate example. In 4th grade, the kids study ecosystems in science. A good example of an ecosystem is the Chesapeake Bay, and because it is in danger, we use it to demonstrate Man’s impact on an ecosystem. We teach the general facts such as the plants and animals living there, how they are interrelated, the surrounding geography, the watershed areas, and the pollutants. Instead of giving a test to see if they have “ingested” all the facts, we ask the students to identify problems of the Bay, design a realistic plan to positively impact the Bay, and include the trade-offs of their plans. The students are required to create a multi-media project to present their plans to their peers, teachers, and parents. This project incorporates science, social studies, reading, math, writing, and speaking.

Q: Isn’t memorization of facts the whole point of education? Aren’t you handicapping children by using a student centered learning methodology?

A: As I just explained, the students still learn the same information, but in a more meaningful manner that translates easily to their own lives. I think the 4th grade project I mentioned provides more long term learning than simply having them simply spit back memorized information that they will forget as soon as the test is over. I think my responsibility as an educator is to equip kids to succeed as adults, and adult skills go far beyond rote memorization. I believe that as adults, critical thinking skills are crucial for success in the work place. So is being able to work together as a team. Part of being a good team player means hearing each other’s opinions and respectfully disagreeing when necessary.

Q: By not forcing students to memorize facts, don’t students taught in a student centered learning methodology do poorly on standardized tests?

A: Actually, if kids can think critically, then in theory they should do fabulous on standardized tests. After all, they can take the skills of deduction they learned in class and apply them to figure out the right answers. Of course, standardized tests are another issue in and of themselves. High stakes testing is not going to fix the educational system.

Q: You don’t believe in standardized testing?

A: Standardized testing does have some merit, but I don’t think the tests adequately reflect teaching quality. Remember, you are comparing every child in the state equally, and not taking into account any local issues that may be present. For example, many schools have disadvantaged student populations. In many of those schools, both the teachers and students work very hard and achieve great improvement year to year. However, because the students were already behind to start with, the improvement isn’t recognized. Despite excellent education and hard work, they are still labeled a failing school, which is deflating to the teachers, the students, and the community. I think a more effective alternative is for schools to chart progress relative to the curriculum, showing growth compared to themselves rather than every child in the state.

Q: You have written a series of articles, beginning with The Dell Latitude 2100 – A Review, where you believe that upgrading from a PC lab to laptop computers in the classrooms is a key component in furthering education for your students. How is a laptop any different than a regular PC?

A: What I think is important is that there are computers in the classrooms available for the children to use throughout the day as needed, and it doesn’t matter to me if they are laptops or regular desktop computers. I want computer use to be embedded in their every day work regime. Right now, going to the computer lab is a special event and not a part of their every day learning. Teachers must sign up for their scheduled, weekly 40 minutes in the lab, regardless of whether they are ready to use computers at that moment or not. Having computers in the classroom goes along with the student centered learning philosophy that we discussed earlier. With the computers in the classrooms, students have a powerful educational resource at their fingertips to look up and gather information. I remember back when I was a teacher, I was really excited when I finally got my own class set of encyclopedias. That way, when a student asked a question, we could look up the answer right then and there, rather than me saying “I’ll check and get back to you.” Having the knowledge readily available was empowering. With computers in the classrooms, students have the whole world available to them.

Q: Are you saying that you allow the children to use the internet? Isn’t that potentially dangerous?

A: I view having the children on the internet as a good thing, but I understand the concerns, as well. It can be a scary idea to let children on the internet, but in school, we have carefully structured and specific procedures for use. The children are supervised and we teach them how to find information easily for learning in a correct and appropriate manner. The children are using the internet at home, and sometimes at home they are unsupervised. At least in school we are teaching the kids the fundamentals for proper usage which they will hopefully carry home with them. Giving students access to the internet allows for greater collaboration, which is an important part of how today’s world works and a fundamental skill they will need as productive adults. Through technologies such as wikis, blogs, podcasts, and digital storytelling, children can publish their work for an authentic, real audience instead of just for the teacher to assign a grade. Knowing that many people are reading or viewing their work, even if it is limited to family members and other students, makes them more engaged, excited, and motivated to do best their best work possible.

Q: Thank you so much for allowing Parentella to interview you. It was a pleasure.

A: You’re welcome! And I would like to thank you for this opportunity to share some of my beliefs about education and the principalship.

——————————-

Christi Grab is contributing editor and writer for Parentella. She is a native of Southern California. After graduating from San Diego State University, she went on to be a successful business woman. In April of 2007, she and her husband decided to put their careers on hold and travel the world for two years. Ms. Grab has recently returned from her travels and is currently writing a book about their adventure. For more information on the trip, visit http://kosmos.liveflux.net/blog.

Tags: Chesapeake Bay, Critical thinking, Dave Sherman, education, High-stakes testing, learning, Methods and Theories, South Park Elementary School, Standardized test, Student-centred learning
Posted in Adult/Child Communication, Christi Grab, Education Policy, Education Reform, Parent teacher communication, Schools, Teacher Perspectives, Technology | 1 Comment »

The Human Connection

Sunday, October 25th, 2009

Dave Sherman is principal at South Park Elementary School, in Deerfield, IL, which is a suburb north of Chicago. This is his 5^th year at South Park and his 14^th year as a principal. Mr. Sherman has a blog called “The Principal and Interest” that shares some of his opinions on being a good educator. In this interview, we are discussing and elaborating on several of the pieces he posted on his site. This is part one of a two part series.

By Christi Grab, Contributing Editor

Q: In a recent article that you wrote to brand new teachers entitled “How to Succeed by Really Trying”, you gave some advice that I think parents would find interesting. Obviously, the article is written for teachers, so I’d like to ask you to clarify on it as it pertains to the parents. First of all, you said that it was important to “Understand the needs, strengths, issues, and problems of a school and surrounding community.” What does the community have to do with teaching a class?

A: There are two reasons. First of all, teachers need an understanding of the culture the kids are coming from to better understand the kids and how to best teach to the kids. Secondly, part of teaching is preparing students for work in the 21^st century global economy, but the school is also responsible for serving the needs of the local communities that pay taxes to run the school. Teachers need to help students to be aware of issues, concerns, and problems in the local neighborhoods and help equip the students to deal with these issues.

Q: You also suggested that teachers should try to learn as much as possible about each student before school starts. Why?
A: Understanding your individual students’ learning styles, interests, issues with behavior, etc. helps the teacher to tailor the lesson plans to best suit the class and most effectively meet each individual student’s needs. If you don’t know your students needs and interests, you tend to spend the first month gathering information to figure out how to best teach them. If you get a head start by learning pertinent information ahead of time, you can plan better for the whole year.

Q: But, in gathering information from outside sources instead of evaluating the children for themselves, don’t the teachers develop incorrect pre-conceived notions?
A: Some educators do argue that the “blank slate” approach is better for preventing pre-conceived notions. But I believe that knowledge is power and the more we know, the better we can teach. It is a matter of differing philosophies.

Q: You also encouraged elementary school teachers to contact each student and their parents personally before school starts. Why?
A: At our school, we try to create a nurturing environment, and part of that philosophy is encouraging two way communication with the students and families. A teacher can keep parents informed by sending out fliers, email, or newsletters, but that is “one way” communication that doesn’t make the families feel like they are part of the education process. The fact that a teacher cares enough to reach out and contact the family creates a personal connection. With a personal connection, the parents and children feel more invested in the education process. I believe that it is up to the teachers to make the first move to show they want back and forth communication with the families.

Q: In the article you wrote entitled “Re-Humanize Yourself”, you mention that you are trying to change the image of the principal as only a disciplinarian, to “re-humanize” the principal in the eyes of the community. Why?
A: Once again, I am trying to create a human connection between me, the staff, and the students. The principal sets the tone of the school, and I am trying to create a positive learning environment. To do so effectively, I must have a positive relationship with the staff and students. I believe that if children are afraid of me, then I am not creating the environment I want. I want children to be excited to come to my office to show me something they are proud of or to read a book to me, not be terrified of coming to see me.
Of course, I take my role as a disciplinarian seriously. I recognize that kids are going to make mistakes and make bad choices. I do hold them accountable for their actions. I believe in natural consequences and that the “punishment must fit the crime.” I don’t believe a zero tolerance policy is appropriate for elementary school children, because the consequence should be determined on a case by case situation.

For example, you may have heard about the six year old Boy Scout who was suspended for 5 days and was to attend reform school for another 45 days for bringing camping cutlery to school to eat his lunch with. The boy had no malicious intentions and the punishment was unnecessarily harsh. After an appeal, the school district reduced the punishment to only the suspension. I believe that boy would have learned his lesson with a simple explanation that the tool could be potentially dangerous and was inappropriate for school, which he did not understand before. All suspending him did was keep him from learning for 5 days. However, if the boy had a threat intent with the knife, that would change the situation – and appropriate punishment – significantly.

Q: But isn’t it important to maintain a strong disciplinarian image? How do you maintain control with a “softy” image?

A: The stereotypical image of a “strong disciplinarian” is someone who is caustic or mean. It is possible to have high expectations of behavior without being “mean.” I don’t think yelling, screaming, or talking down to a child is the answer to solving disciplinary problems. I treat the kids with respect, even during disciplinary situations. I try to encourage kids to want to do well, rather than have them perpetually afraid of doing something wrong.

Of course, children will make mistakes and get in trouble. Part of growing up is learning where the line of acceptable behavior is drawn. I try to use those times as “teachable moments.” One tool I often use is called a “Better Choice Slip.” I help the child identify the moment when he or she made a bad behavioral choice, and we talk about what alternative, better, choices there were. I explain to the kids that there are positive and negative consequences of each choice. For example, if children get into a fight, I explain that both get in trouble and both could get hurt. But if they choose not to fight and work their differences out another way, the problem is solved with no one being hurt or getting in trouble. I make the students write what they did wrong, write what a better choice would have been, and then have their parents sign the slip. For many kids, this alone will end the disciplinary problem. In the case of repeat offenders, I have to take disciplinary action up a notch. I hope the kids respect me as a fair leader with fair punishment, not a “bad guy” who is “out to get them.”

Q: How do you develop this positive relationships with the students who don’t get in trouble?

A: I try to be visible and approachable, and to show I care. Before school each day, I meet the busses, greet the students, walk around outside, help teachers organize lines, etc. I spend time in the lunchroom, and I will sit down and talk to the kids. After school I help the students get onto their busses, help direct traffic, and see if anyone needs help with anything. I visit the classrooms to read stories to kids, get on the computer with them, and get involved in class discussions.

In part 2, we discuss teaching methodology and using technology as an educational tool.

————————————————

Christi Grab is contributing editor and writer for Parentella. She is a native of Southern California. After graduating from San Diego State University, she went on to be a successful business woman. In April of 2007, she and her husband decided to put their careers on hold and travel the world for two years. Ms. Grab has recently returned from her travels and is currently writing a book about their adventure. For more information on the trip, visit http://kosmos.liveflux.net/blog.