For+Monday+the+2nd

Assignments Due On Monday the 2nd.
 * Read Zull Part 1.
 * Write a reflection in the discussion section that establishes a connection between "differentiated instruction" and any part of what Zull is putting before us.

Discussion Notes:
 * Write a reflection in the discussion section that establishes a connection between "differentiated instruction" and any part of what Zull is putting before us.**

In reading part 1 of Zull's book, I found it particularly interesting (and somewhat connected to differentiated instruction) that he spoke about a balance in teaching. Zull says that we need to teach to both parts of the cortex. There was a study completed at the Harvard Graduate School of Education (Schwartz and Sadler) that used a middle school science lesson on electromagnets. This study proved that "...students using the balanced approached increased their understanding steadily and reached levels significantly higher than the other two groups in the end." (41) //So this is useful from the vantage point of knowing our work can't be all centered in wholly constructivist tasks? And also, it means we have to intentionally design into our teaching those opportunities for our kids to do something with what we teach them. cr//

The reading identifies the different parts of the cortex as being the front and back cortex. It states that the front cortex is used when we want to generate ideas and actions, while the back cortex is responsible for receiving information and remembering. Focusing on those two types of functions of the brain, would force an educator to differentiate a lesson such that remains balanced, and thus reaches different learning styles, or abilities of all students.

Zull also goes on to speak about a "battle" going on in the brain. "Different sensory signals physically compete for attention in the brain, and those that are the strongest win out. It is a physical battle." (75) This seems to have a direct connection with differentiation as I would think that students' learning styles would designate which signals would win in this battle. Keeping this in mind would be important, as the educator would need to insure multiple ways and opportunities for students to gain knowledge such that the "battle" in the brain would not disrupt their learning. **-LG** //This makes me wonder how "learning styles" find their formation in our tissue. Are we predisposed to certain styles or do we build familiarity with certain styles in our early years (nature/nurture)? Does it do us any good to think about this? Is the nature/nurture dichotomy indeed useful any more?cr//

The first part of Zull’s investigation of the brain was intriguing to saying the least. I admit my nervousness in reading this book. I was worried that science would outweigh the practicalities I face in the classroom. Nevertheless, I was surprised to see that his points were clearly illustrated and connected to every day life. I enjoyed many of his own classroom stories and found myself replacing names like Tony or Anita with those in my own classes.

There were many occasions throughout the text that one could compare differentiated instruction to brain function and learning. One such point was apparent when Zull was discussing the transformation a person makes, “from a receiver to a producer of knowledge.” (39). This made me think back to our plant lessons and how we each structured our plans with a bit of whole class instruction before the real individual investigation could take place. When a student has control of their learning, they have the potential to grow. Once again I began to think about DI strategies mentioned in Tomlinson’s text. One such strategy that provides students with control would be the sidebar activity (Tomlinson, p. 53). With this freedom, students are able to “continually test their own knowledge” through active based learning. (40). //With this freedom, students transform outside knowledge to inside knowledge, past information to future information, and take control over the importance of the information for themselves (Zull, p. 33). cr//

Zull points out that teachers must create opportunities for their students to find balance between the front and back cortex. Teachers must break away from the traditional method of knowledge download as well as avoid a complete discovery approach, without guidelines (40). A balance can and will be found by those teachers that provide ample opportunities for the student that are purposeful and centered on their learning. This is the heart of DI in the classroom.

What I found most interesting throughout part one was that Zull never mentioned the practice of DI directly, but much of his text was referring to the biological foundations of it. This pushed me to reflect on the connection while reading. I was constantly writing ideas down and continue to reflect on his points. Some parts I liked, others I did not. One area I found particularly interesting was the idea of rewards. This again could connect with DI and the area of grading. I disagreed with his story about Eddie and Dave (54). I disagreed with his point that because Eddie had limited academic focus in college, in relation to a major and career choice, he would continue to perform poorly in his classes. While I understood the reason behind Dave’s positive performance in his premed classes was connected to his investment in becoming a doctor, I do not believe the reason why Eddie performed poorly can entirely be measured by his lack of investment. When I read Zull’s justification of Eddie and his poor performance my response was, “how many eighteen, nineteen, and twenty year olds really know what they want to be?” I found his point to be judgmental. I believe if a person really wants to explore their possibilities in an academic setting, being restricted to one major can be limiting to that person. If a person is dedicated to truly exploring various aspect of education, they have the same potential to do well as someone who is enlisted in a specific major. Anyone else have a reaction to his idea of rewards in connection to learning?

Tara, I feel the same way. It is difficult at such a young age to determine what you think you want to be when you grow up. Some people just know, but I say let them explore-it may open a door to something unexpected. HEIDI

//But aren't you guys kind of asking biology to be fair in a way it hasn't the capacity to be? Certainly we rarely expect our young adults to have a clear idea of what they want to do in life and we may well affirm the value of indeterminacy in this, but does it necessarily need to follow that brain biology doesn't favor the chances of one learner over another to acquire and retain knowledge and understanding? It makes sense to me that without a system of deeply felt goals to help him organize his knowledge, Eddie might well retain less and have less motivation to activate his knowledge in useful ways. My own experience tells me that my own learning was qualitatively different when I was an undergraduate, groping about in that wide world of academia, responding primarily to the aesthetic appeal of certain kinds of knowledge, from when I was in graduate school preparing for a defined career. Not that each experience doesn’t have a value, but I do think the learning was different. I would say my sense of personal investment (i.e. survival instinct) was greater in the latter instance. TA//

If Eddie was there just for grades, and he couldn't manage to achieve the grades he thought his intellect deserved, then I can see him getting really discouraged. It doesn't sound like he was looking around for interesting careers, it just seems like way too much of his sense of self-worth was tied up in high grades. When he wasn't able to accomplish that, the rest of it held little meaning for him. I don't think he was exploring majors. I think he was trying to rack up the bulls-eyes. When he couldn't do that, he couldn't do anything. cr

I look forward to reading and hearing from the rest of you. Have a nice Sunday! **Tara**

Tara, I also had a weird reaction to Zull's discussion about intrinsic and extrinsic movitation. I agree that choosing a major early on, could be restrictive, but at the same time, broad exploration could be more confusing to some students than invigorating. I do believe that everyone has the same potential to do well, it is just our job as educators to figure out ways to help students reach their goals. I have to admit that I began my collegiate studies as a premed and music double major. I was motivated to do well, but I couldn't achieve that goal. It was not until I took a tutoring job that I realized my passion for helping others understand math. The whole motivation discussion is really interesting to me as I believe I was initially intrinsically motivated with premed as my major, but when I didn't do well (extrinsic motivation) I started to doubt my abilities. As it turned out, I was able to find my niche and be much happier in education anyway. The funny thing is that I have never stopped to wonder what would have happened if I had had the same struggles with education. Hmmm...food for thought I guess. I hope your Sunday is going well. See you tomorrow! **-LG**

//Laurie, I think you make an excellent point here, that intrinsic motivation can come from a variety of sources besides career ambition. Would we consider the desire to be of service, the warm glow of giving, to be intrinsic or extrinsic? I would say intrinsic. We recognize a benefit for ourselves in creating good. Our survival is advanced. It might be a touch less direct than the drive to avoid threats, be rich,and win mates, but I do think it’s part of our intrinsic motivation system. TA//

Part 1 of Zull's book contained a lot of information that just made me "think". For me, the connection between Differentiated Instruction and Part 1 is the idea that "learning is physical" (5). Kolb also states, "deep learning, learning for real comprehension, comes through a sequence of experience, reflection, abstraction, and active testing". To me this is the connection to Differentiated Instruction because it fits with finding out the students' interests and experiences, what we model and what we would like them to learn or practice. We send them off to actively test what has been presented to them, which we hope to engage some abstract thinking after some kind of concrete experience. And some reflection time at the end to process what you have learned.

I also really liked the question "Can we teach without anyone learning?" (p.20). I discovered that even though a student might not walk away with what we wanted them to learn, doesn't necessarily mean they didn't learn something. Ultimately the student has had an experience of some sort due to sensory input and therefore doesn't walk away without being affected. (Ultimately, teachers have to take responsibility for student learning. cr)

My last example from Zull is on page 23 where I can clearly see the connection to Differentiated Instruction. 1. Concrete Experience- Hear words or see words 2. Reflection- Remeber related words, images, or ideas 3. Abstraction-Generate new words or ideas 4. Active Testing-Speak or write new words or ideas 5. New Concrete Experience-Hear or see new words and teacher's response

I don't believe they need to happen in that exact order but I feel 1 and 2 go with the content and how it is presented. Active testing can happen in various ways during hands on activities which more than likely will lead to some level of abstract thinking. And finally, resulting in a new concrete experience. This differentiation is guided by the teacher but with a teacher understanding to some extent how we function as human beings. HH

I thought that there was a couple connects made by Zull to DI. The first one emotion and how that related to learning. I think that Zull said it well on page 48, "Our best chance to help another person learn is to find out what they want, what they care about." I think this is a great way to approach teaching students so that they do learn. Relating topics to things that students are interested in or has relevance to them goes along way. I think that a teacher could use DI to approach a single topic in a number of ways so that each student could do something that they wanted to do. If the lesson was well designed there's no reason students could pick from a number of activities, but still come out with the same general understanding and ideas. In the same section Zull also says (p 49) "wanting survival means wanting control". I think that this idea can also play into the DI strategies. By giving students some choice or variety they can create a sense of ownership (control) for the material. I have seen students who get so much more out of a topic when they become emotionally invested in it. This emotional investment could lead to students using DI strategies such as interest centers or groups.

~ I love this concept! I think whenever possible, we should try and focus our lessons around the individual and their interests. Not only is it then easier to grasp and hold their attention, but I think it has a more lasting impression upon the student if they can relate to what is being taught. It may also ask them to think about their interests in a whole new way and from a whole new light. It may also help a student "break it down" a bit more piece-by-piece if they can make parallels between their interest and what the learning goal is. For example, with the plant lesson, if an individual is really into super heros, the super hero activity of a plant may be right up their alley. If they can look at a plant function, call it a "super-power" and then really digest the function, your goal as a teacher (the learning of plan functions) may be more easily accomplished when the student can draw those parallels. JB~

Another connection Zull makes is about "balance". Zull talks about balancing the front and back cortex. If you look at the front and back cortex they cover things like memory of stories and places, understanding language, facts, choice, predicting, and creating to name a few. If you want to teach so that students have a balance between the front and back cortex you would have to use DI. I think that Zull suggests something along these lines when he says, "our structure for learning should have a well-proportioned foundation". HB

I really found the information on the basal structures and the amygdala very illuminating and helpful. It’s obviously not quite this simple but it’s clear that fear can be a very powerful inhibitor of the kind of learning we seek, while pleasure can be a very powerful motivator. For instance, if we shoot so far over a student’s head that he just feels panic and no hope of getting ground under his feet, we are really ensuring that little academic learning can take place until the student’s fear is reduced. Most of what that student is going to learn, otherwise, is how to keep the likes of me at a safe distance, so that his ego will not be at my harsh mercy. I think what challenges me is the knowledge that Zull alludes to that learning, itself triggers the pleasure centers of the brain, so that a learning experience that is just rigorous enough and teaches something the student wants to know, is an inherently pleasurable thing, as long as fear does not derail the whole process.

As one who studied theater, I found number of these things making sense. One of the supreme challenges of a theater director is that she can’t just download her vision into the minds and bodies of the actors. She can’t just say, “Show us that you are terribly upset by Mrs. Smith’s letter,” and expect to get a great performance. A good director will generally create a framework of experience in which an actor will discover his own pathways to a strong performance, using both his mind and his body. We often talk of the memory that allows the actor to repeatedly deliver an engaging emotional performance as an physical memory. My experience bears this out; as an actor a physical adjustment can make a huge difference and I can sometimes use a body position to cue an emotional reaction. The director, like a teacher, cannot create this by simply talking and transfering information about the script, characters, etc. (//This is a beautiful example. Look at it through the transformation idea Zull writes about in C2.cr)// Another experience from theater is that there is often a delicate balance between being stretched and being safe. Having been stretched and disciplined in a rehearsal brings a feeling of pleasure. Being undisciplined and unchallenged in a rehearsal leads to feelings of dissatisfaction, time wasted. And of course being berated or harshly criticized leads to its own destructive, fear-based results. The trick as a teacher is to assess accurately where each student is so that she does not have to labor under a constant sense of failure, nor a sense that all the neural pathways being stimulated are already well-trodden.

It seems like good differentiation might naturally lead to stimulation of multiple brain functions. I find that as i think about multiple intelligences, in particular, I naturally find myself designing more applied, experiential activities. Once you’ve got people out of their seats, it seems a short leap to giving them a little more opportunity to test ideas out for themselves.

On a personal note, I found this very helpful in understanding the sluggishness I often feel about moving from reading to writing. It’s a leap from one end of the brain to the other, from perception to action. With action comes risk and the need to take in a much more immediate, present tense (and stressful) kind of information. TA

I saw an exhibit in NYC on the human [|body] last Fall. I was completely fascinated with the fact that human nerves look a lot like little telephone wires traveling through the bodily system. So when I saw the diagram on page 39, I wondered if those connections were actual conduits nerves (or fasiculi), the "wires" Zull writes of. I did a search for brain images and sure enough, they are. (I'll show the pictures in class.) Even more interesting is when these tiny little bundles run adjacent to each other, they also excite each other physiologically. It's like one bundle can set off another bundle just by its association. I wonder if my learning style - the embodiment of an aspect of my physical brain - has the coherence it does (as distinct from the coherence of other people's styles) because of where these bundles run and touch and turn each other on? Kind of an interesting thought. Then again, this really big idea that all thought is embodied in our physical selves is only dimly dawning for me. Phew. The connection to DI? Well, I think its all wrapped up in the reflection/action vibration that Kolb first articulated and that Zull takes to such a deeper level. When we ask learners to create a kind of performance outcome based on something they've connected to their prior knowledge, aren't we running them around Kolb's cycle of experiential learning? I think so. cr

~ complete sidenote, but I wanted to express that the pictures and diagrams helped me digest some of the thicker points he was attempting to illustrate (yup, total visual learner). Although this doesn't have a ton to do with the DI question exactly, I liked how he approached the topic of feelings and how they tie into learning. I think that emotions can influence the way an individual learns, and how he or she will react to a lesson. Not that all classrooms have to turn into a home for dramatic learning, however even recognizing emotions exist in a teaching setting is something I hadn't necessarily thought about directly. I like how he pointed out that //wanting// an answer to be something could potentially influence what you came up with as an answer. I can see this particularly being an issue with older ages. Any issues with this for those of you teaching in High Schools? or is it less common or relevant than I think? just curious! JB~

Schedule for the Monday the 2nd.
 * Gathering / CyberCafe
 * Report In and Discussion of Readings / 426
 * Charlie Time / 426
 * Sharpen up the cubes from Friday.
 * Make a second cube. Have one be for learners who require more structure. Have the second be for learners who can work more independently and with more open-ended directions. Work on activities that are differentiated.
 * Connect to Part One of Zull. Talk this through with your partner as you work on the cubes.
 * Work Time / Various Places.
 * Share Time / 426
 * Next Steps / 426
 * Zull Part Two.

Reactions to Today's Class. //Approximately 100 word entries//. //Please don't add separate pages here. Just add your entry to the one that comes before as a new paragraph. Leave your initials after your last sentence. CR//

Well, I can honestly say that after today's class I am more comfortable with the cube idea. Hannah was wonderful in letting Jenni and I join her group. I think that having a more concrete, standards-based topic made it easier to figure out some really neat activites for the cubes that we were constructing. I also think that there were a ton of great discussion points in class today. I especially liked Dan's discussion on lack of freedom. I realize that it was not necessarily his belief, but I found it to be both a fascinating and frustrating point of view.

I think I have come up with a possible idea for my article outline. I have created a blog site of basic notes and ideas, and hope to present that piece to the class (along with the outline) on Friday (is that when we are presenting?). For the time being, I have attached a screen shot of my main idea.

I can't wait to talk more about Zull tomorrow, and to see everyone's take on part two. I hope that everyone gets a chance to step outside and enjoy the beautiful weather this afternoon. See you in the a.m. :) **-LG**


 * Laurie, that sounds fascinating. I am very curious about the ways music affects the brain. My sense is that it complicates the picture, somewhat. I keep hearing about evidence that the a musically trained mind tends to perform better at a variety of academic tasks. I haven't actually read anything about it first hand, so I'd love to hear about what you've turned up in your research.**

I found today’s discussion of Zull interesting. I think that there's so much in this book about how we learn that to understand most of what he is talking about I would have to read it a couple of times. I did reread a few sections, but still feel like I've just scratched the surface of the truly complex ideas he is discussing. I liked looking at the cubes again. I was glad that Jenni and Laurie joined me. They forced me to think of activities that were different from where my mind would naturally go - which was great. I would like to try this cube idea in my classes and see how it goes. Laurie your outline looks great. I hope you send us a copy when you get it done. HB

Monday Reflection: I was looking forward to our discussion of Zull from the time I finished reading. I wanted to see what others felt and took away from it. I know I was skeptical at first, but appreciated the scientific point of view and our fantastic discussion. Your analysis blew me away and it made me think about so many elements that I hadn’t before. It felt like I took away so much more from it after our discussion. I particularly enjoyed the “free will” imput from Dan. Very out there and I love that kind of thinking!

Working on the cube for the second time felt like a breath of fresh air. I loved creating more activities with Heidi and hearing input from the group. Thank you for your help! If you get a chance, please check out my individual wikispace. I would love the feedback from the group on my project progress (mainly around a summative assessment I had thought up). Thanks! See you tomorrow. **Tara PS: Laurie, I loved your outline. The topic choice sounds SO interesting and right up your alley (talk about student interests). Great work!**

Tim here: I found myself a little sleepy during the cube2 activity and may not have brought as much rigor to my processing and thinking. For instance, I didn't really firm up the standards alignment that was lacking the first time around, nor did I think too much about applying the Zull. I may have fallen into the trap of being too "activity-centered" rather than "learning-centered". It was however, good to talk to Dan and get his ideas about increasing the complexity of tasks. I did advance my thinking about ways to make tasks more or less challenging, while not necessarily changing the opportunities for learning the fundamentals.

As always I enjoyed our conversations about learning and teaching. I don't know if I am making too much of this idea that I need to provide more opportunities for the feedback loop to close. I think it's an idea that drives the backward design movements focus on assessment. Maybe it hinges on the question of how we actively test our ideas in the "real" world. We speak and watch people's reactions. We touch or taste, and look for pain, pleasure, disgust to come. We build things and see if they work. We design experiences. We write and receive the response. So the feedback need not be highly formal, but it does seem like teachers need to be deliberate about how it is communicated to the student. In a sense, the artificiality of school environments may inhibit the flow of critical feedback to students. Therefore, it has to be manufactured and broadcast for the student to determine whether a given experiment worked. TA

~I can honestly say that I was NOT meant to be a high school math teacher, period. Props to Hannah... you have got to really know your stuff and really love your stuff in order to come up with as many lesson plans as you do! despite all of that, I really got a better grasp on the cubing idea today. It was nice to think it out, and hear the "thinking out" that others were doing as well. As far as Zull, I think that talking it over in class brought a lot more perspective to the table for me. It was some pretty heavy reading at times, and I know that I had some difficultly fully wrapping my brain around everything at points. It was nice to hear other people kinda "think it through out loud"... always helpful! JB~

I enjoyed the class discussion on behavior today, though I fear I may have done a disservice to the sociobiological perspective in my explanation and selective understanding. It is such a large and encircling “umbrella theory” that it is overwhelming for me to even begin to address in full measure without utterly biffing it. I found the class discussion on Zull rather helpful in establishing the processes and occurrences that transpire both simultaneously and in turn in our brains during learning—though I still have a lot of absorbing yet to do on this book. Following up on the cube was an excellent idea! I found that it solidified the concepts of differentiated questioning in regards to varied skill levels without watering down content. Some great questions were brought up during the cube revisit. –DI

I was glad we had the opportunity to make another cube only this one tailored for the more "sophisticated". I really like the concept of cubing and after designing the second one it made me go back and thing about how to make the previous cube a little more exciting and not quite so structured. Again, maybe looking at the standards first would help narrow down the activities we design. Group work has been a huge part of my learning process this past week and a half!! Love hearing everyone's ideas and feedback! HH