Scorecard for Colleges Needs Work

Jason will be following up our discussion last night on 'Foundational Questions' with his discussion notes, but I wanted to highlight this interesting article from today's New York Times.  It demonstrates the difficulty the Obama Administration is having in providing an accurate indicator of 'value' that colleges and universities provide their students.  It's worth a read although it does not apply that closely to what we discussed last night.  Of particular interest in the article is a link to a company called 'Pay Scale' that ranks colleges and universities strictly on the economic outcomes of their graduates.  Coming in at #1?  That's right, Harvey Mudd College

Pay Scale

Scorecard for Colleges

Harkness Webinar Opportunity

From the Center for Spiritual and Ethical Education:

Dear Colleague,

Harkness Pedagogy helps students build collaborative relationships, take responsibility for their own learning, and develop the kind of autonomy that fosters psychological well-being.

Join us February 20th at 3:30 Eastern for this 40-minute web meeting, where former Exeter English teacher and Harkness consultant Nita Pettigrew will explain the methodology and its effectiveness.

Unable to attend the live webinar? A recording may be purchased for later viewing.

For more information and to register, please visit our event page.

www.csee.org

CSEE Webinar on Harkness Pedagogy

Technology Use in the Classroom

Classrooms Without Walls

Sam Adams

When E-Mail Turns from Delight to Deluge

Not something that directly addresses education, but we all deal with the blessings and nightmares of email and this article from The New York Times is an interesting discussion of what has caused email to become so difficult to deal with, and it offers a few ideas about how to address the problems.  Worth a quick read.

When E-Mail Turns From Delight to Deluge

Notes from Roundtable Discussion on Character Education and Residential Life

PDC Thursday Roundtables—February 7, 2013:

Topic:  Teaching Character Beyond the Classroom – Residential Life Curriculums

Attendees:  Teddy Wenner, Dave Facciani, Hans Doerr, Mike Eckert, Tiffany Zimmerman, Ryan Pagotto, Rachel Stone, Carolyn Conforti-Browse, Jason Beck

Reading:  Selections from PDC Blog Posts

Thoughts: Teaching character and values at Blair is something we all feel strongly about, yet how do we communicate these values to our students?  And what is the role that residential life plays in educating the whole student? 

Particular questions and issues that were raised:

•          A formal Residential life curriculum comes with both pros and cons.  At Blair, we have relied on Prefect modeling in the dorms, organic conversations about values at the dorm level, in classes, and with advisors, etc.  A one-size fits all curriculum would likely saddle larger dorms with a very different burden than smaller dorms and raise questions about buy-in.
•          Organic approaches to character and values work at Blair, but how can we be more intentional about our residential life focus?  Public speaking has become a part of the regular conversation on campus and as a result it seems to have improved across campus.  Would consistency in conversations about character and values have a similar effect?
•          Tiffany reminded us of the Search Institute’s 40 Assets of Developmental Assets (see link below) and Hans brought of Tough’s commentary on the Kipp/Riverdale 7 Character Essentials – both could provide models for a shared curriculum and focus at Blair.
•          Community-wide Essential Questions (as used by Francis Parker and others) could be an effective way to guide the conversation and a school-wide curriculum on character and values.  Could align with chapel, vespers, dorm, prefects, advisors, even Skeptics and coursework…  A shared reading?
•          Would a Character Curriculum “Independent Study” that students could elect to participate in be a nice way to elevate the conversation?  Or should the program be more advisor-centric?
•          What do we want our graduate to value when they cross the stage?  Is there faculty agreement on what values these are?  Should there be?
•          Housemasters could be empowered to develop their own curriculums and use prefect and student involvement in that process. 
•          Could we align a residential life conversation/curriculum with the CHAT program?  Is it time to consider a new approach to CHAT given the current challenges?  A look at Loomis’s Center for the Common Good classes or a new model of larger presentations then follow-up in dorms for CHAT? 
•          It was suggested that Prefect Program could be more engaged in these conversations on a formal basis.  Could we put more structure in place for them on this issue of character conversations with the kids in the dorm?
•          Should we re-consider the role of the Dorm Staff and our expectations of them beyond the absolute basic nature of dorm duty?
•          Would the use of “badges” for character be a way to engage the kids and provide structure?

Action items:

1. Continue the conversation about more formal structure for residential and community conversations about character and values.
2. Look at revising CHAT and consider aligning it with a community-wide Essential Question and other programs.
3. Develop a shared vocabulary of character values and/or graduate outcomes that all faculty agree on.
4. Survey community about their perception of what comprises character.
5. Consider more synchronicity between prefects, class councils, weekend activities, housemasters, vespers, chapel, CHAT, and the advisor program.
6. Look at intentional ways to focus this conversation in the community.

Looking Ahead:           Thursday, February 14^th at 7:00 PM in the Wean Dining Hall. 
Topic:  Foundational Questions:  What We Live and Believe

Thursday, February 21^st at 7:00 PM in the Wean Dining Hall.
Topic:  Advanced Placement Courses:  Academic handcuffs or a valuable curriculum?

 Links:

Kipp/Riverdale Character Set:  http://www.kipp.org/our-approach/strengths-and-behaviors

Search Institute 40 Developmental Assets:  http://www.search-institute.org/content/40-developmental-assets-adolescents-ages-12-18

Foundational Questions

I recently discovered Grant Lichtman's blog "The Learning Pond" and have thoroughly enjoyed his perspective on education, pedagogy, and the potential for innovation.  I was struck by an entry from earlier this year that posited three Foundational Questions that schools must ask.  I've copied them below and encourage you to read his full post on these questions.

What made me pause was that these are precisely the types of things that I know some of us think about with some regularity when we take the time to consider the "big picture" at Blair.  They are also fundamental components of the accreditation process.  And they raise the specter of the "value-added" conversation as well.  Yet, I'm not certain that all of us in this community would answer these questions in the same way.  Perhaps that's what we want as a community of educators and learners with any number of different foci to embrace, or maybe its just that the language isn't there to describe shared ideals in uniform terms, or perhaps they are a constantly shifting mark that need constant refreshing.  Regardless, they made me think and I propose them as fodder for discussion in the months ahead:

• What are the essential learning outcomes or qualities of your students when they graduate?
• What is the desired relationship at your school between students, teachers, and knowledge?
• What is the differentiated value that your school offers to your clients?

Source:  http://learningpond.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/three-foundational-questions-schools-must-ask/

Gender and Education

Given the conversation about gender that took place at last week's Monitors' Meeting, I found this particular Opinionator entry of real interest:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/the-boys-at-the-back/

I do believe it is appropriate for us to re-engage the conversation about gender at Blair. The distribution in upper-class effort marks is a good outward indicator of gendered approaches to education and community.  How can we get a dialogue on this issue going with our student body?  Do we prime our students with how we frame the conversation?  How do the great all-boys schools deal with this issue?  Can we look at programmatic approaches to improving male achievement?