CUE View: Sports May be the Answer to Inspiring STEM-related Careers

By Harry Bloom, EdD

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) jobs are growing at a rate three times faster than other occupations and are projected to grow 17 percent by 2018.  As reported in a recent article in the Huffington Post by Vivian Pickard (cue.tc/PackardSTEM), president, General Motors Foundation, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests that over the next five years, the United States will have more than 1 million STEM-related job openings. The Commerce Department reports that STEM workers now command 26 percent higher wages than their counterparts yet, while employers are eager to hire, the number of students pursuing STEM-related majors continues to shrink, especially among women and minorities. Just 16 percent of American high school seniors are both proficient in mathematics and interested in a STEM career, and only 25 percent of STEM graduates are women.

With those sobering statistics in mind, when Sara Armstrong asked me, as State CTAP chair, to present an article for OnCUE highlighting “What’s New – Trends and Predictions,” I was thrilled. Over the years, there have been literally hundreds of articles written by scores of contributors for OnCUE. But I would be willing to bet not a single one of them has focused on technology and sports and the power and promise they hold together to address the STEM issue.

Ever since I can recall, I have been a huge sports fan and, in my younger days, even pitched a year for the UCSB Gauchos, providing numerous opportunities for opposing hitters to present spectators with souvenirs.

Perhaps shining a spotlight on the intersection between sports and technology could enhance students’ interest in the pursuit of technology and science careers. With its dependence on statistics, mathematics has always had a place in the sports world, but now, with the innovations of social media and new technologies, science and engineering are needed as well.

Technology is contributing greatly to the growth of the global sports industry, which today is estimated at well over $100 billion. Innovations are created by scientists, engineers and mathematicians designed to enhance individual and team athletic performance, improve the game-day experience, engage fans, and distribute sports information on multiple platforms. Their work has led to substantial increases in revenues from gate receipts, sponsorships and media rights. With fans becoming more tech-savvy every year, franchises are forced to keep up with these STEM-related sports advancements.

Today’s NFL franchises are now facing their most formidable opponent. It isn’t the other competing sports, an increase in criminal behavior among players, or even an increase in steroid use. No, this formidable opponent that NFL franchises are battling is what New England Patriots Publisher and Vice President of Content Fred Kirsch calls the three Cs: cost, comfort and convenience (cue.tc/Kirsch3Cs). The three Cs are leading more fans to forego high ticket prices, concession stand lines and cold weather for the comforts of a La-Z-boy recliner, strong Wi-Fi connection, Hi-Def television, and a short walk to a private bathroom.

The future holds a world with live sports viewable on Facebook, real-life hologram instant replays, Wi-Fi access for fans at stadiums, and numerous other sports-technology related advancements. Therefore, the sports, technology and educational communities need to work together. Could a focus on technology in sports encourage, inspire and convince this and future generations to investigate, navigate, and master the challenging—and unfortunately still distant for many—worlds of science, technology, engineering and mathematics?  By making them more relevant and rewarding, we could entice increasing numbers of today’s students to become more interested in the STEM subjects, even making American students more competitive with their counterparts from the Middle East and Southeast Asia and even helping the U.S. produce more engineers and physicists. Just a thought to ponder.

There is a place where these worlds of technology and sports intersect. SportTechie (www.sporttechie.com), an exciting and provocative site, highlights the latest innovations in global technology. It offers students an understanding of and an appreciation for analytics, variances, mobile devices, emerging social media, and gaming skills. By combining technology and sports (which is exactly what SportTechie does) it is possible for educators to open up a whole new world of career possibilities in the STEM fields to their students.

On that final note, my educational community colleagues, in response to Sara’s request for What’s New – Trends and Predictions, I pose to you these rumblings from the intersection of sports and technology, the interaction between jocks and tech geeks, and applaud SportTechie for its unique focus on technology and its impact on training, player health, game strategy, and fan engagement. Check out SportTechie. I think its exclusive focus on technology and sports has hit a home run and offers tremendous promise for getting more students involved in STEM courses and careers.

About the Author

Dr. Harry Bloom is Senior Director of Technology and Planning at the San Diego County Office of Education. A strong believer in the power and promise of technology as a learning and decision-making tool, he has served as State CTAP Chair, a superintendent/principal, assistant principal, high school teacher, and ASB advisor. He can be reached at hbloom@sdcoe.net.

A Roundtable Discussion About CCSS: What’s Involved and How Do We Get There?

By Lisa Kopochinski, DataBus Editor

According to the Common Core State Standards website at www.corestandards.org, the mission of CCSS is to “provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.”

While this goal is a lofty one, many believe it is achievable. However, few argue that it will take some time to navigate the hurdles involved.

DataBus editor recently sat down with the following individuals—Thomas Tan, director, network and computer services for the Hacienda La Puente Unified School District; Jim Klein, director, information services and technology for the Saugus Union School District; David Thurston, information technology director for the Colton Joint Unified School District; and Luke Hibbard, CTAP 6-California Technology Assistance Project with the Stanislaus County Office of Education; and Kelley Day and Christine Sisco, BTSA induction consultants from the Instructional Services Division at the Stanislaus County Office of Education—to get their take on CCSS and what it means to their district and county office in terms of interpretation and preparation as well as the challenges involved. Here is what they had to say.

What do you consider the main benefit to your district of implementing Common Core State Standards?

Thomas Tan: I’d have to say the main benefit is the goal to graduate high school students who are college and career ready. It’s a goal that we can all rally around and support—students, educators, parents and the community. The last five years of the great recession have been particularly nasty. Data has shown the value of post-secondary education for people to weather rough economic times. Future career opportunities that we can foresee point to growth in careers in science, technology, engineering and math backgrounds. The power in “common” is that we can now borrow resources developed by teachers in other states using the Common Core State Standards. It’s a competitive world. Our students are not just competing with the kids in the neighboring district for opportunities. CCSS helps us all pull in the same direction.

Jim Klein: I would say the biggest benefit of the CCSS is the weaving of authentic technology use throughout all of the academic disciplines, which is further driving our efforts to implement ever-greater, more effective use of technology in the learning space. When the standards describe students who “use technology and digital media strategically and capably,” they are not describing the sort of technology “as an add-on” or content delivery mechanism that has plagued ed-tech across the country. Instead such statements demand deeper, richer, more thoughtful strategies for technology in the learning space.

David Thurston: From a curriculum perspective, the depth and rigor required by the CCSS is going to significantly enrich our students’ educational experience. This will better prepare them with the critical thinking skills necessary for their college and career choices, while also providing more opportunities for project and process based learning. As far as IT and EdTech is concerned, the CCSS provides the greatest opportunity yet to further integrate technology into the classroom. Under the CCSS, technology is no longer a subject supplement or an enhancement employed by only a few “techy” teachers. It’s now a requirement that will be foundational to teaching, learning and assessment in all classrooms. This will drive the district to make organizational-wide resource commitments to provide the teachers and students the EdTech tools and training they need meet the demands of the new standards.

Luke Hibbard: There will be greater teaching indepth rather than covering more topics in less time. (Mile deep and inch wide rather than inch wide and mile deep). This encourages students to use their critical and thinking and problem-solving skills in addition to asking students to translate ideas, concepts and skills into the 4 Cs of 21^st-century skills. The 4 Cs speak to Communication, Collaboration (new emphasis in CCSS on the Speaking and Listening standards, which are integral to working with classmates, co-workers and customers in a worldwide arena), Critical Thinking, and Creativity. Preparations of lessons need to be more thoughtful to address all levels of Depth of Knowledge (DOK 1-4).

Kelley Day: Right. And this is all weaves nicely together with the Standards for Mathematical Practice, which encourages the same qualities in the area of math (also meshes with Next Gen Science and Next Gen ELD standards). There are many cross-curricular benefits, which includes ideas such as writing in all content areas (including math, PE, music, etc.), reading critically and applying information to extended situations. For example, taking information read in a technical manual and applying that to a real life/hands on situation). Technology integration is not just for presentation of lessons, but embedded within Common Core. Students are being encouraged to be technologically fluent in all arenas (research, publishing, problem solving, public speaking, etc.)  All of the above is working toward making students college and career ready and subsequently more productive and employable citizens.

How is your district preparing for the implementation of CCSS?

TT: Now that’s the million-dollar question. CCSS is new for everyone, so we’ve been using every bit of information we can get our hands on to map the way forward. We have worked with our assessment people to conduct online pilot tests at schools sites. Our business, instructional and technology people have been meeting weekly to focus just on common core. Having all the functional groups and departments around the same planning table has been very useful. We all hear the same info and can anticipate future issues early on and work on solutions. Attending the CETPA regional group meetings has been a great source of information on how other districts are handling online assessments and classroom technology. The CETPA statewide listserv has also been an invaluable source for an ongoing running flow of discussion about CCSS.

DT: First and foremost, we’re training teachers on the new standards. Colton has made the commitment to train all of our teachers in the new ELA and Math standards by 2015. We’ve been hosting regular (three to four times a week) CCSS staff development sessions and will continue to do so for next the next two years. Additionally, our Curriculum Council and Educational Services Department are preparing for new and much-needed CCSS aligned textbook adoptions scheduled for next year. On the technology front, we’re completing our district-wide wireless network rollout and refreshing the majority of our network infrastructure so that we can handle the expected increase in bandwidth/access demands. On the EdTech side, we’re starting the implementation of Google Apps for Education (GAFE) this year, and we plan on selecting an official Learning Management System. I expect that both of these systems will play a large role in enabling the collaboration and project based learning that the new standards will require.

JK: Our district is marshaling all of our expertise across the entire array of departments, working together to meet the demands of the new standards and testing requirements. A key strategy of ours has been to be involved from the get-go with the SBAC pilot program, in which we participated in both the early and late rounds. These pilots enabled us to evaluate not only our technology capabilities and needs, but also the demands and expectations of the tests on our students. These experiences have aided tremendously in our development of strategies for the learning environment. In addition, we’ve engaged a number of educational services and technology committees, with plenty of cross-pollination, to deconstruct standards, build/collect resources, and set strategies for the future.

Christine Sisco: As a county office we are supporting 26 districts in the roll out of these new standards. All departments are working together to further our districts’ implementation of CCSS (Instructional Support Services, CTAP, BTSA/SpEd Induction). Throughout 2012-2013, our County Office Instructional Support Services division hosted the CCSS Leadership Institute, which introduced districts to the CCSS and how they are structured. This five-day academy helped districts create an implementation plan for the 2013-2014 school year and beyond. Districts brought key players to the Institute such as teacher leaders, educational coaches, administrators and curriculum coordinators. And during this past summer, the ISS team hosted a county-wide conference titled “Splash into Common Core,” which gave participants both the opportunity to “DIP” (two days of 90-minute workshops focused on implementation of common core and practical classroom application) and “DIVE” (three-day intensive workshops which allowed participants to dive deeper into specific standards by grade level in ELA and Math).  The “DIVE” sessions are being reoffered throughout the 2013-2014 school year. The Technology and Learning Resources division supports the ISS team in helping districts craft vision and effective uses of technology to reach the Depth of Knowledge required of the new standards.

What is the largest challenge your district has faced so far—or will face—in the implementation and how will you overcome these challenges?

JK:  The biggest challenge, by far, is the short timeline. The new standards and expectations related to student performance represent a sea-change so great as to be truly disruptive, with the added demand of significant change at a rapid pace—something that can be extremely difficult for a large organization to cope with. We are, therefore, investing heavily in our strategic teams, staff development and professional learning communities (PLCs). We are also increasing our investments in technology and technology related support, while simultaneously tightening up our technology plans for both the short and long term. In addition, we are preparing to seek a significant facilities bond, which will further gain us the opportunity to rethink the learning environment to an even greater degree.

DT: Colton is still struggling with major budget challenges. Furlough days have cut into classroom and staff development time and coming up with the funds for major technology/EdTech expenditures has been challenging and controversial. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) should help with some of the funding concerns but given our current state, it won’t be enough and will have to use categorical and general funds to fully implement and support CCSS. That being said, Colton’s executive management team has made a commitment to funding the implementation of CCSS and we’ve developed our budget as such. And, at an organizational level, the changes brought about by the implementation of CCSS have provoked a lot of anxiety and resistance. The CCSS related staff development takes teachers out of their classrooms and any new curriculum adoptions and technology rollouts are always stressful. Implementation of the new standards is bringing dramatic change to the classroom and teaching methods, all of which can be a source of unease and concern. Colton is trying to take a collaborative approach to help manage this change. We’re including teachers and school site staff as much as possible when making CCSS related decisions about curriculum, training and technology.

TT: On the technology side, our largest challenges were the ones pointed out from Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium pilot tests on the East Coast: 1) adequate bandwidth and; 2) having adequate student computers for testing. It’s an algebra problem, “How many computers do we need (that meet SBAC standards) to test students grades 3 to 8 and 11 in a three-week period?”  Three weeks is what our principals say they normally test with paper and pencil tests. We built spreadsheet models to calculate the time to test a school, given the population of tested grade levels and computers available. Our facilities and technology teams are conducting surveys of school sites to: 1) survey current computer labs that could be used for online testing, and; 2) identifying empty rooms that could become computer labs. This info will help us get a more accurate budget picture and how much funding is to be allocated to teacher professional development and instructional materials.

LH: As we are a county office, districts will bring their challenges forward as they need assistance from us. From an instructional standpoint, there has been an emphasis on changing instructional strategies and engaging learners. As far as the technology side of the house, the county office has been helping districts plan for infrastructure needs to appropriately administer the Smarter Balanced Assessment. Many of our clients are curious about how to acquire and configure wireless networks to ensure the most reliable and accurate testing experience possible.  In addition, many districts looking to integrate technology are focusing on “which device” to deploy when truly the discussion should center on “what we want students to be able to do.”  The device conversation should be a secondary piece

What advice can you offer other school districts in implementing CCSS? Any do’s or don’ts?

JK: Obviously, the number one “do” is to take CCSS seriously. I know of a number of districts that seem to be taking a “wait-and-see” approach to the whole thing, making little effort to plan for a successful transition. As a wise man once said, “to fail to plan is to plan to fail.” Do get your students taking the practice tests on a number of different devices early, and be sure to pay close attention to how they do/what they need to be successful. It’s not just about the device, the infrastructure, etc.—although shortcomings in these areas can make a significant difference—it’s also about skills, abilities and experience, so be especially mindful of the questions and expectations, with an eye toward the sort of activities students need to be engaged in on a regular basis and the technologies that can be employed to help students attain the requisite skills, abilities, and experience. And above all, don’t let this become a conversation just about taking tests. Take this opportunity to inspire others to rethink the learning environment, with a healthy conversation about purpose, environment and agency. We, as education technologists, have a tremendous opportunity to help shape the conversation around education moving forward. Let’s not squander it.

KD: Start early. Professional development is important wherever you seek it.  Make sure that your message regarding implementation is positive and clear. Professional development will be a tremendously important piece of the puzzle from both the instructional strategies standpoint as well as technology. This is why the team approach at the Stanislaus County Office of Education to this point has been effective in changing the mindset of educators we serve. This is not another educational pendulum swing.  It is based on brain theory and research in how students learn and grow.

DT: I’m not sure I’m in a position to offer any advice, as I’m still finding my way around this process. I can say that as a classified manager the CCSS implementation has really required me to work very closely with the educational services staff and develop an even stronger relationship with the teaching staff. In fact, I specifically requested that the IT department be moved under the Educational Services Department because of Common Core and SBAC!  Colton doesn’t have an EdTech department, so the only way to bridge that IT-curriculum gap was get more involved with the certificated side of the house. It’s been really rewarding, as I’ve been able to have greater input in technology related curriculum decisions and have found new sources of funding for EdTech initiatives. Additionally, I’ve made a concerted effort to involve teachers in a lot of the CCSS related technology decisions (GAFE, LMS, device choices) and they’ve taught a lot me about their EdTech needs.

TT: This is a leadership and relationships challenge.  Teachers and schools want to know what their role is. Board, parents and the community want to know how this will benefit their children. Business needs to know what the costs (e.g. technology, professional development, instructional materials) are to budget for them early. Purchasing will have a hand in acquiring the technology. Instruction and human resources will need to plan for professional development, the need for subs, etc.  If you set out a month-by-month map from now to the online testing in 2014-2015, you’ll discover that the calendar of what needs to be done fills quickly. Act now. Time is running out.

About the Author

Lisa Kopochinski has been the editor of DataBus magazine for more than 10 years. She works closely with Steve Thornton, CETPA’s managing editor and President-Elect. She can be reached at 916-481-0265 or at lisakop@sbcglobal.net.

 

CUE View: Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards

By Dennis Deets

The City of San Diego City Council has determined that one of the biggest problems facing the city is the congestion at the San Diego International Airport. Students at High Tech High (HTH) work in small groups on short-range and long-range solutions to present to the city council. As part of their assessment, they will present their group’s proposals to actual members of the City Council, one or two civil engineers, a couple of city planners, their teachers, and their peers. This was a project-based learning activity students were working on a few years ago at High Tech High in San Diego. They are now probably on to solving the Coronado Bridge problem or the Qualcomm Stadium issues.

At the Center for Advanced Research and Technology (CART) in Clovis, some groups of students were redesigning various floors of the Twin Towers so as to have better facilitated evacuation. The winners of local competitions were flown to New York City to compete in national competition. Other groups of students at CART were working with the local Park Rangers — think Yosemite — to nurse and raise injured ducks for reintegration into the park.

These are some brilliant projects. And, for my money, the further we get from multiple-choice assessments, and the more we move towards authentic assessment, the more possible and viable projects like these will become typical for all students (not just those lucky enough to find themselves at HTH, CART, or other similar schools).

So what do problems like these have to do with CCSS, NGSS, educational technology, and CTAP?

First, our new standards and especially our next generation assessments will expect students to be able to address issues at the Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Levels 3 (strategic thinking) and 4 (extended thinking). In short, students will need to be able to provide good answers, good arguments, and creative solutions to open-ended problems.

One of the most difficult things I have to do is helping educators identify open-ended questions. Somehow “right answer” and school have been joined at the hip for so long that it is very difficult to break this bond.  But, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), and project-based learning (PBL) will all help us move in the direction of providing solutions to problems that do not have or at least do not yet have “right” answers.

Secondly, in most cases, technology is now our own portable research library. Once we start working on problems that do not yet have solutions, we will need to do research in areas that are not nearly as well defined as those in which the answers are already known.  When you ask, “Who killed President Lincoln?” you know which materials to provide for students to be able to find the answer.  When you ask for a short-term solution to the congestion problem at San Diego International Airport, it is not so clear which materials and which information will be needed.  Our teaching responsibility will move away from providing the right information to students to teaching them how to find the information that is relevant to their solutions.

Most teachers learned how to do research in school, college, at their graduate university, and now at the dinner table at night when their spouse says something that they think might not be all that factually correct. (Yes, I can no longer make up facts at the dinner table.)  But CTAP and CUE are experts at helping teachers better facilitate research in their classrooms, and in their PBL labs.

Fourthly, at least one-third of coming up with good solutions to PBL activities is in communicating one’s solution to one’s peers, to the community, and to whoever is assessing, and eventually paying for, the work. My father used to tell me, when hiring aerospace engineers for NASA from a pool of mostly MIT and Cal Tech grads, “They all have good ideas.  They are all competent aerospace engineers. I hire the candidates that can communicate their good ideas to others and work with others on projects that cannot be done in isolation.”

Modern technology has profoundly changed the way we communicate. (I hope I do not need an argument here.)  It is imperative that we help students leverage the technology that they know how to use and teach them those that they are not already familiar with to better communicate both their solutions to complex problems and perhaps even more importantly, to communicate the next set of problems that we have not even identified yet.

So, PBL is good. CCSS is good. SBAC is good. NGSS is good.  All will help move our educational institution into the 21^st century.  I want to give a very short caveat here, though. One thing we learned back in the College Preparatory Math (CPM) days (I bring this up because the end-of-unit activities in CPM — while not fully PBL — were pretty nice at helping students develop open-ended problem-solving skills) was that asking students to solve problems without providing adequate instruction was not always the best way to go. There is a huge amount of instruction that needs to go into a student’s knowledge base before they can even grapple with problems like re-designing skyscraper floors or raising ducks. PBL, CCSS, and NGSS are not asking that we stop teaching DOK levels 1 (recall) and 2 (skill/concept) skills. These are necessary! But they are not sufficient for being adequately prepared for the modern world. Instead, we are asking that our students aspire to so much more than being able to identify the correct words, phrases, or numbers on multiple choice assessment.

About the Author

Dennis Deets is the Director of the Educational Options Center in the Riverside Unified School District, which includes the Riverside Virtual School. Before moving to the EOC last month, he was the Statewide CTAP Chair. He has worked in the education field for the past 28 years. Dennis worked as a high school principal and high school math teacher.  When not working on online education, Dennis spends his time reading, swimming and walking his dogs.  He can be reached at dennisdeets@gmail.com.

This article first appeared in the Fall, 2013 issue of OnCUE, the journal for Computer-Using Educators, Inc.