Thursday, Ferbruary 7, 2002

So just what is all this costing?Ý I don't know, but this is what is involved:Ý Last week there were six teams of three from Eastern Europe and this week there are 6 teams of three from the newly independent states.Ý Last week there were six American teachers, plus the staff of the various organizations running the program.Ý This week there are two very happy teachers from New York...ÝIn the spring each of the 12 teams of three will expand to a team of ten for a total of 120 who will come to the states in groups of 40 for three weeks each.Ý They will spend half that time in Washington, and half that time in either Los Angeles, Washington, Colorado or ChicagoÝ (the latter in their national groups of ten). Then each of the twelve teams gets $15,000 to take home to assist with the implementation of their programs.Ý Nikki and I are responsible for writing lesson plans for American teachers to use when teaching about the issues of democracy in these newly emerging states.Ý I will let you know when our work is up on the Internet, so you can see what that part of these good American tax dollars has produced.Ý

This morning the national teams (of three) are working on their goals and objectives.Ý They need to establish some goals so that they can go home and put together their individual teams of ten.Ý For example, if one of their goals is to get their ministry of education to support civics education, then perhaps someone from the ministry of education should be one of the ten.Ý If a goal is a pilot project in one or two schools, then perhaps one or two teachers from schools should be part of the ten.ÝThere is definite encouragement for the groups to consider using materials already developed by organizations running this conference -- the Constitutional Rights Foundation, Street Law, etc.Ý Russia, for example, already has major projects using Street Law materials, and has translated and adapted them into Russian.Ý Street Law had an office in St. Petersburg for a time while that was in development.Ý Of the two issues, adaptation is more critical than translation because you have to give students an idea of how government works in their own communities -- and it may well be changing, even as we speak...ÝI noticed, for example, that the materials currently in use in Uzbekistan only have pictures of men in them -- perhaps this is because the "clip art" available there is rather limited, but of course that is an issue.Ý

Speaking of men, last night at dinner an administrator from Ukraine made the toast, to all the beautiful women here tonight and asked all the men to stand and toast, which they did.Ý An American woman, in response, suggested that all the women then stand and toast the men.Ý This would be so inappropriate at a professional conference in the US that I don't even know where to begin commenting on it.Ý It is a reminder of how many subtle issues lie just under the table of "civic" education.Ý

This afternoon the groups are working on their plans.Ý They have been given a good model, where they distinguish activities, short-range and long-range goals.Ý They are encouraged to work with post-its, so that they can change the plan and rethink what-goes-where as their ideas develop.Ý It makes more sense for them to be speaking their own languages while they work in these small groups of three, so I have been spending time exploring the website of iearn.org, one of the groups that is here.Ý They describe themselves as a grass-roots organization that encourages web communication among schools around the world.Ý They have developed some interesting material and I think I can find many ways for me and the Poly Community to be involved.Ý I have felt that I don't do enough pro-bono computer work since I stopped being a volunteer tecaher for America Online once they got too big and bureaucratic.

I encouraged Nikki to go in to town this afternoon and finish shopping.Ý She didn't want to go alone, but we found someone to go with her and I went to the ilearn.org session by myself -- there was no need for us both to go.ÝSitting next to meÝwhile I write this is Anatoly, one of our two translators (pictured above).Ý They are both wonderful, although he is the only one doing the simultaneous translation that we value so much.Ý Right now he is translating one of my assignments into Russian because I would like to share it tomorrow.Ý It is an assignment that asks students what activities they would haveÝundertaken in an effort to end slavery in the United States in 1854.Ý The assignment assumes that slavery should have been ended and that the person is a northerner.Ý The dozens of choices include symbolic, financial, political and personal choices.ÝÝWhen students finish deciding which ones they would have done, they need to write a rationale for the choices they have selected.ÝÝJoe Kahne's lecture the other day defined three kinds of leadership: personal responsibility (working in a soup kitchen), initiative and leadership (organizing a soup kitchen) and considerations of justice (learning why some people don't have enough to eat).Ý I find the discussion a little simplistic, but sometimes it is easier to work with a simple schematic.Ý Joe made the point that many civics lesson only focus on one type of citizenship (more often personal responsibility) and that society needs citizens who can do all three.Ý IÝlike this lesson because it includes all three without identifying which is which.Ý If you want a copy of the assignment (in English) let me know and I will send you one when I get home next week.Ý What would YOU have done if you had been alive in 1854?Ý

A second page I asked AnatolyÝto translate, if he has time, is on how to evaluate an interactive lesson.Ý Many teachers think that if they are being observed they should do a chalk-talk lesson so the evaluator can see them "teach."Ý Many evaluators think that, too,Ýeven if they know the teacher does lots of group lessons.ÝÝSome years ago, when I was a supervisor in public school, a student, who happened to be in two classes I evaluated on the same day,Ýtold me that he understood how I could evaluate the first assignment (the lecture) but not the second which was all group work.Ý His comment was that the teacher had barely said a word in the whole lesson.Ý I told him that the question was whether I was there to observe the teaching or the learning, and asked him how he would evaluate the learning of the first lesson. I explained that had been unable to, although I later asked the teacher to show me an assignment his students had done in order to see that learning had actually taken place. In the second lesson it was obvious every minute of the period, just who was engaged and what they were accomplishing.

ÝThis afternoon the groups worked on their individual plans.Ý They were given a large piece of posterboard on which had been drawn four rectangles about 8 x 11" each.Ý Each rectangle was divided in three like a tri-fold letter.Ý They were to plan different aspects of their project in each box.Ý One was for Student learning, one was for teacher learning, one for curriculum, one for national standards.Ý The tri-fold subdivisions were for "activities," "short-term" (one year) goals and long-term goals.Ý They were to write each idea on a post-it and then put the post-its in the proper rectangles and subdivisions.Ý I thought it was a clever strategy because if they changed their mind, they just peeled off the post-it instead of having to cross things out.Ý I think I'll try that on some student projects when I get back to Poly.ÝTonight at dinner I got some of the gossip about who is going where.Ý Of course the groups are dying to know, but I mustn't tell (no pressure, they don't know I know..)Ý Now I should get started on my evaluation.Ý