Chapter+7

This chapter was rather dense with information: fluency, Benjamin Bloom, Daniel Pink, Thomas Friedmam, and so on. However, what was written in the first part of the chapter is was stuck with me when I was finished. Going off of Felicia's on the quote from page 59, I felt that much of the blame was being put on the teachers for not being able to prepare our students for the 21st century. Of course we are going to "teach to the test," because our schools and our jobs depend on it. I feel more "blame" for lack of a better word, should have been placed on our governmetn and our education policies as a whole to change the way we teach in schools. Eventhough that quote was in there, I feel the authors were saying that the teachers should be doing more in the classroom. I think that it is extremely hard for us to do that, given the strict standards we need to follow.
 * Doug**

Cindy- Chapter 7 surprised me when I saw the information referencing the article [] I shared in class on May 20 for our class sharing time. I had no idea it would be presented in our textbook in later chapters(what a great find:) Well, I am glad they went into this article more deeply for our chapter study. In the beginning of the chapter once again amazed at the information being presented in these chapters. Particularly, when our text writers mention that "the vast majority of high school teachers assume that students already know how to effectively research and think,critically." This and the pressure of covering all the context in the curriculum guide is causing teachers not to teach the higher level-thinking skills in preparation for post secondary education. This is why other countries are ahead of us because those countries are teaching qualitative education over our quantitative standards lack of tech. standards. Secondly surprising, was the use of multiple choice questions being so frequently used in classes. My personal and professional opinion of testing is that students should be exposed to all types of testing format;however, some districts having mandatory tests where the teacher has no choice but to administer them. This article : [] assesses students by upper level thinking, research driven and active learning. If that be the case, what will the report cards of the 21st century look like (maybe a wiki?) I will be the first in line to give up those old report cards:)


 * Nick**

From Chapter 7 I really liked how the authors connected Bloom's Taxonomy to the 21st century skills our students are going to need when they enter the working world once they leave school. What was especially interesting was the comparison the authors make between the skills necessary for the 20th century world and the 21st century world. The authors provide a nice analysis of the skills required for the early 20th century working world that only required the lower levels of Bloom's Taxonomy, knowledge, comprehension, and application, and how the 21st century working world will require the higher order skills such as anlysis, synthesis, and evaluation that our students will need to master in order to be productive and survive. The more teachers use and help students use technology in school to develop these higher order Bloom skills the better we will prepare our students for the 21st century world. The following link shows how Bloom's Taxonomy applies to the 21st century learner and gives some brief explanation of each of the new levels [|21st century Bloom]. As the needs of the world change around us we must, as teachers, prepare our students to adapt to these changes by adapting ourselves and our teaching styles to help our students acquire the necessary skills for the 21st century working world. Using Bloom's original Taxonomy as well as the newer as a foundation we can hopefully ensure our students' future success.

Diane __Chapter 7__: Since we no longer live in the industrial world, compulsory concepts and skills of that particular time have become obsolete. And as the old adage goes “If you keep doing what you’ve been doing, you’ll keep getting what you’ve been doing.” Therefore, in order to free ourselves from this time warp we are in and prepare our students for the modern world, higher level thinking skills are required. This is just one of the many points the authors discuss in this chapter. The skill of memorization is no longer essential, but rather the skill of knowing how to get the information is, by far, more pressing. Since there is an abundance of information available at the stroke of the keypad, in addition to the vast and uncharted information yet to be gathered, time-worn skills are no longer needed. The authors advocate that it is time for education to clean up its act and make the necessary adjustments “to match the new world of technology and work” (63). Suffice to say, these adjustments must be considered in the significance of traditional skills, evaluation and implementation of new skills, most importantly, developing higher level thinking skills, or as the authors put it—“a shift to whole-mind instruction." For me, this is the most profound part of the book so far because higher-order thinking skills have been part of education ever since Bloom gave them an explicit hierarchy in 1956. In recent years though, such complex thinking skills have become tied to state content standards, making it necessary for every educator to understand them. However, in today’s world, does higher-order thinking—such as logic and reasoning, problem solving, and creativity—go beyond Bloom? What are the best ways to teach students how to think? In which subjects do complex thinking skills fit best, and do certain activities promote or hone their usage? How do teachers know their students have developed sufficient thinking skills and an understanding of how to apply them? Which leads to the real question at hand—are teachers willing to change their way of teaching—perhaps even the entire curriculum in order for students to develop higher order thinking skills? For most teachers, making the shift to whole-mind instruction may mean to stop doing what they have been doing, and as a result, get something they have not been doing. Interesting article that redefines teaching [|Article]

Felicia Chapter 7 I took away so much form this chapter. I found it very interesting (and true) on page 59, when it says “Classroom teachers have naturally responded to the new demands for increased testing, and as a result, many of the supplemental instructional activities and projects have been abandoned in favor of instruction and assignment that directly prepare students for these tests.” It’s sad that having students participate in projects and other activities (which are the meaningful things kids enjoy and remember) has taken a backseat in order to focus on testing. Another thing I found interesting is the shift on emphasis-there a new basic skills that need to be addressed now (not such a focus on memorization) and we need to promote higher level thinking skills. I think this is scary to a lot of teachers because it is so unfamiliar to them-and they are uncomfortable with that much change (its not just bringing in technology-its changing what and how you teach). Here is a website for some tips on project based learning Project Based Learning


 * Adam**

This chapter gave some very interesting insight into how we must switch our instructional stance. In the chapter, it notes how authors such as Kevin Kelly are scanning as many books as possible to create an online database of texts. The point was brought up to imagine how simple organizing and quoting would be with an easy to locate and use online database.

**Scan This Book!**

Here is the article written by Kelly.

Jen
Chapter 7 This chapter again reminded me of Daniel Pink’s Book __A Whole New Mind__. We really need shift our way of teaching so that we are truly preparing our students for the challenges that lie ahead. What we need to do as a whole is balance our need to do well on the state tests with our more pressing need of preparing the students for their future. We need a balance between test taking skills and 21st century skills. I really believe that if we teach our students critical thinking skills and move them higher up on Bloom’s taxonomy scale, then they will be able to take the standardized tests because they will have the skills necessary to answer the lower level questions. Also, with regards to Bloom’s taxonomy, this is even changing to meet the needs of our digital learners. So, if a standard that we use to build our students up is changing, then hopefully this is a sign of things to come – that other things in education will also be changing for the better to help our digital learners.