The IBL Blog

IBL and Large Classes (an example)

2024-02-15T23:20:00.001-05:00

Large classes come with more logistical challenges, but using IBL in these contexts is still doable and rewarding. It's not the same as small classes, but many good things can happen in large classes. Check out the podcast episode below!

Podcast: A conversation with Carol Schumacher, Kenyon College

2023-10-17T20:44:00.006-04:00

It was great catching up with Carol Schumacher, Kenyon College. Carol and I have worked together off and on for over a decade. It's been wonderful to learn from Carol and work with her on moving education at the college level forward.

Huge congrats to Carol for receiving the Haimo Award in 2023. See the info HERE.

Link mentioned in the video: IDEAL Center https://new.smm.org/ideal-center

IDEAL Center Teamwork Norms

Everyone has something to learn.
No one person is good at everything or has all the skills to complete a team-worthy task
Everyone has expertise to offer.
Every person has relevant strengths to bring to each team-worthy task.
You have the right to ask for help, and the duty to assist. • We need each other.
Help others do things for themselves.
Explain by telling how.
Everybody helps.
Pay attention to what other team members need.

Email mentoring after a professional development workshop (for professional developers)

2023-02-21T13:40:00.001-05:00

This primarily audience for this post is professional developers in higher education.

After a workshop in the early part of the summer, attendees go back home... and then the calendar unceremoniously flips to August. Fall semester is approaching, and summer is ending. All of the ideas learned at the summer workshop have to intersect with reality. Real students are coming, the syllabus needs to be written, choices need to be made, and the LMS needs to be set up. During this phase instructors new or newish to IBL can benefit from the community they worked with at the workshop.

Email mentoring doesn't sound exciting. It sounds like "having to mow the lawn after a long week." I apologize for the unexciting, descriptive title. But in reality email mentoring is important for participants and truly rewarding and fun.

What is email mentoring? Email mentoring is follow-up support after workshops, and is organized by workshop facilitators. Facilitators email the whole group every two or three weeks to check-in on the group, asking participants to share how planning or teaching is going. Participants have questions before the start of the term, and issues or questions might come up during the term, or they may have a success story to share with the group.

A typical pattern is the facilitators send out a few emails to see how people are doing, and a few responses trickle in. But then eventually there are times when you get large threads. Someone has a question. Another participant chimes in. And then another chime. A facilitator thanks the people who chimed in, and asks for more thoughts. More people chime in, and it's a flurry of helpful, insightful, and supportive messages.

Activity ebbs and flows within a semester. Email mentoring starts a few weeks before the term and is heavily used during the parts of the first half of the term. Activity tends to pick up again towards the end of the term, when facilitators encourage participants to share and reflect on the semester.

Email mentoring is a type of follow-up support. Follow-up support is a broad category of continuing professional development after the main workshop. Follow-up is the booster to the summer prime doses, and strengthens and enhances what was accomplished in the summer.

One common example of follow-up support is having monthly meetings, which is more common for professional development programs that take place in a specific region, such as a single campus or in the K-12 setting of a school or school district.

Meeting regularly during the school year makes sense in cases where all the instructors are in the same geographic area. You can continue to support workshop participants as they are implementing their courses, get together over boxed lunches, and get folks outside of their environments. Video conference call is another option to do this for groups that are more spread out.

Email mentoring especially makes sense for undergraduate math instructors, because of the asynchronous nature of email. Everyone uses email, and access to the conversation fits into faculty work life. Scheduling faculty meetings is also a big challenge, because finding a common time across multiple time zones with 20-30 faculty is nearly impossible. Hence, asynchronous email exchanges make sense in this context.

Email mentoring also does not require prep like the summer workshops. The main thing is being effective with timing and being kindly persistent and supportive. Thinking about this work as building community rather than "getting lots of chimes" is a more useful mindset.

Why is follow-up support important? As mentioned above, learning about IBL, active learning, or any other topic during the summer is great for getting over the "activation energy" needed to start the change. But implementation in the real world requires steady work, and having a community of collaborators doing the same thing can make a difference in how much and how well someone implements new teaching changes (to them). In some instances, follow-up support can make or break an implementation attempt. I think of follow-up support as an important part of the workshop.

Some people are teaching in departments where they are the only one doing active learning. They feel isolated, and going to a workshop for a week is a refreshing change. Having their community still with them during the term via email mentoring gives folks working alone much needed support and camaraderie.

How do you ping the groups? We use low-entry, high-ceiling prompts.

"Hi everyone,

Hope your week is off to a good start. Please let us know how things are going with your teaching. Even if you don't have a lot of time, please feel free to click 'reply-all' and send us just a sentence or two. We want to know how you are doing.

Cheers!

SY"

The idea is to make participating easy and it can be a short update or something more involved.

Sometimes the facilitators send out informational emails, and they usually don't get many replies, although they can spark a thread on a topic usually not directly related to the original information being shared. Perhaps there is a good article worth sharing or a conference or workshop coming up. Those kinds of messages keep the community informed and in people's minds.

Repeatedly checking in the with group is necessary. Sometimes it takes a multiple tries to get a thread going. This is normal and fine. Not every email needs or should have a lengthy response from a large number of participants. The strategy is to gently check in regularly, because eventually someone will want or need to run something by the group, and you'll have primed people that chiming in is okay and welcome.

Emotional content is a key component of successful email mentoring. What does emotional content mean in this context? Examples are thanking people for sharing, validating the struggle, and celebrating successes. Here's an example.

"Hi ABC - thank you for sharing that story. I have been in that situation before several times, and you handled it better than I did the first time. Here's what I learned along the way... Does anyone else have anything to share? Please chime in - it'd be great if we had more perspectives. - SY"

Emotional content is often short and sweet.

(Participant) "Hi everyone! Just had a great day in class..."
(Another participant) "That's wonderful!..."
(Facilitator) "Thank you so much for sharing that story. Congrats!"
(More compliments...)

One thing to keep in mind is timing. You want other participants to chime in, so facilitators need to carefully time their messages so they are not pouncing on all of the questions right away or letting big gaps of time go by. Perhaps they can let a day or two go by and encourage someone to chime in. Facilitators can chime in with, "That's a great question. Does someone have something they'd like to share?" to amplify the question without answering.

Why email and not slack/discord/teams? I personally would prefer to use something like Discord or a discussion board. But the reality is that you lose people from the group post workshop if you use slack/discord/teams/etc. Only a subset will take the extra step to login and check another platform that is not email. This has been an consistent barrier for all the years I have run workshops. Email is the one consistent way to reach everyone.There are definitely pros and cons to email, but in the end, the kicker is that email is the one universal platform out there that everyone already uses.

Email mentoring is fun and rewarding! Email mentoring is great, because you get to learn about what people are doing, help people with their questions, be part of a supportive community, learn new ideas, and celebrate successes. It's many of the good parts of being an educator rolled into one activity.

Email mentoring is a helpful and fun strategy to implement follow-up mentoring post workshop, especially when working with busy faculty schedules. One way to think about it is that you already spent all that effort planning and running your workshop, and you want it to stick. One way to help ensure students experience the benefits of high-impact practices like IBL is to help your attendees when they are implementing your workshop ideas.

Want to learn more? Read Chuck and Sandra's paper super-detailed analysis of what we did to create a supportive community using feedback loops, which helped us achieve high response rates. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0120-9

"This workshop for 35 college mathematics instructors used online and in-person communities to provide support to participants during the post-workshop period of “refreezing.” Almost all workshop attendees participated in “e-mentoring” (94%), primarily through a productive, engaging group email listserv. By combining qualitative coding of message content with the techniques of social network analysis, we reveal how facilitators and participants on the group listserv provided intellectual and emotional support, as well as positive reinforcement through feedback loops. The analysis also shows how the facilitators made this a helpful group and maintained participant engagement through frequent encouragement, deliberate community building, and thoughtfully timed responses."

Edit: One pitfall to avoid giving up too early. Sometimes you will send out an email and no one will respond. And then you try it again, and no one will respond. Don't give up. Keep on asking nicely, perhaps send out some info, or share something from your class, and end with open invitations.

Simplicity

2023-02-04T10:27:00.000-05:00

“Simplicity is an exact medium between too little and too much.“ - Joshua Reynold

One lesson I have learned from photography is the importance of simplicity. In photography, one point of view in composing a photo is the process of elimination. You eliminate objects in your frame until you feel like you have a compelling image.

Leaning Oak, Central Coast CA (copyright Stan Yoshinobu)

The next photo shows what the scene looks like. It was taken at a different time and day. An arrow is pointing to the tree in the first picture.

A view of the larger scene

Wide angle views take in nearly everything in the scene. Wide angle lenses are "greedy" lenses and they include so many things. This is useful in some cases, but in many cases including everything makes the scene less compelling. There is just too much in the scene, no story, a documentation of what is there in a literal sense.

The process of elimination is in many ways the opposite of teaching. Especially in courses like Calculus, we have included so many problems, so many techniques, and every class has to cover so much.

Teaching is complex. Intricate concepts, big ideas, lots of students, assignments, deadlines, planning ahead, grading, random stuff that messes up your plans.

And then there is the pressure to innovate in your teaching. Trying new things, different things, adding technology, updating assessments.... Don’t get me wrong. This is all good and we need to innovate and continue to find ways to improve the human experience of education.

But there is a simple truth at the root of all this. It comes down to the students, their engagement with the ideas, and the instructor and the course structure supporting students. All the rest are mostly details, important details, but in the end those other things are either supports or requirements.

Does it matter that we use IBL/active learning and focus on the details and carefully execute our plans? Yes, of course!

So what is the point? We can go to far by adding too many layers or we have too many assignments and things for students to do.

I’ve talked to instructors who out of enthusiasm and excitement have flipped classes, WebWork homework, Perusall assignments, recitation assignments, hours of videos to watch each week, practice problems, writing assignments, group assignments, midterms, practice midterms, and more. This overwhelms students and creates a course requiring double the work. The question I get asked is why are my students not buying into my class? You're asking them to do more than they can handle and the experience is more painful than enjoyable and fulfilling.

There can be too much of a good thing, such as watching all your favorite movies in one sitting. At some point you aren’t enjoying it and neither are many of your students. In teaching, if you’re managing a wide range of course management tasks and students are running from one thing to another, then you may be including too many teaching element into your course.

"To truly cherish the things that are important to you, you must first discard those that have outlived their purpose." - Marie Kondo

What I try and do is mentally start with student engagement in class. I focus on what they need to learn in terms of content and dispositions. Then the math tasks (curriculum) are aimed at those things. The assignments and assessment layers are added aligning with the goals. From there you finish with the logistics, etc. and you have your course. That helps me see what to cut, what to exclude. Then I go back to my over-engineered course and take out the things that are not needed or at the very least revise them down.

This doesn't mean my classes are simple or bare bones. That's a risk, too - a course that merely shows the content and gives multiple choice tests. Simplicity is about finding the right balance between all the things you wish you could accomplish in your class and a real-world experience that is fulfilling for the instructor and students. It's focusing on making the best choices you can make for student learning and growth and letting go of trying to do everything. The coverage issue is a real thing. We all struggle with it, and what helps me stay centered is focusing squarely on students, the math, their interaction with the math, and their long-term intellectual growth.

In short, you gotta choose.

The great 8 pillars of IBL teaching and grading for growth

2022-06-15T13:48:00.007-04:00

It's time to connect the pillars of IBL teaching and grading for growth (alternative grading). The idea here is that these two sets of pillars go together and help provide a holistic framework of teaching. The combo is better than the individual components. Peanut butter & jelly. Peas & carrots. Mac & cheese.

IBL pillars:

Deep engagement in rich mathematics.
Frequent opportunities for students to collaborate with peers and their instructor(s).
Instructor inquiry into student thinking.
Instructor focus on equity.

Alternative grading pillars:

Clearly defined standards.
Helpful feedback.
Marks indicate progress.
Reattempts without penalty.

Both IBL and grading for growth are frameworks or "big tents," within which are a set of tools for each. Instructors can select tools to address the needs and challenges in their teaching context.

When you are planning your next course, use the great 8 pillars!

Disclaimer The number of pillars can change over time. So this might be the fab five or the nine pillars someday. The number doesn't matter. The combination of IBL teaching and grading for growth is what matters.

Grading for growth in large classes: a first attempt

2022-06-01T12:16:00.001-04:00

Here's the context. 1000 students are in first-year Linear Algebra, split into 7 lecture sections with 7 different instructors, and 14 TAs, who teach dozens of tutorials/recitations. That's a lot of people!

We started the term online due to the omicron wave in winter 2022, and then taught the second half of the term with a mix of in-person and online. At the beginning of the term, we did not know when or if we would return to in-person learning, and had to setup the course in early January with the uncertainties of the pandemic. This post focuses on the assessments for the course and some initial thoughts.

TL;DR You can implement grading for growth even in large, coordinated courses.

Here the assessment setup:

First a major constraint... An in-person final is mandatory and "owned" by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and has to be at least 35% of the grade. The other 65% of the grade was based on the items below. Also note that in Canada, 80% is an A-, 70% is a B-, and so on. So the weight of the final is not as immense as it would be in the U.S. In the U.S. 25% is a rough conversion.
I gave a two-part final. Part 1 tests core standards worth 25% of the course grade. Part 2 of the final had challenging problems worth 10% intended for students who want to improve their grade to an A or A+.
In lieu of midterms (which would have been online for at least one of them), students submitted 4 graded group reports. (Two additional assignments were reflective writing assignments for a total of 6 reports.) Group size was set at 2-3 students, and some groups were allowed to grow to 4 due to special circumstances (e.g. adding a student to a group).
Group reports (30%) were submitted online (Gradescope) and the TAs and instructors graded 2 or 3 of the 4 or 5 problems. The ungraded problems were checked for completeness. Problems that were graded, were graded with a rubric for mathematical correctness and presentation. The entire assignment was out of 10 points, and written feedback was given to students.
Students could resubmit group reports at least once. For the early group assignments, we had the capacity to accept up to 3 resubmissions. The last group assignment, which was due near the end of the term, allowed us to accept one resubmission.
Online homework (20%) was assigned on MathMatize, and the due date for all assignments was set for the end of term. Students were allowed to redo problems as many times as needed, and were given suggested completion dates that matched the pace of the course.
Because the course was a flipped, IBL course, students were required to do reading assignments (15%) before class. Reading assignments were done on Perusall, where they were graded using "threshold" grading with instant feedback. If students made 3 or more comments they would get credit for the assignment. Reading assignments had a hard due date, because we expected students to read the sections before we would do activities in lectures. The 4 lowest scores were dropped, which allows students some flexibility.

Lectures were centered on activities to support student learning of the core ideas. Tutorials were a mix of activities, practicing basics, and preparing students for their group reports. I won't go into further details about how classes were organized, since the focus of this post is grading for growth.

Students could pass the course if they did all of groups reports, online homework, and reading assignments. Students would need to perform well enough on the final exam to earn an A or B.

The Whys?

I wanted to accomplish a few things. One is to reset incentives towards learning and intrinsic values. Another is to center honest, hard working students who want to learn, and reduce incentives for cheating. A third is to avoid using creepy proctoring software (where students have to ask a proctor for permission to move if they need to vomit), which also use biased algorithms.

One aspect of grading for growth that I appreciate is that the honest students, who do their own work and submit their mistakes are not penalized or behind, compared to people who lookup answers or pay for services that give them the answers. Students who make mistakes receive feedback, and grow from the process. These students appreciated being able to update their reports and fix issues. Their grades aren't being negatively affected by those who cheat. The students who cheat will learn less and be less prepared for the final, future courses, their lives, and careers. Online cheating is a reality at the University of Toronto and sadly almost everywhere, when things are setup the old way with timed, rigid, high-stakes (online) tests as the bulk of the grade.

The pandemic is a major factor still (and will be next year too, imo), and impacts students and their families. The gradient of risk also skews heavily towards the more vulnerable and marginalized. Grading for growth with opportunities to resubmit work without penalty gives students more time to learn the material during the semester and crucially creates a more level playing field. If students get sick or have to deal with a family emergency, flexibility is built into the course to help students get their work done during the term. It should not matter, if a student learned something in week 8 vs. week 10.

Students who don't invest in the learning will not do as well on the final exam or in their future work (or life). The final exam is one of the ways that students are held accountable during the term. More broadly, students need to learn the course material as well as learn how to learn, and the course philosophy is talked about with students. Students will need both the content knowledge and the improved thinking in their lives, and cheating/looking up answers won't help them become better and smarter.

Group reports are focused on why questions or having students explain why things work the way they do. Sample questions on group reports:

Give examples of a plane in $\mathbb{R}^3$, using vector form, normal form, and standard/cartesian form. Explain the advantages and disadvantages of each representation.

The setting for this problem is $\mathbb{R}^3$. Suppose you have a plane $P$ and two vectors $\vec a$ and $\vec b$ in $P$. The task is about the general question, ``If you add two vectors in a plane, is the result still in the plane?'' More specifically, using examples, diagrams, and sentences, find characteristics of planes, $P$, such that $\vec a + \vec b \in P$. Additionally, find characteristics of planes, $P$, such that $\vec a + \vec b \notin P$.

Some things I'd like to change The reason why we have to have group reports vs. individual reports is due to TA hour limitations. Without constraints I would have students submit individual reports and have all problems graded. But that is way beyond the budget for TA time.

Practically speaking, reducing the number of group reports to 2 per term could allow for individual reports, with 1 rewrite each. The pros would be that there would be more individual feedback, and less incentive for students to divvy up group report problems and focus on fewer problems. The downside of going down to 2 reports is that you have fewer topics covered and higher stakes per report. There are other options such as 3 reports done in pairs or 3 reports done individually. I'll have to sort this out this summer. One takeaway here is that there are options and tradeoffs.

Reading assignments and online assignments generally work as they are intended. They focus on basic skills and fundamental concepts. The one issue that is specific to the University of Toronto is regarding Perusall and reading assignments. There are local tutoring services in Toronto that sell Perusall comments that customers can copy-paste into the system. Some of these get flagged as "plagiarism" by the Perusall system, but students can make slight edits and work around the issue. One way to get around this is to switch to reflective writing assignments submitted via Canvas and grade these for completeness.

Tweaking the final into more sections to make clear what the standards are and what students are expected to know for the final is another area that will be worked on. One idea is to have three parts to the final with specific themes.

Part 1: 10% of course grade is based on core skills (e.g. computing determinants, determining if a set of vectors is linearly independent.)
Part 2: 10% of course grade on demonstrating conceptual understanding of core concepts (e.g. answering concept questions via short answer or sentences.)
Part 3: 15% of course grade on applying ideas and skills to solve more challenging problems. (Prove why a given matrix is/is not diagonalizable.)

Students will be given a final exam guide with the details, sample problems, and a list of standards that will be covered on the exam. Students who do all the term work would go into the final with 65% of their course grade in hand (or a course grade equal to a C). Getting 80% of parts 1 and 2, will net 16% or a total score of 81% in the course, which is an A-. Students who want an A or A+ will need to solve some or all of the Part 3 problems (or get 100% on parts 1 and 2 to get an A).

Setting aside the details of the scheme above, the main takeaway is that instructors can set percentages for the term work and final exam parts in ways to fit the assumptions and values of their institution. What I did was try my best to think of something that would work and then I'll adjust as I learn and get feedback.

Places to start A couple easy places to start with grading for growth is to make homework online with infinite attempts (WebWork, MathMatize, or whatever is bundled with your textbook) and setting up a standards-based final exam using. I am unable to implement a standards-based (formerly called mastery-based) final at UofT due to policy restrictions.

With standards-based finals what I did in the past is to write a Part 1 of the final with the core standards, where students need to earn 90% on it in order to keep their grade going into the final OR earn a C- (if the incoming grade is below a C-). Students scoring less than 90% on Part 1 could have their grade go down on a sliding scale up to a whole letter grade. Part 1 has core standards, such as basic skills and computations. The theme of Part 1 is "If you pass this class with a C-, you should know these things." (What is on Part 1 needs to be transparent to students with ample opportunities to practice.)

Part 2 of a standards-based final are challenging problems that are opportunities for students to demonstrate that they learned the material deeply and can raise their grade up to an A. Part 2 problems can be proofs, explanations, or more challenging problem-solving questions.

Again I could not implement this due to policy constraints, but standards-based finals are a way to start without having to change everything. Keeping all the other parts the same, and using a standards-based final is a reasonable starting place. Once you get that down, then you can move onto other parts of the assessment scheme.

Final thoughts I used grading for growth in small classes (enrollment 25-35) for many years, so the idea wasn't new to me. Transitioning to coordinating large courses meant focusing on things like group reports, a "tiered" final exam, and then thinking about how to make things work within the TA hours constraints. The smaller the class, the more options you have.

One advantage of having a TA hours budget is that you have to think about what would work without spending all your time on grading. It's not ideal or "excellent," whatever that means, but it's better. And better is good. More TA hours would also be good :)

If you are teaching a small course and have no TAs, one idea is to think of your own budget in time. Set aside a number of hours you would spend marking per week or per term, and then figure out what could work in that time budget.

I know that for many it is big step to use alternative grading, but there are major benefits to switching that needs to be emphasized again and again. When you align assessment with learning and implement IBL or active learning, it's a much better experience for students and makes the entire course more aligned with the goals of education. It brings us closer to our vision of humanistic math education. Thus, it is worth the effort to go down this route.

Resource Check out the Grading Conference group, their slack channel, and work with a community of educators working on this grading for growth. They are a fun, friendly group, and will help you get started.

Resources for Professional Developers (short post)

2021-10-02T09:32:00.002-04:00

Note: I've been backlogged for a few months from moving and starting at a new job. More posts on IBL topics coming.

Last August, I gave the Leitzel Lecture at MAA MathFest. In that talk, I shared some resources for professional developers. Here's a link to a webpage on the AIBL site with a range of resources.

Some items you find are:

N things to consider when facilitating a workshop
AIBL Handbook for Online Professional Development: Lessons Learned from PRODUCT Workshops
AIBL Workshop Modules for course coordinators running department-level workshops on IBL
Self-paced course on Race in America
Links to blog posts on equity and inclusion
Explainers and evaluation reports for about what IBL workshops are and evidence about their effectiveness.

Umami and Teaching: "Feeling Closer to the Teacher of My Vision"

2021-04-03T13:08:00.002-04:00

Umami is a Japanese term from the culinary world described as meaty, savory deliciousness that deepens flavor (Link). Umami as an idea has other forms. For example, umami can also be the first sip of coffee in the morning. Ahhh! Or it can be taking a refreshing hot shower after a long hike on a warm summer day. Ahhh!

We usually talk about IBL teaching in terms of benefits to students, the key features, or the nuances of how to implement it well. What faculty gain is talked about less, and is often overlooked. For many of us teaching is a calling, and it's not only because we love our subjects. The enjoyment of teaching is in meaningful human interactions, students and instructors working together towards to learn, discover, and grow as humans.

One of the big reasons why instructors should use IBL methods is because it's enjoyable and fulfilling for instructors. A centerpiece of IBL teaching is building community, and when students and instructors work as a team, then the magic happens. Enabling the dreams of students and transforming their lives is a great thought to wake up to in the morning. That's a form of umami within the grasp of every teacher.

The evaluation team (Sandra Laursen, Devan Daly, Tim Archie, Chuck Hayward) for the NSF PRODUCT asked participants, what did you gain personally from employing IBL methods? Below are a some responses from participants about umami and teaching. Enjoy!

“I personally enjoy going to class more each day. When lecturing I sometimes found myself dragging myself to the classroom with particularly challenging groups. In IBL classrooms, I am generally excited to see what my students will do each day.”
“Teaching using IBL methods keeps me excited about teaching, helps me see things from different angles and I learn new things from students all the time.”
“When I can do it, I feel really proud and energized--feel closer to the teacher of my vision.”
“I feel that the IBL workshop helped me adapt my pedagogy in small ways to try to create equity and make my students feel that this was their classroom and that I believed in them unconditionally. I held those beliefs prior to the workshop, but the workshop opened my creative thinking to all the ways I could adapt small (and large) behaviors to support my goals.”
“I enjoyed my time in class more, was able to interact more with the students and develop deeper relationships with each.”
“I've learned more about the material than I thought I had left to know.”
“I found it much more enjoyable designing a course around IBL methods, and implementing these methods in my classroom. There's only so much you can do with a lecture, and it becomes boring after a while. It was exciting when students surprised me with the answers, both correct and incorrect.”
“I enjoy teaching more, and find my work has much more value. I'm not just teaching students calculus, I'm changing what they think mathematics is and their views of themselves and their own view of their ability to do mathematics.”
“It was a lot of fun! It felt like my students and I were working together and that they were like mathematicians in training/apprenticeships.”

The case for virtual conferences and workshops post pandemic

2021-03-01T19:56:00.000-05:00

The future is not written. We can secure the prosperity of future generations through our actions today. We can make choices that determine how we ultimately manage the climate and human climate crises, AKA the twin crises, of our time. We need both policy and individual actions to address these crises, and while individual actions are small in terms of contributions to the CO2 footprint, changing norms and influencing the policy requires individuals to take part in the process by raising awareness. We influence the people in our circles.

Everyone wants to see friends, family, and colleagues in person and enjoy activities we can do together. Conference travel has taken me to places I wouldn’t have traveled to otherwise, and I have been able to meet new people and learn new ideas via work-related travel. No one wants to travel more than I do, and I understand how going virtual impacts people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warming_stripes

But my thinking has drastically changed the past few years, and now I’ve come to the conclusion, where I strongly believe we need to do things differently in higher education. We should plan virtual meetings and conferences post pandemic as the default (with allowances for regional hubs). More and more faculty are concerned about our role in the climate crisis, and some believe we should do our part to reduce our carbon footprint and set an example for other sectors of society. My individual actions are tiny compared to what professional societies and institutions can do, and purchasing an electric car or reducing my air travel is minuscule in relation to what the math profession or the larger education sector contributes.

How much CO2? For one of the 2019 IBL workshops offered by AIBL, the total flight miles was about 90,000 miles traveled by just 33 participants and facilitators. These flights created about 24 tonnes of CO2, and does not include airport transfers, conference room service, and if family or significant others also traveled.

Conferences create orders of magnitude more carbon footprint than a single, small workshop. One large example is the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU). “Take the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) — the world’s largest Earth- and space-science conference — held in San Francisco, California, last December. We calculate that its 28,000 delegates travelled 285 million kilometres there and back — almost twice the distance between Earth and the Sun. In doing so, they emitted the equivalent of about 80,000 tonnes of CO2 (tCO2e).” (Link). The Joint Math Meetings or MathFest are much smaller, yet still could account for thousands of tonnes of CO2.

I think most people understand generally why this matters. David Wallace-Wells wrote about some terrifying studies in his book, “The Uninhabitable Earth.” Half of all CO2 emitted in history has been during the last 30 years. In one study just the difference between 1.5C and 2.0C and only looking at air pollution (and not other factors) results in an estimated 153 +/- 43 million deaths. This is unconscionable, especially given that poorer, developing regions and BIPOC communities will bear the greatest burden, and they have contributed far less to the crisis (Link to cited article). Not only is climate the largest problem we have faced, it is also the largest social justice problem we have ever faced. What scientists have learned is that we are on the path past +2C, and that climate change is a dial, not a binary on-off switch. The less carbon we emit, the less suffering there will be, and humans control how far we turn this dial.

Another major reason why I believe in the value and promise of virtual options is equity. There are a handful of groups of people that often are not able to participate in professional development workshops or travel to conferences. These are people with small children or other people in their care, people with health issues or disabilities that prevent them from traveling, non-tenure track faculty, and instructors who do not have access to travel funding, who often work at 2-year colleges and regional institutions.

Even before the pandemic, people in these categories were not able to travel to conferences or workshops. For those who have been able to travel in the past for work and are looking forward to doing it again, imagine all the people working in our profession who have not had such opportunities. During the pandemic some of them were able to attend virtual JMM or a virtual IBL workshop, and if things open back to the way they were, these groups will once again be locked out. Even if we had the technology to create zero-carbon air travel, equity will persist as an issue.

One overlooked consequence of going back to 2019 is that it puts the onus on individuals to try and navigate systemic issues. Individuals would have to choose between the climate or attending a conference to advance their careers. Some individuals will not be able to attend, and all they can do it email the organizers, if there will be remote participation options. This is one way systems perpetuate social problems, and hence it is the responsibility of professional societies and institutions of higher ed to work on these issues and develop systemic solutions to system induced, contributed, or created problems.

One aspect of addressing the climate and equity crises is the essential role of policy. In our small corner of the world of math associations, policies could be crafted that help us do better in both reduction of our carbon footprint and increasing access for all people in the math profession. Otherwise, we will continue to add to climate problems and maintain social inequities.

Biennials, regional hubs and virtual attendance can significantly reduce emissions (Link). Carbon offsets can be purchased to mitigate absolutely necessary travel (and could be built into the cost of registration fees. I personally use Native Energy). I We can also develop virtual events during conferences and workshops to include activities for informal community building, recreating some of the valuable informal time at in-person conferences. We can innovate how we organize these sessions and utilize technology to make these experiences check all the boxes.

One oversimplified mental exercise is to ask, "Would I rather spend part of our carbon budget on work travel or on visiting family once a year?" This is not a real choice. It's an exercise in engaging in defining priorities and attempting to connect to our values.

As a profession we say we care about climate and equity, and if we go back to the way things were in 2019 after the pandemic, then it’s tantamount to looking the other way. Looking the other way normalizes human suffering and inequities, which is exactly the opposite of the collectivist values needed to pull us together to deal sufficiently with the twin crises of our time. So let’s not look the other way and languish in complacency, because we need a more empathic, active response. Let’s look forward and think creatively to recreate better and more inclusive ways to meet and do our work.

IBL Rhythm Changes (IBL-Jazz Analogy)

2021-02-26T18:03:00.000-05:00

Rhythm Changes is a common 32-bar chord progression in jazz, originating as the chord progression for George Gershwin's "I Got Rhythm."

Jazz is a useful analogy to some aspects of IBL teaching. You have your big goals and plans for what to do in class, and as the teacher you are the holder of the vision for the course. But what happens in class depends on the people there. Two sections of the same course can often be different on a day-to-day basis. What an instructor does depends on what happened the class before, and being able to "improvise" in the moment to take advantage of what students are saying and doing. That is, be open and able to dance with the spirit.

The word improvisation sometimes has the connotation that things are just made up on the spot. That's not the case in Jazz improvisation or teaching, and we can unpack what improvisation means. In Jazz improvisation is a studied, practiced, musical art form. Improvisation is within a context, a set chord progression, and there are standard practices and key notes. From these "ingredients" comes the creative artistic part, which I cannot explain and merely enjoy as a fan of Jazz.

The connection to teaching is that we have our plans for the days and weeks of the course. What happens in a lesson or a specific activity depends on what students do and where they are at. This is where teaching improvisation (or flexibility) comes in. Depending on what a student says, we adapt to maximize the learning opportunities present. Mistakes, half starts, full solutions, alternative takes, are all valued discoveries and items for discussion. The students respond to the teacher, and the teacher adapts to the students. The whole group tries to do math and create learning.

"In music, silence is more important than sound." - Miles Davis

We can teach using silence, and teaching using silence can mean several different things. One is to ensure students have time to think for themselves. Another is to let students to discuss with one another, where the teacher is not talking and instead listening to student thinking. A third meaning of teaching with silence is letting problems do the talking. This is when a rich task has the imbedded learning through engagement in the problem-solving process. Rather than the teacher explaining it all, the process of working through a problem can be a way knowledge and skills are learned.

Silence can go too far, of course. A song with 3 minutes of pure silence isn't music. I'm arguing for a balance of saying enough to keep things going or set the stage, but not too much that I'm doing all the playing and students are sitting on the side.

So what about our detailed plans? Miles Davis might say, "So what." Plans are preparation, and we should expect to be flexible and present in the moment. Plans are the practice, the setup, the choices about what we're working on, and how we're going to work together. If things go well, our students have the time and space to comp and solo in class, and we learn to work together as an ensemble be more creative, thoughtful, and respectful.

IBL is like Jazz, and one of our jobs as teachers is to be prepared for rhythm changes.

IBL Workshops Work! Validating Our Theory of Change with the Theory of Planned Behavior (Preliminary)

2021-01-28T10:12:00.002-05:00

This blog post is co-written with Dr. Tim Archie, CU Boulder, Ethnography and Evaluation Research, Tim.Archie@Colorado.EDU, and this is work done by him and Dr. Sandra Laursen, Devan Daly, Chuck Hayward, CU Boulder. This effort is funded by collaborative NSF grants DUE-1525077, DUE 1525058.

---

“A lever is a simple machine used to move an object at one location by applying a force somewhere else. When we try something and see that it is working, we have gained leverage on the problem.” -Levers for Change, AAAS Link

In this piece, we look at one of the key levers for change, professional development workshops in higher education. We'll start with our theory of change, and then share results from our research team. Specifically the data is based on participants, who attended intensive 4-day IBL workshops. These workshops provided intensive training to more than 500 college math instructors, impacting hundreds of courses and thousands of students per year. Peer-reviewed articles will be published separately, and if you have questions about technical aspects of this work, please contact Tim. In this piece, we focus on the broad story about how professional development can change instructor behavior in the classroom.

Our Theory of Change is that instructors need professional development to make the switch from passive instructional methods to creating active, student-centered, inquiry-based learning environments. This professional development must address instructors’ knowledge and skills to carry out IBL in their own classrooms, but also their beliefs about instruction, and must mesh with their own identities as teachers and understanding of their own students and teaching contexts. Achieving substantive change in teaching can be addressed via intensive summer workshops that provide these resources and a strong, steady support system that follows each instructor through the evolution of their professional career. Yet we also need to find ways to build the pipeline of instructors who are aware of and receptive to IBL methods. To widely offer these varied forms of professional development will require a larger, more flexible group of skilled professional developers than is now available. Building capacity to design and deliver effective professional development is necessary for increasing uptake in college mathematics.

College math instructors are not fully trained in teaching. We may receive some training as TAs, and then we are off to start our teaching careers. Active, student-centered teaching methods, such as IBL, require skills and practices for maximizing effectiveness. While some instructors are able to learn and develop these skills on their own or by attending conferences, professional development workshops can provide a big boost to help instructors new (or newish) to IBL teaching.

The IBL workshop is a 4-strand model. The fours strands are (1) analyzing video of IBL classes, (2) discussing the nuts and bolts of running an IBL class, (3) developing a target IBL course, and (4) studying articles from the mathematics education literature. The four strands were designed to address specific obstacles instructors face in their classrooms.

How do we know a workshop works? To answer this question, we need to define two terms, IBL capacity, and IBL intensity.

IBL capacity is an aggregate of several variables. It includes a participant’s beliefs about the effectiveness of IBL, knowledge of IBL, and skill in using IBL. What the evaluation team did is ask participants to self-rate their capacity before the workshop, immediately after the workshop and one year after the workshop.

Our data show in the figure below that workshops increase IBL capacity. We see a statistically significant increase in capacity measures from pre to post workshop and that these gains are sustained through to the one year follow-up.

(The slight drop from post-workshop to follow-up is not statistically significant.)

IBL intensity is a way to measure how much or how intensely an instructor is using IBL. We know the workshops are effective because a large percentage of participants, 94%, reported using IBL methods after attending the workshop. We also asked participants about the frequency of use of a range of teaching practices (e.g. group work, student presentations, lectures, etc.) before they attended the workshop and again one year after they attended the workshop. Higher scores indicate more intensive use of IBL and lower scores indicate lower IBL use. Based on their responses, we created an IBL intensity scale shown on the y-axis of the chart below. We see a statistically significant increase in IBL intensity from pre-workshop to follow-up.

Crucially there is more to the story on top of the increases to IBL capacity and intensity. The evaluation team also conducted additional analysis to explain more precisely how the workshops work, using the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen 1991). The theory of planned behavior path model explains how the IBL workshops are influential in changing teaching practices and the relationships between IBL capacity, IBL intensity, and some other key factors.

Let's go down the left side of the model. Belief that IBL is effective is a factor that influences teaching. Simply put, the stronger your belief is in the effectiveness of IBL, the more likely you intend to implement IBL, which in turn affects IBL intensity. The IBL workshop has a strand that provides an opportunity to learn about the research supporting the use of IBL, see successful examples of IBL, and learn about real-world stories of student success.

Subjective norms include factors such as department or institutional support and supportive colleagues. For instance, the more supportive your department chair is, the higher your intent to implement is, which then affects IBL intensity. Generally, the more supportive the environment is, the more instructors use IBL. Subjective norms can also be a barrier. If you lack support, then you are less likely to implement. Norms matter, because teaching is a cultural activity, and local environments play a role.

The last factor on the left side is perceived behavior control. This is the perception of how much you control your behavior, which is highly dependent on IBL capacity. If you feel confident in your skills and knowledge how to implement IBL, then this directly impacts both intent and IBL use. This is where IBL workshops play a direct role. Skills and practices are central topics of the workshops, and as shown we have data supporting participant gains in IBL capacity.

There are other contextual factors that play a role. These factors are prior IBL experience, whether a course is coordinated (in a way that is supportive of IBL), and class size. All of these factors can potentially be barriers, such as coordination that steers instructors away from IBL or large class sizes.

Factors such as gender, career stage, rank and position, and institutional type do not influence IBL capacity or IBL intensity (i.e. were controlled for). This is a striking result, because what this means is that anyone can teach via IBL anywhere! While individuals do face different challenges in the field due to their identity, group differences are not detected in the data. Of course identity matters in teaching, but what we know from experience and from data that no matter what group you are in, it is possible to teach via IBL in whatever setting. This means that the challenges we face are surmountable, and the focus should be on finding ways to support instructors.

Technical Question: What does r = 0.18 mean in the relationship between attitudes that IBL works and intent to use IBL? These are standardized regression coefficients which describe the relative strength of association between an independent and dependent variable. Standardized coefficients have standard deviations as their units, making the coefficients comparable when variables have different levels of measurement. Please also see “An Effect Size Primer: A Guide for Clinicians and Researchers” https://doi.org/10.1037/14805-020

Summary of key findings

The theory of planned behavior model explains 21% of the variability of behavior change (IBL intensity). (Note: R^2 equal to 21% is a significant result for social science. For more see this Link)
Workshops increase IBL capacity.
Workshops increase IBL intensity.
Department norms and institutional support matter for better or worse.
Other factors like class size, course coordination, environment, course coordination, beliefs, play a role influencing IBL intensity.
Anyone can teach IBL anywhere (under the right conditions)

Consequently, we can confidently say that IBL workshops work. Instructors change practices in meaningful ways. We can measure IBL capacity and intensity, and further we can see more clearly how the pieces fit together in a coherent story. Some policy implications include increased and sustained investment in professional development workshops, providing more support for faculty to access training, conducting outreach by individuals and professional societies, targeted efforts to inform and train department chairs and course coordinators, and investing in addressing institutional barriers to adoption of IBL methods (e.g reducing class size, mitigating the effects of large class sizes).

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.

Archie, T., Laursen, S., Hayward, C. N., Yoshinobu, S., & Daly, D. (2020, November 5-7). Findings from 10 years of math instructor teaching professional development [Link to Poster]. This Changes Everything, AAC&U Virtual Conference on Transforming STEM Higher Education.

Ferguson, C. J. (2016). An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Methodological issues and strategies in clinical research (p. 301–310). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14805-020

Why I Use Dr. Y or Professor Y When I Teach

2021-01-08T21:05:00.004-05:00

When I started teaching, I was given some advice to use my first name with my students. The idea was to be more friendly and make things more comfortable in class. Many of us, perhaps nearly off of us, got that message. I didn’t think about it too hard then, and I did that for many years, all the while not knowing that what I was doing was making things harder for women in academia.

Last month Dr. Jill Biden was the target of a disdainful WSJ op ed, basically saying she’s not a real doctor and full of sexism and anti-intellectual tones. It’s one example of a long history of sexist put down of successful, smart women in the academy.

Men get to be Dr. ___, even if they use Stan or Paul in class, but women get called Ms.___ or Alice, and it’s not always respected or assumed that the woman is a Dr. ___ and an expert.

This is how systemic biases can work. We do things without knowing that it undermines a group of people. A well intended suggestion I received early in my career, which sounded like good advice at the time, actually had some hidden( to me) negative aspects that oppresses women in higher education. Later I learned about the biases that make it so that women have to work harder and deal with more, and the extra challenges and burdens women have to deal with.

Consequently, I decided years ago to use Dr. Y or professor Y with my students. It’s out of solidarity with women and minoritized groups, and it’s with the long-term goal of contributing to shifting norms towards equity and social justice. If we all did it, then that’d be the standard way students would address *all* faculty.

In countries like Japan, all teachers in elementary and secondary schools, professors, medical doctors, other leaders are given the title, “sensei.” It is an honorable title for those who teach or help others in society. Japan is not a society that earns high marks for gender equity, so I’m not trying to say that the term is some magic bullet. Thinking about what sensei means in Japan, however, does provide useful insights. Doctor can mean more than one thing, and we generally lack norms that could help our education system be more inclusive and equitable for women.

The closest thing we have to sensei is professor, although professor has been earmarked as a rank. For those who are lecturers and without a Ph.D., we do not have a professional title. Given all this, I argue that it is appropriate for all college instructors to use the title “professor” in classes, just as sensei is used by K-college instructors in Japan. Words and titles can mean more than one thing, and their meaning can be easily understood in context.

Thus, I invite all my colleagues to consider using Dr. or professor with our students, if you haven’t done so already, because it contributes to shifting norms in a decisively positive direction. We could explain to our students why we are using our titles, and why it’s important to respect all educators for gender equity. Where possible, we can use our titles, identities, and positions at our institutions to level the playing field for women in higher education.

How much professional development is enough?

2021-01-07T18:14:00.002-05:00

This post is a summary of some research findings for a series of workshops we have conducted with NSF PRODUCT. The evaluation team for the project is Dr. Sandra Laursen, Dr. Tim Archie, and Devan Daly, CU Boulder E&ER (Link to work on professional development, link to people). The talk was presented at the Joint Mathematics Meetings on January 7, 2021.

One of the many research questions they studied is, "How much is enough professional development?"

Some key points:

We offered two general types of workshops.

One week, residential or online via zoom summer intensive workshops (IWS). These were 30 hours+ of workshop time with a year of follow-up email mentoring.
Shorter traveling workshops (TWS), where two facilitators would travel to a conference or department and offer a workshop that lasted from a few hours to a day or day and a half.

IBL capacity is a measure of skills and practices related to IBL teaching. It's sort of like a battery pack for teaching. More capacity means more skills and knowledge.
One result from the analysis is that both formats had a positive and significant impact on increasing IBL capacity.
IWS participants implement a more intensive version of IBL compared to TWS participants.
TWS reached a different subset of the teaching population and was effective at increasing interest in IBL.
TWS reaching different subset of teaching population is due in part by outreach efforts to send facilitators to groups that are not doing IBL yet. For example, sending teams to 2-year colleges. The IBL community in math roots in the Mathematical Association of American, which skews toward 4-year and advanced degree granting institutions. Travel funding can be a barrier for IWS, and TWS commitment level is lower. (It's a commitment to spend a week of summer at an IBL Workshop.)
Rather than the dosage analogy, a another analogy is TWS and IWS are different tools, and could be used strategically for different main purposes.
Takeaway: Use TWS to increase awareness, interest, reach new instructors, and get people trying IBL methods. Use IWS to increase depth of IBL implementation.

IBL Blog Playlist (updated)

2020-12-16T22:56:00.007-05:00

A really short post... I've kept playlist of IBL blog posts organized by topic. Posts go back to 2011, and the idea behind the playlist is to help people find some of the more popular posts, instead of having to dig around. Here's the link: The IBL Blog playlist. Take care!

The case for love, empathy, respect especially during a pandemic

2020-11-18T11:47:00.002-05:00

A global pandemic is raging. Children are stuck in online school, and teachers are struggling under the added weight of teaching online or in unsafe conditions, some who have little kids at home 24/7. Social problems are boiling over. Democratic norms are crumbling, and we struggle to coordinate even basic efforts to bring the pandemic under control. Teachers and students are trying to get through their courses, but with the world upside down. This is the context of education in 2020.

If that's not enough, stories of schools giving out more Fs during the pandemic are making the rounds. This makes me ask, "What are we doing to be giving more Fs during a pandemic and social crises?" Failing grades are clearly a bad sign, and something is seriously not working.

When a student is doing poorly, it can be for a number of reasons. If we are quick to judge them, it's really easy to blame the student. It's easy say it's their fault for not showing up or not doing the work. Deficit model sometimes kicks in stronger, and maybe the student just isn't "motivated" or "lacks the confidence" or innate ability. It is easy to judge. Online or virtual teaching makes it even harder for human connection, and I conjecture easier to be more deficit model oriented.

I remind myself that we are in a pandemic, and there is real pain and suffering out there in all our communities. People are struggling. They may have lost a loved one to Covid-19, or they may be the target of racial, gender or other bias. They may be feeling the weight of poverty, or feel the stress of a family business going out of business. A student could be lonely, sitting in from of computer screen all day, trying to learn in an isolated environment that just feels worse and worse as the weeks go by.

In reality, we don't actually know any student's full story, and this is especially the case if an instructor uses teacher-centered methods. Sure some students come to office hours and good teacher-student interactions can form in these situations. But generally speaking, the less students talk in class and the less they feel comfortable talking, the less likely it is that an instructor will have a good sense for who a person is. Even in active learning, it can be a challenge.

Love, empathy, respect in teaching is a few related things put together. It is a visible inclusivity image to remind us all to be kind and respectful to one another. It's also a way to signal to students, that you care about equity and inclusion, and that all students are welcome. And yet another way to think about love, empathy, respect is in our attitudes as teachers towards our students as humans. Love, empathy, respect is a mindset of being understanding. This idea is called a strengths based approach. That is, we don't assume that poor performance or lack of engagement is due to some deficit, and instead we start from a position of emphasizing student strengths.

It's not that hard really to get started. It comes down to listening. What I do is listen to students, and try and understand what the situation is. Then work with students to find ways to get them through the challenges. Using practices like active learning and mastery grading puts my course in a better spot to be more compassionate, while being fair to everyone. Giving extra chances to try a problem or assignment, is part of the standard package.

Here's a good story. A student of color named Kim (a pseudonym) failed calculus multiple times. Kim took the class 3 times and failed each of those times. That's three Fs. Most people would have given up, but she tried a fourth time. I actually had her in a different course (for future elementary teachers) during the same term, and noticed that in group activities and class presentations she did really well. When I learned about Kim's struggles with Calculus, it didn't add up. So I suggested she drop by office hours for her Calculus questions, and when she showed up I listened to her try and explain something to figure out how she was thinking. I learned how she was approaching Calculus versus the future elementary teachers, and saw how in Calculus she tried to memorize without understanding and would get stuck and not know what to do. In her other class, she worked from the core concepts first, and then was able to think through to find a solution. Kim's brain was engaged in entirely different ways. That was a key moment for her education, because she learned about her own thinking that hindered her progress in Calculus and her thinking that made her successful in her other math class. Skipping forward several terms, she ended up passing Calculus and taking several more math classes, until she earned enough credits to get a middle school math teaching credential added on to a multiple subject credential. That's a huge turnaround!

This was possible because I started from a position of love, empathy, respect. I made sure I tried not to judge, I listened, and then we found a pathway forward, based on Kim's strengths. Now back when this scenario happened, we didn't yet have the words, love, empathy, respect. There are other words and descriptions for this idea, and I am certainly not the first nor the best teacher to be a mentor like this. But I think today, if I didn't listen and was judgmental or dismissive, she might not have gotten out of the cycling of failing she was stuck in. In my mind it doesn't take great teacher skill or talent to do this, but rather it's mostly about being starting from a position of understanding and caring.

Another story is about a student named Jerry (pseudonym). Jerry is a historically successful student, but in the class I had with Jerry, things were very different. Jerry missed classes and assignments. When in class, engagement was low and Jerry was spaced out. Anyways, this is a case where the student would likely be written off. You gotta do the work to pass, right? Well, hold on. I'll email Jerry and check in... Ok, no response for a while. Ok, maybe I'll chat in person next class to meet outside of class... That worked, I think. Now it gets interesting.

It ended up being the case the student was going through a tough time with health issues. Life was hard, and the student was feeling depressed. I listened. I did what I could to be supportive, by extending deadlines and put the student in groups with highly supportive and dependable classmates. I also pointed out the long-term possibilities of all the wonderful things that could be done in Jerry's major. We all need hope. In the end, even after a rough start, Jerry was able to finish the course. Later on, I received an email from Jerry, saying thank you for the support and that it was truly a rough time, and that Jerry had thought about ending life. However, with the support of classmates, my teaching, and other community support, Jerry was able to turn things around. Good teaching can help save lives.

Today in 2020, love, empathy, respect is so desperately needed, by millions of students sitting in their rooms alone on their devices trying to get through school. We have a choice in how we engage with struggling students and in general people in our community. I also know that we are also working at over 100% capacity right now, and we're tired ourselves and it's hard to be even more for others. With that said, we all have a need to know that love is the opposite of hate, that empathy warms over the coldness of apathy, and respect counteracts the disrespect of deficit model thinking.

Hang in there and stay safe!

Seven Ideas to Help with Reopening K-5 Schools from an Educator Perspective

2020-10-26T12:34:00.003-04:00

The focus on reopening has primarily been about health and safety for good reasons. It's a good time for us to add another layer to this discussion, which is to think about how we can improve teaching and other related factors to help reopen smarter.

A typical situation parents might find themselves in is this... Their child is doing math homework on their own, and gets stuck. This is added stress on top of all the pandemic stresses. Dinner needs to be cooked, like is hard as is. It gets emotional, parents are frustrated, Math feels awful, and then everyone wants to get back to in-person school ASAP!

I totally get it. For many of us with kids at home, it's been a huge struggle during this pandemic. Juggling parental duties, work, taking care of yourself, it's a tough. We all want to go back to something normal.

In this post, I share some thoughts about actions educators can take to help improve our situation. This is really important, because we want to make the decision to go back to in-person because spread is low and we have the resources to do it right. We shouldn't be reopening prematurely, because virtual teaching is bad. It puts people in harm's way for the wrong reasons. As of this writing, the US is hitting all-time highs in case counts, hospitalizations are increasing, and the government has literally said it's given up.

What this means for schools is that virtual is going to be a big part of reality for a long time. I don't see a way for us to go back and it's magically 2019.

Many families can't go back to in person, because they have a high-risk member. They deserve a good education. Others need to go back, because they have essential jobs. We need space for them. Little children should be in some form of in-person school (assuming it's safe), because they are so young and it's what they need. Secondary and college students should be largely virtual, because we need to set aside precious space and in-person time for the youngest and neediest. But we can make virtual better, and in some cases much better.

Caveats: I'll focus on Math, because it is my area. The ideas are generally applicable to other subjects. Education is an extremely large sector. In California, there are over 6 million students in public K-12 schools. This means that the comments I write here are not going to cover all the cases due to the sheer size and range of scenarios that are present. But there are things we can do to (a) alleviate some of the pain and stress of virtual learning and (b) use better virtual learning as part of a larger strategy to carve out time and space for some in-person learning.

I'm not commenting in detail about things like masks, coronavirus testing, or other health and safety measures. That's an area of expertise that I have been following closely, but it is not my area of expertise.

Below is a list of some ideas to help with thinking through reopening schools from an educator perspective. The perspective I can offer as a professional developer in Math Education is that I see areas where we can improve teaching and learning that have benefits with dealing with the pandemic and can have lasting upside even afterwards.

1. Prioritize the youngest, neediest tiers of students, teacher safety

The top priority should be to the youngest and neediest students and the safety of teachers. If a child can't read yet, because they are in kindergarten, then zoom isn't the best format for this child. Further, there are other situations for all grades (K-12), such as students who are homeless, who are not safe at their homes, or have special education needs or other needs. These students need to be on school campuses for their wellbeing. Hence the priority grades are K-2. And other priority groups can be also be identified and put into this top priority tier.

As our pandemic situation improves, we can add in more tiers. The tiers are preK-2 and high needs, grades 3-5, middle school, and high school.

Teachers should be classified as essential workers, and they should be in the early phase of vaccinations. They work with large numbers of people, indoors, for long periods of time. Teachers deserve all the support we can give them, because they do so much for our society. Sick or dead teachers are devastating to schools, just as losing HCW in medical settings.

2. Try to decouple academics, socialization activities, and daycare

This section is about rethinking services provided by schools in a different way. In 2019 and before, schools provided all three of academic training, socialization, and daycare. What would help our problem-solving approach during a pandemic is to try and split these three things apart, as much as is reasonably doable. This doesn't mean we won't have overlapping areas with these three areas, but that we don't need to bundle them as all-or-nothing. Bundled, all-or-nothing thinking limits what we might possibly be able to do to help more children and families.

For instance we could have academics taught mostly or completely virtually (depending on the grade tier), have socialization events in person and virtually so that children can learn social skills and just have fun and be kids, and daycare could be provided in smaller group sizes, so parents who can't stay home have safer options.

For example there are families, where the parents are essential workers and the family has an at-risk member. In-person could be too risky. Families in this situation are put in a tough spot. Consequently, de-coupling the services schools provide opens the door for more solutions. In this case, daycare could be provided in a small setting nearby, while the children do mostly virtual learning, allowing the parents to work while mitigating risks.

Secondary school students in virtual learning could do some in-person socializing, such as some organized activities in gyms or outdoor fields to do normal things like hangout with friends and get off of screens for a while. Of course properly distanced, masked, etc.

Decoupling the three services is a complex task, requiring input from all groups, including parents, students, teachers, staff, and local officials. It'd be interesting to see existing solutions in this area, and my sense is that daycare is the key piece. If parents had good daycare, some safe options for socialization, and virtual teaching was good enough, we'd be in a very different context regarding the pressure to reopen schools.

3. Improve virtual (and in-person) teaching via active, student-centered teaching

This item applies more to older grades and upper elementary. But all grades will likely have to be virtual part of the time.

So, imagine a world where virtual teaching is fun. Your kids are okay with it, and they are learning. This releases some (a lot?) of the pressure to rush back to in-person school, and gives time for scientists and the government to develop better testing and treatments.

Good teaching is good teaching, whether virtual or in person. Teaching is a complex system and cultural activity. I can't do it justice in this space. The short version is that we can use active, student-centered methods like inquiry-based learning (IBL) to shift classes to engaging, collaborative spaces. Uptake of active, student-centered teaching is still low in the US, and this is an area of need, whether or not we are in a pandemic.

The four pillars of IBL teaching in Math are:

Deep engagement in rich mathematical tasks
Opportunities for regular collaboration between students and with the teacher
Instructor inquiry into student thinking
Instructor focus on equity

These pillars aren't specific to Math, and you can substitute in whatever subject. On a typical day, roughly 2/3rds of class time should be spent on students doing tasks or engaged in thinking through questions, where students are guided by their teacher to think and discuss math questions, such that the process of answering these questions leads to authentic learning.

Generally speaking, there exist ways to implement IBL methods in virtual settings that are promising for upper elementary and certainly for secondary. Professional development training for teachers is one way to get these kinds of teaching methods into our classrooms. Younger children need more hands-on learning, hence the need to prioritize bringing them back in the first round.

More information about IBL is available on the AIBL website and on this blog.

4. No math homework in K-5!

No matter the teaching methods used, one thing that can be done across the board is to eliminate or significantly change homework. Homework is not shown to help learning outcomes in K-5, and I'd argue that it's not needed everyday in secondary either.

Homework for points adds stress, and even if students do it, many leave disliking Math due to the accumulation of negative experiences. When students are asked to do problem after problem after problem without help, all alone, it can really frustrating for students who struggle, and entire families feels this, and just makes them want to go back to in-person, whether it's the right thing to do or not.

Math anxiety is a real issue. Many students carry math anxiety into adulthood. See this post on Math Anxiety Realities, where college students speak about their painful experiences from math classes. Teaching in ways that increases stress is not good for student learning, and sometimes leaves lasting scars.

The best option is to eliminate math homework for K-5. Just don't do it. Do all the learning together synchronously or in-person where possible.

For secondary, one option is to assign modernized, optional homework, where students are given handout to read about a math idea, technique, a solution to a problem, looking back at recently completed material just to name a few ideas.

Another option, and a really easy one to implement is to state a problem or question and provide a detailed solution with an explanation. Ask students to try the problem first, and then have them compare their thinking with the provided explanation.

5. Use mastery-based grading

There are many reasons to update assessment. A points system is an extrinsic values framing of grades, which is actually not a good motivator, can lead to inequities, and isn't tied necessarily to actual learning. Students are told that homework is worth X points and tests are worth Y points, and it's all about getting points. While this has been the standard, it's not as good as a system with intrinsic values framing, such as mastery-based grading. In mastery-based grading, students are given transparent learning goals, and given multiple opportunities to learn them. The focus then is on learning.

A simple example of mastery grading is to give frequent quizzes/tests, where students are given two possible scores. One is "meets standard" and the other is "not yet." For problems that students earn a "not yet," they are given chances to retry the problem until they earn a "meets the standard." Quiz/test questions are centered on students explaining why things work, so that they the emphasis is on critical reasoning and problem solving. Basic skills and concepts should be practiced in class together with informal assessments to give feedback to students and teachers. This feedback then informs the class whether they should practice more or move on.

Other mastery-based grading systems exist that are more sophisticated and tuned for student learning. The example provided is an easy-to-implement version that is compatible with the challenges and constraints teachers face in a pandemic. See www.masterygrading.com

One key potential benefit of mastery-based grading is equity. I'll argue via an example. Suppose student A learns a topic in week 7 and student B figures it out in week 9. The test is in week 8. Student A get a higher grade than student B, but both have learned the same thing. Now let's say student A is in a middle class family with parents with college degrees who can work from home, and student B has to work or has parents who are working long hours, and student B has more non-school responsibilities. In this case, mastery grading would result in the students getting the same grade, because they learned the same things.

Mastery grading can be bias resistant. That is, it is less likely to penalize the student who has more in life to deal with and/or fewer resources.

In states like California, standards-based grading is already used in elementary schools. Where teachers can further make improvements is to drop timed tests, and use oral exams/interviews and other task-based live sessions to see if students are making progress. All these should allow for retakes after getting support.

Online proctoring software raises many questions about whether they are ethical. Lockdown, surveillance testing is not morally sound, expensive, and completely avoidable. We can use better assessments that are more humane and aligned with learning outcomes that we value, such as critical reasoning and justification. (See this disturbing account reported on by The Washington Post, where a student asks a proctor if she can *vomit* Link).

6. Cull unnecessary or less important topics, and focus more on core topics

A typical math textbook has a lot of material in it. Most teachers and college instructors will say things like, "There's so much to cover." This really doesn't have to be the reality and shortchanges time on better, high-level goals such as problem solving and communication.

In every course, some topics can be covered less intensely, because they are less important or tangential to the main learning goals. Each subject area can be culled down to essential topics using the state standards as a starting point. Culling the list of topics can help teachers and students by giving more time for core topics, which actually matter in the long-run.

Connecting back to the revised homework ideas above, secondary math teachers can cover less important topics by assigning reading, a video, or a handout for students to read and try something. In this way, students get exposure to additional topics, but it's not taking up valuable class time that could be better spent on larger goals.

The reality is that students use Khan Academy and other resources. Harnessing this for a range of uses opens time and space for educators to hone in on key ideas.

7. Focus on community solidarity

More than any other time in our lives, we need community. We are living through a global humanitarian crisis, and it affects all of us in many ways. Thus, building community should be one of the core goals of every class. To do this, some class time can be used to build community on a regular or daily basis. We don't only teach Math (or insert your subject). We teach students, and they deserve an education that is humanistic, empathetic, and compassionate, especially in time like this.

Why is building community so important? If students feel disconnected and stop caring about their education or worse their futures, then what's the point of learning how to add fractions or complete the square? Thinking of reopening schools purely and solely as a medical problem is incomplete and possibly dehumanizing or invalidating. Putting humanity first is the right move.

Even in virtual learning, we can build community. Teachers can do this using chat, breakout rooms, padlet, jamboards, discussions, and others. Some socializing virtually can benefit students, and help them feel more involved connected to their classmates and teachers.

Sample openers for class are fun polls like "What is your preference (a) oatmeal, (b) toast, (c) cereal?" Or "How many cups of coffee did your teacher need this morning?" Mix it up, have fun, be human and authentic!

Common misconception RE rigor

A common misconception area is that hard equals rigor. This is especially true in STEM subjects, where low grades, lots of homework, and lots of students doing poorly means the class is "rigorous." The corollary to this is that classes where students do better is less rigorous and watered down.

All of the suggestions above are not about reducing rigor or lowering standards or "dumbing it down." They are adjusting how we teach or assess to improve learning. It should feel easier, more doable, and more enjoyable, if done right. If a student learns more their grades will go up. That's not a sign of less rigor, it's a sign of student success. If anything, regressive methods are ironically less rigorous, because many of the exam questions can be solved with google or looked up on Chegg.com. This means AI can do much of the usual tests tests, which is less rigorous than having to explain or justify why something works or doesn't work.

Colleges messed things up

Colleges should have been bailed out and been virtual. We effectively spent significant "in-person budget" on the tier of students most capable of learning virtually, all the while seeding more outbreaks. Bad policy and planning is directly affecting your school's ability to reopen safely. I won't go into details, but here are some links, if you want to dig deeper.

The coronavirus, poor leadership and being understanding

The pandemic is causing our problems. Let's be clear about this. While we may disagree about how to reopen or what to prioritize, the real problem, the real thing causing us all the pain and suffering is the coronavirus and the mismanagement of the pandemic. We need to acknowledge this and not unfairly blame schools or teachers or superintendents for the predicament we are in. Their job is to educate, not to do infectious disease public health.

Further, East Asian countries have done a much better job managing this crisis, and they can run their schools close to normal. Lack of national leadership in the US, and a catastrophic lack of empathy have created this Groundhog Day cycle we are experiencing. The obstacles of reopening schools are unnecessary, avoidable, and directly a result of failed leadership.

Thus, it's important we start from a position of understanding and kindness. Schools are not responsible for getting us into this mess, and we shouldn't place unfair responsibility on schools to get us out of this predicament, especially when many schools lack resources to even meet basic needs even before this pandemic. The predicament is on us as a society. Own it.

Outro

Other major issues in education need to be addressed eventually on a societal level. Specifically we also need to take more action on inequality, old buildings, overcrowding, poverty, school segregation, lack of or inadequate healthcare, and more, because all these things directly affect our schools and prevent us from forming a stronger, more just society. These issues overlap with the pandemic and can't be solved with improvements to classroom instruction alone. I mention this to contextualize the broader issues at play and the limitations of focusing on teaching.

What is outlined here isn't attempting to solve all the problems, because many issues are outside the locus of control of educators. With that said, real, practical, implementable actions we can make things a whole lot better right now.

Prioritize the youngest and neediest
Try to decouple academics, socialization, daycare
Use active, student-centered learning like IBL
No math homework in K-5
Mastery grading
Cull content from course that are not essential
Focus on community solidarity

Stay safe and healthy!

Mastery-Based Grading: Interviewing Sharona Krinsky, David Clark

2020-09-30T18:22:00.003-04:00

SY: Massive thanks to Sharona Krinsky and David Clark for sharing their thoughts on the topic of mastery-based grading or MBG for short. This interview grew out of a different conversation Sharona, David, and I had about a separate topic. MBG is an excellent framework for assessing students for learning with a focus on equity and is compatible with IBL methods and non-IBL methods.

Question 1: First, tell us a bit about yourselves.

Sharona: I’m a full-time lecturer in the math department at California State University Los Angeles. I’m also the executive producer of Encore South Bay (Link), a community and youth theater company in Los Angeles. I have degrees in math from UC Berkeley and The Ohio State University, as well as an MBA from The Ohio State University. In addition to working, I love Israeli dancing, scrapbooking, and traveling.

David: I’m an associate professor in the math department at Grand Valley State University, in west Michigan. I’m also a boardgamer (although not a very good one…), hiker and backpacker, and amateur photographer. I’ve lived my entire life in Michigan and nearby. For grad school, I moved from Michigan south into Canada.

Question 2: How did you get involved in MBG?

Sharona: A few years ago I was looking for more ways to bring active learning into my Calculus classroom and stumbled across Kate Owens’ blog about SBG [standards-based grading]. Started reading it and then joined the Google+ group run by Robert Talbert. This led me down a rabbit hole that included Robert’s blog and posts by Josh Bowman. I dove in head first, converting three separate classes at the same time to standards based grading and never looked back. From there, I had the incredible fortune to meet Kate at MathFest a few years ago in Denver which connected me with Dave, Drew Lewis, and TJ Hitchman. This was followed by a serendipitous run-in with Robert Talbert at Poly Teach at Cal Poly Pomona. A year later, I was asked to redesign and coordinate our GE statistics class, which has over 1,500 students in 50+ sections every fall and about 600+ students and 20+ sections in spring. I convinced my co-coordinator to do standard-based, mastery grading and brought about 30 other instructors along for the ride.

David: As an undergrad, I took a few classes that used (what I now recognize as) Inquiry-Based Learning and Ungrading. They encouraged me to learn and persevere much more than my other classes. That experience lived in the back of my head throughout grad school, while I got more and more disappointed with the incentives that points brought into my classes (think: “Why isn’t this 8/10 instead of 7/10?”). After graduating, I heard a talk from TJ Hitchman during a Project:NExT session in which he offhandedly mentioned how he used standards-based grading in a geometry class. That started me down the rabbit hole, and I ended up completely re-working my syllabus to use SBG -- just weeks before I started teaching that course. That class was an amazing experience, and I couldn’t believe how much it improved my students’ experiences (they begged me to give them a quiz on the day before Thanksgiving break). Since then I’ve been slowly learning and converting more courses to use various forms of mastery grading.

Question 3: What are some of the key benefits to students?

Sharona:

Allows for growth through failure: Getting students to understand that failure is not only OK but a better way to learn is a huge breakthrough. De-programming the idea that only immediate success is how you succeed allows time to build on growth mindset ideas and build grit in our students.
Talking Math, Not Arithmetic (of Grades): Students get to focus on questions such as “what do I not understand about the math?” instead of “how am I going to get enough points to get the grade I want?”. Conversations with students are positive, encouraging, and about MATH. They learn more, and they discover that they can succeed by not giving up.
Encourages deeper thinking and communication: Students learn that there are a lot of ways to show that they understand the material. AND that understanding is not the same as getting the right answer. They learn to show what they know, even if what they know is partial or incomplete.

David: MBG...

Gives students time to learn. It gives students a chance to come back from early failures without penalty. Compare that to how, in a traditionally graded class, doing poorly on an early midterm exam can tank a student’s grade for the rest of the semester. Similarly, if a student doesn’t have some background that an instructor expected, MBG helps identify this and give students a way to learn background material without penalty.
Decreases test anxiety. Because assessments are lower stakes, there’s less pressure on each individual assessment.
Encourages students to develop a growth mindset, which can benefit them beyond any individual class.
Sets up a clear path to success. Clear objectives, and grade requirements stated in terms of those objectives, let students see exactly what they need to do to succeed in a class. It removes the sense that grades are something that happen to students, and gives them agency.

Question 4: The covid-19 pandemic has highlighted serious limitations of timed, (high-stakes) tests. How do you see MBG helping in this current era?

Sharona: In my opinion, MBG is the answer to the serious limitations of high-stakes tests. Although I still give timed assessments, the knowledge that the worst thing that happens as a result of the test is that they might have to test again tremendously lowers both the anxiety of the students and the incentives to cheat. Most students WANT to learn. That’s why they are in college. They want to do well, and they want the time spent studying to be worth it. If they can show what they know, get feedback, and then get to show it again, they quickly learn that it is worth it to do the work themselves. It also allows for tremendous customization of the learning process to meet students where they are, without placing undue burden on the instructor.

David: During the Big Pivot online last March, the one thing about my classes that didn’t need to change was my assessments: My MBG setup was flexible enough to keep working. MBG lowers the stakes on every assessment. Even if an instructor uses timed tests, each one becomes lower stakes, since students have opportunities to retake or revise later. MBG also supports instructors in using assessments that fit the COVID era better, such as portfolios, interviews, or student-made videos. These kinds of assessments aren’t inherent to MBG, but they work well with the philosophy of determining if students have demonstrated overall proficiency in their work.

Question 5: How does someone get started with MBG? And if someone has a question, where can they go?

Sharona: In addition to reading about MBG and joining the community, instructors need to begin learning about and using Backwards Design principles to design the course. Begin by asking the big question “What should my students know and be able to do” after taking my course. And really hone in on that answer. Don’t just accept the list of skills that we have traditionally taught. For example, I really thought about what the core concepts of Calculus II were and came up with the math of “accumulation”, “the infinite” and “position and motion in space”. I then organized my learning targets around those core concepts. If you visit www.MasteryGrading.com you will have links to over 16 hours of recordings from our first Mastery Grading conference, held online in Summer 2020.

David: Start by reading one or two of these articles to get an overall idea of how MBG works: Kate Owens’s standards-based grading blog post, Robert Talbert’s Specifications grading blog series, or my MBT article. Then check out the articles in the PRIMUS Special Issue on MBG. These articles are detailed explanations of how instructors have used MBG in many different classes, and they are free to all MAA members. Two great places to ask questions and get inspiration: Robert Talbert’s Mastery Grading Slack Workspace (the link invites you to join the workspace) and the super-friendly MBG community on Twitter. Follow @MasteryGrading, check out this list of MBG tweeters, and look at hashtags like #masterygrading, #sbgchat, and #pointlessgrading.

Question 6: Anything else you’d like to add?

Sharona: MBG has been the single highest impact practice that I’ve adopted in over 30 years of teaching. I did workshops on “cooperative learning” in the 90’s and have used active learning for decades. I was an early adopter of the Hughes-Hallett Calculus text. Despite all of that, I never really succeeded in getting most of my students to really engage in the actual mathematics until I started MBG. The depth of content in my conversations with my students is incredible. And I really enjoy giving really high grades that my students worked incredibly hard to get. (My grades are bi-modal, all A’s, B’s and F’s). I call myself an MBG evangelist for a reason :)

David: My first time using MBG was a “glass shattering” moment. I’ve never again been satisfied using points in a class. It’s changed not just how I do assessment, but my whole focus when designing a class. MBG also fits well with active learning pedagogies like IBL: We’re trying to inquire into what students know and set up opportunities for them to demonstrate their understanding -- rather than forcing limited assessments with punitive results. Finally, the huge variety of ways that people use MBG, and all the acronyms that go with it -- SBG/MBT/Specifications/etc. -- can seem intimidating at first. There’s a lot out there, and everyone ends up finding the best way for themselves. You can dip your toe into MBG (maybe using it only with tests or quizzes) rather than blowing up your entire class plan.

The Beloved Community and Teaching

2020-09-18T19:16:00.000-04:00

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had a global vision, the Beloved Community:

"In the Beloved Community, poverty, hunger and homelessness will not be tolerated because international standards of human decency will not allow it. Racism and all forms of discrimination, bigotry and prejudice will be replaced by an all-inclusive spirit of sisterhood and brotherhood. In the Beloved Community, international disputes will be resolved by peaceful conflict-resolution and reconciliation of adversaries, instead of military power. Love and trust will triumph over fear and hatred. Peace with justice will prevail over war and military conflict."

The late congressman and civil rights leader, John Lewis, dedicated his life's work in the pursuit of the beloved community. Many others continued this effort in a variety of ways, including the vital work of Alicia Garza, Patrice Cullors, and Opal Tometi, who founded the #blacklivesmatter movement, among many, many others that cannot be listed here across a spectrum of issues. Know that I acknowledge the variety and scope of the different struggles in society.

What does the beloved community have to do with teaching? Superficially, perhaps not much. But upon closer inspection, everything, at least everything that matters. I fully understand why a person could say the following.

"I teach math [or fill in your subject], it's not my job."
"I don't want to be political..."
"I'm just a small person, in a small city, doing my thing. I'm not Dr. King or civil rights leader. What could I possibly do?"

None of us are being asked to do extraordinary things, march every weekend, and sacrifice all our free time. As a college math instructor, I don't feel particularly powerful or influential. I know I am just a small person on a small stage in a small city. But if each of us pitched in and did our part, we'd be in a far better place. The lesson for me is that in order for us to create the beloved community, each and everyone of us must do our part with the people we live and work with in our communities. No hero is going to come save us from ourselves.

We all have something within our locus of control that can be impactful. For college math instructors this means doing something in our classrooms and our departments, colleges. We can center equity and inclusion. We can be visible about our values with our students and colleagues, and stop making excuses, such as "I don't want to be political." We can make equity part of hiring and retention processes, and we can insist that systemic biases, such as student evaluation of teaching, stop. Just stop.

Active, student-centered, equity-centered teaching is a pathway forward. We can teach students the values of we seek in society. We can show by example and lived experiences that equity and inclusion benefits all of us and creates a better, stronger society, where we are all better off. While schools and colleges by themselves are not enough, I firmly believe that education plays a central role. If it doesn't happen in our classrooms, then it can't happen in society. Therefore, we have an obligation to do this work.

So, use your power! Do something small in your next class, and nudge someone in your circle, and keep on building. Connect with people on our campus and in your profession, who have experience and expertise with DEI. Then we can build brick by brick, classroom by classroom, and more and more people will join the movement to reimagine, to rebuild, and ultimately to move toward the Beloved Community.

Need a place to start? Check out this self-paced workshop on Race in America (v1.0)

Stay strong, stay safe!

Link: https://thekingcenter.org/king-philosophy/

Virtual Teaching v1.0

2020-08-07T18:53:00.006-04:00

This post is an update of a post from May (Virtual Teaching, Mixed Synchronous-Asynchronous). Fall is approaching, and we're sadly in worse shape regarding the pandemic. My institution and others are going with virtual for fall 2020 and like the entire 2020-21 academic year.

Last spring I taught Calculus 2 (quarter system). We started and ended virtually. My thoughts on organizing class are in the embedded slides below. Ideas apply to STEM and potentially HS.

Setting aside labs and clinical subjects, good teaching is good teaching. Whatever the format, we can teach effectively in virtual formats. It doesn't have to be horrible. The false choice that is unfortunately presented in the media is (a) in person awesomeness and (b) deleterious virtual teaching. We can do an outstanding job teaching Math virtually, and we can help and support students learn this year.

Quote from a student in Spring 20: “I actually took [Calculus 2] last quarter and got a D, learning hardly anything. This quarter though, the learning style you are using is super helpful to me. I am way less stressed…. also am significantly better at solving the very same calc problems!”

Slides on a virtual teaching:

The Devil Is In the Reopening Details

2020-05-29T01:03:00.001-04:00

Let's say you work for NASA as a team sending astronauts into space. To launch safely, you need a "go" from all systems, not just one or two or 90% of the systems. Astronauts do not want to hear from mission control, "We got 9 out or 10 systems ready, so yea let's light this candle!" They don't want to hear, "We worked really hard on this plan building the rocket, and there are a lot of people who want to see a rocket launch, therefore we need to launch today, even if conditions are not right."

Reopening a campus during a pandemic means you have to get all the details right. In this sense, we are like NASA. The core problem I see is that we are not taking the same level of attention to detail needed commensurate to the challenges facing us. Many of the plans to reopen colleges ignore key issues. It's not enough to have a good idea in concept or have consensus in committee/task force. The reason is because nature doesn't give partial credit, and nature does not care what we think or believe in. So it is not my opinion or other people's opinions that matter at the end of the day. It's whether we have solved the coronavirus problems.

And the astronaut analogy goes further. Building a rocket is a complex problem. It requires big ideas, vision, and crucially nailing every single little detail, otherwise things go wrong. Likewise in this pandemic, the devil is in the coronavirus details.

I wrote a blog post (link) and published an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education outlining the case for not reopening. I don't think reopening is the right choice, and you can read my thoughts in the linked post or article. In this post, I take a closer look at the issues of reopening. I also note that I care about human lives and believe that humanity should be placed at the center of our discussions. I am also for using campus space as refuge, for instance, for students who do not have a safe home to live in. We need to set aside space for those who truly need it.

A partial list of some key issues not yet addressed or adequately addressed is provided below. I could add more items, but left this post at the current length to get across enough reasons to clearly demonstrate that important details are being overlooked. A comprehensive list is beyond the scope of this post. The list starts with "nuts and bolts" items and moves towards areas that connect with culture and motivations.

Bathrooms: Oddly, I see very little on bathrooms in plans regarding reopening campuses, yet it's something everyone I talk to is worried about. Many college buildings have one bathroom per floor, and are used frequently throughout the day. Ventilation is usually not good. Some have hand dryers, instead of paper towels, and toilets do not have seat covers (so when you flush droplets from the toilet could go into the air.) The bathroom in the building where my office is has poor ventilation and no windows. There is no easy way to improve ventilation in many cases.

Lack of Hand Washing Stations: This brings us to the next point. If the only place you can go to wash your hands in the bathroom, then you are sending all of the people on your campus into small spaces on a daily basis, multiple times a day, often with poor ventilation. One solution to this is to have available everywhere is hand sanitizer and hand washing stations. This means having stations in every class, near al offices, and so on. Not just a dispenser in a handful of places.

Door handles/knobs: Going to class requires me to open 5 doors each way. I need to grab the door handle/knob for the doors to the stairway leading in/out of my floor, the building door, the door to the building where my classroom is located, and then the classroom door itself. Each person has to use doors regularly. That's a lot of people touching the same door knob in just one period.

Hallways During Period Changes: I have yet to see anything written on this very basic thing that happens at schools. When the bell chimes, even if we reduce classes to 50% and have 6 feet distance, then everyone has to get up and go out into the hallway to get to their next class. Social distancing in hallways is nearly impossible in this situation. If a student goes to 4 classes, there will be perhaps 30 minutes of hallway time. That's a lot of exposure daily just in hallways. Hallways are also not the most well-ventilated spaces usually.

Desks/tables in classrooms: I suppose the only way to deal with this is for instructors and students to bring sanitizing supplies to class everyday. I doubt colleges with shrinking budgets will be able to hire people to clean each desk each period. Students and faculty will have to bring their own cleaning kit.

Time: Classes are one to two hours long. This is a long time for people to be in a room. Even if people are wearing masking and sitting far apart, we have a room with people talking and breathing the same air for a prolonged period of time.

HVAC: HVAC systems need to be able to move air into and out of rooms. Some classes do not have windows, and some offices in the interior are sometimes windowless or have small windows. Even determining if an HVAC system is "good enough" for the coronavirus situation would seem like an area that is not well-understood to the point where we could push this info out to all facilities departments across the nation, where they have the knowledge, skills, and materials to make it all work.

Asymptomatic spread and the high cost of testing: Asymptomatic spread is an issue that I am really concerned about. When people are feeling symptoms it's clear what to do and how to behave. But if you don't know and have it, then it's a dangerous situation. This means that testing needs to be broad, according to experts. So far, I have not seen good school plans on managing asymptomatic cases that is feasible. Temperature checks and testings students with symptoms only catch a subset of those who are spreading the disease. Some colleges have vast testing capacity, which is great for that campus, but not all campuses across the country.

With more testing comes high cost in money and moral standing. For the Cal State system, the WEEKLY cost for testing is estimated to be $25 million. We don't have a spare billion dollars in the system, when we are facing big budget cuts. More damaging is the moral cost. Unless testing is widespread and cheap, we are taking useful testing capacity away from the healthcare system and from those working in essential jobs. Perhaps there will be big breakthroughs with testing capacity. But even in that case, the cost of many millions or billions could be spent on reducing fees/tuition and providing students in need or at risk with the devices and support they need. There are better uses of the money than the testing.

Other key questions...

How many positive tests will it take to close a campus?
Are you testing all students?
How transparent will this information be?
If the institution is slow in responding, and where do students, faculty, staff go to report a developing situation?
What do you do when some refuses to be tested and has symptoms?
What is the contact tracing team and what is their capacity?

Masks and compliance: Masks and society are colliding right now in the US in ways they are not in east Asian countries. If we are to deal with asymptomatic spread, then we'll need masks for all students, faculty, and staff. Then the question arises of whether we are we going to require students to wear gloves and masks. If some don't, then the community is not as safe as it can be and risks go up. Wearing masks is a team sport, and at present the US is not united even on this basic issue. Hence, wearing masks is also a social problem, and this could lead to conflict in addition to increased health risk.

For example, suppose it is an exam day, and one student refuses to wear one. To keep people safe, you would cancel class. One way around this is to give online exams. But then that leads us back to virtual teaching. And faculty should not be passing out paper and collecting it from all students for safety reasons anyways. Hence, electronic testing is the best solution, which once again leads us back on the path to virtual.

Libraries and Study Spaces: Libraries are not easy places to manage, because unlike a classroom, people go in and out when they want and linger. Students and faculty literally spend hours and hours in the library. Like classrooms, each and every desk and chair needs to be cleaned after each use. This seems incredibly hard to manage and do well in a sustained and consistent way.

Compliance is an issue in libraries and other student spaces. If a person refuses to wear a mask, then what should the library or building manager do? Call campus police to remove the person or close the library/building? If this behavior is allowed, then risk will go over for everyone.

Staff who have to work the frontlines are especially at risk, and will also be tasked with making the call to campus PD or to close the building. It's not something people are trained to do, and they didn't take the job in the first place to be a bouncer.

Further, handling anything in the collections is also a concern. How does a library safely get materials to and from people?

Parties, clubs, and social gatherings: Social gathering is not addressed or perhaps can't be legally. Some students are going to hangout and socialize. Some will party, and these large gatherings are one way that coronavirus spreads quickly. Colleges seem to be hiding behind the phrase, "We can't control what people do..." But this is incomplete, dishonest, and putting all the responsibility on the individual. Campuses control to a large degree whether students come to the area in the first place. Bringing people together in large numbers is giving tacit approval of convening and socializing. Colleges are cultural activities, and gathering people and then wondering why they are hanging out is abdication of responsibility or at the very least being complicit.

False comparisons: Comparing us to Sweden, France, or South Korea is inappropriate and wrong. These are countries with better healthcare systems, universal healthcare, and in the case of Sweden doing worse on a per capita basis. For countries like South Korea, yes they can try and reopen, because (a) they did their homework, (b) they hammered the curve to the x-axis, and (c) they are more coordinated and organized to do things like wear masks, testing, and prioritize community health. Cherry picking one small part of some other country's strategy is dishonest and bad science. I am all for learning from successful countries, but doing so in scientifically sound ways.

Travel: While some schools are ending the fall term by Thanksgiving to try and surf the second wave, the broader issue is travel. Students travel from their home to residential college and then back, sometimes multiple times a term. Some are daily commuters, and some go back home on the weekends. Increase in travel raises the risk for the communities involved at both endpoints of the travel. Closing campuses before Thanksgiving is only a partial solution. If thousands of students travel, it is going spread the virus somewhere.

Colleges planning to go in person and end instruction by Thanksgiving are making a major acknowledgement. It's easy to not notice, but actually sheds enough light to throw some shade. Ending early is an acknowledgement that travel and in-person college increases risk. While it is an improvement to end by Thanksgiving, institutional values are revealed in this decision. That is, institutional values represented by calculations of acceptable risk and acceptable number of casualties.

The devil, indeed, is in the details.

A simple truth: Setting aside labs, arts, clinical classes, etc., if we are dressed in PPE, shielding instructors behind plexiglass, swabbing deep into our noses looking for viruses, and fearing for our safety, then the very thing we are convening for is dead on arrival. That is not a thriving educational environment. Students and faculty can't learn well when they don't feel safe. We're human. We want human experiences, not some twisted, dystopian experience.

Paraphrasing JFK, we go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard. For many institutions apparently, the moon shot is the journey to the moral high ground.

Virtual Teaching, Mixed Synchronous-Asynchronous (Version 0.9 Not Final Firmware)

2020-05-11T18:44:00.000-04:00

Cal Poly SLO, where I work, is on quarter system. So we had the advantage and challenges of ending winter quarter in March, and starting spring quarter in April. It's been an adventure to put it mildly, and I am thankful that my family is healthy and safe.

This quarter I am teaching Calculus 2 to a group of 35 students. These students range from first year to third year, and span science, engineering, math, and architecture majors. I have not met these students before in person. We started the term on April 6, and most all students left the area to go back home. Goal #1 is to build community.

Technology and internet are not issues in my class for students. I know these are issues that have to be dealt with, and this was not an issue this term for me. My institution also did well to provide support for students and to get students, staff, and faculty the devices and connectivity needed. So I won't comment on tech issues.

The short version: carefully craft "tutorial handouts" that guide students to the main learning goals. Work through some of it in class with regular student-centered activities. Students who can't make class at the scheduled time can work through the tutorial handout (where expanded solutions with insights are posted). Classes are also recorded so students who can't connect can view the class later. Overall, class meetings are a mix of synchronous and asynchronous (75%-25% split).

Details in these slides below.

Earlier related posts:

Sample Handout (Clean Link, After Class Link)

A Case for Virtual Fall Term 2020 (and Probably Spring 2021)

2020-04-22T22:55:00.001-04:00

These are my thoughts. I'm a Math Educator, speaking as a college faculty person. I'm using my own logic. I'm not an infectious disease epidemiologist. Some of my opinions will change as we get new info. This is written on April 22, 2020.

---

Emotionally what I want is to go back to normal. I am sure we all do. I have been in lockdown for 6 weeks. I spent my birthday in lockdown. I am zoomed out. Virtual teaching is not why I got into the teaching profession. My kids miss their friends and teachers.

Despite all that we have to be responsible and meet this historic challenge. We have a moral responsibility to ourselves and each other to make good choices.

Risks are asymmetrical, and this is a key point I want to make clear. The downside risk of a contagion on a campus is far greater than the downside of virtual teaching. Sadly, the range of choices we have is between bad and horrific. But people don't like bad, so it is understandable that we want something better. I fully understand that teaching via zoom in our bedrooms with kids at home is not a good situation. But this is the coronavirus era.

We are in a global humanitarian crisis. It’s a giant problem that unfortunately comes with a large basket of problems. The item in the basket this post primarily focuses on is in-person vs. virtual fall 2020. I make a case for virtual fall 2020 and likely spring 2021.

A list of points and comments organized in a list.

We don’t have a vaccine. ETA is March 2021, according to FDA (as of this writing). How we roll out 7+ billions vaccine is a manufacturing challenge, beyond the scientific challenges. Not sure we will get this before spring term.
Equity is a big concern in general in this crisis and specifically with respect to vaccines. When it comes to vaccines and treatments and access to healthcare, we will likely see income disparities. So if a college knows that vaccines are out, and plans to open in-person next spring, then will it also have in place vaccinations for low-income students and marginalized groups so that every students has access to treatment? If not, then the college could force poor students to make the choice between missing school or their health. The children of NBA players and movie stars will get vaccines before the children of gardeners and housekeepers. But schools might be wanting to open, when treatments are announced or starting to become ready, and leave behind or force into a tough decision students who are at the back of the line.
Testing is still not up and running to a level where we can do surveillance testing as of this writing. In CA, we are testing people with symptoms, but will we be able to test all our students before they arrive, after they arrive, during the term,...? If yes, then this is a good start. It is one of the things reported that we need in order to open up society.
Treatments (other than vaccines) are being tested as of this writing. These may help, but they are not here yet and it's hard to plan on anything now for something that might help later. Widespread availability is another factor. Even if a treatment is shown effective in clinical trials, will your specific region have it in quantity and will it cover all students, faculty, staff, and the wider community?
Travel is a massive issue facing colleges that does not affect K-12 schools nearly as much. Merely getting college students physically to campuses in the fall is a significant risk due to long distance travel. Colleges and universities generally have students from different regions, some students are international. At the start of fall term, hundreds of thousands of students travel from their homes to different cities, often with parents or family. The situation where millions of people traveling AND being able to do so without spreading the virus seems impossible.
Once on campus, hundreds of thousands of students across the US will live in dorms or apartments in close proximity to one another. Many eat in dining halls or other campus dining serving thousands of meals per day. The HVAC systems in buildings may be connecting the air between rooms.
Even if somehow we get everyone to campus 100% coronavirus free, it gets messy from there. Do we let students go home on the weekends? What about Thanksgiving and winter break? What if a family member of a student is in the hospital - do we let this student go home to see their family? And when the student returns is it to a 14-day quarantine?
Students also do things like go into town and to the market. The university is not closed off from its region. So the virus could be transported to the community or vice versa.
Thought Experiment: How would a college town feel if 20,000 students from China and Italy are coming in August? Ok, maybe not China and Italy, but maybe Los Angeles and New York. We need to think about the communities around the colleges and their reactions (right or wrong).
Winter break is especially concerning without a vaccine. Are we going to send people home for 3 to 5 weeks in the middle of flu and possibly a coronavirus resurgence, and bring them all back again for winter quarter/spring semester in January? If yes, then we need to replay the fall scenario again in a tougher environment and less time to prepare due to the winter holidays and length of winter break.
Classrooms and labs force very close contact between students, with no option of proper distancing. Take a look at this image from one of our math classrooms. There's maybe two feet between desks. Plus we pack in 35 students into this space. After you get a 6 or 7 people in there, you've used up "6 feet of distance" between people. Classroom buildings have HVAC systems that could be moving air from room to room.
Classes are used multiple times a day. A single seat or desk may see as many as 10 or 12 different people using it each day. It seems unrealistic that we will sanitize each desk completely during each period. We'd need to hire hundreds of staff to do this massive cleaning job. This is unlikely given budgets are expected to go down. Given that we won't expand staff, then we won't do the cleaning needed. Therefore, we will have a petri dish in each classroom.
Thought Experiment: Student A sneezes on a desk. Gets up after class. Next class period, student B sits in that desk and gets infected.
Universities are not setup with staff and equipment for daily testing, tracing, isolating, etc. One question is, "Who is going to do this work for thousands of people regularly?" And if a student has to go on quarantine, then what about their roommates, classmates, instructors?
If instructors get sick, then how does the class proceed, especially in areas that require specialized expertise, where there may not be a qualified expert able to step in? If staff get sick, then how does the university function if a large number are home sick?
Each day, a university is like an all-day concert or sporting event. It seems more clear that we should not be having concerts or sports events until a vaccine arrives. The same logic applies to colleges and universities. Thousands of people engaging all day in close quarters, sitting in the same seats hour after hour, and then going to the library in close quarters.
College parties are another issue. Are we going to ban parties? Even if we can legally (not likely), then how will it be enforced especially if students live off campus? If it does happen, then what is the consequence? Quarantines?
Thought Experiment: Suppose student A goes to a "corona party" and gets coronavirus. Student B sits next to student A in a class, and get coronavirus. Student B is in an at-risk group and is hospitalized or dies. Student B washed her hands, wore a mask, did everything right, but also depended on all other students on campus to follow through with the guidelines. This then raises the issue of putting at-risk students into harm's way. And telling them to wash their hands isn't going to ensure they are safe, because safety in this crisis depends on everyone. Even if student A was being responsible, student A could get the virus from the grocery store or a humanitarian mission.
In Education we talk a lot about safe learning environments. A psychological factor is also in play during the coronavirus era. When someone sneezes or coughs, it'll come with a tinge of fear. "I just sneezed - do I have coronavirus?" Or "My group mate just coughed! Am I going to get it next?” The fear of illness and death is not a foundation to build a safe learning environment. It's literally a potentially physically dangerous learning environment. It's hard to fully focus on a task or exam, when stressed about personal safety.
Will we enforce a no-attendance policy campus wide? What I mean is that faculty cannot have attendance as a requirement or part of the grade. Here's why this is important. If an instructor breaks ranks and requires students to show up for class as part of the grade, then the incentives for students to be in class are at odds with health concerns. Students in this case will be forced between choosing their grade and health. It's a horrible dilemma that students should not be forced into.
Similar to above, but "attendance" replaced with "exams." What if a student is sick and it's midterm day? Then the student might have to decide between taking the exam and their health and the health of their class. And even if a college has a policy on make-up exams, how will it get monitored and enforced?
Marketing Risk Thought Experiment: Assume a college rolls the dice and goes for in-person fall term. That campus then gets an outbreak in October, when thousands get sick and dozens die. First and foremost, there is a huge human cost that could have been avoided. And second, there is the reputation of the institution, which will be trashed. Who is going to go to Coronvirus U next year? Why trust what they do or say after that? What parent will want to send their kid to a place where dozens died unnecessarily. It's very easy to destroy the reputation of an institution.
If instead, the marketing is, "You will still have 3+ years of amazing, in-person, hands-on learning. But safety and health for you and everyone else matters most. So we will be working our hardest to do virtual right and then to open up when it's safe." That would be more honest, and we'd get the kind of students we want anyways, who share our values. Those who are understanding and want to be at Cal Poly or wherever for what makes your institution special. That does not go away, if we hold true to our values.
Sports will likely be governed by conferences or NCAA. So I won't comment on this.

False Dichotomies

False dichotomies are bad. They also seem to have grown in number exponentially this year. Here are some examples.

The lockdown has created a rise in domestic violence. So we need to end the lockdown. (Choosing between lockdown and dealing with domestic violence).
If we do not run in person, then enrollment will be down and budget will be a problem. (Trade lives for money.)
We need to save lives or save the economy.

All these are poor logic. Pandemics are a basket or package of problems, not an "A vs. B" scenario. Pandemics attack your whole society from top to bottom, from left to right. It's a systemwide set of problems. This means every part of society gets affected and disrupted. So splitting up issues into coronavirus and non-coronavirus is poor logic, since it's all one giant set of problems, and more importantly these false dichotomies can lead to bad decisions.

Here's an example. Let's focus in on domestic violence issues. Domestic violence is a real problem and we need to fix this like right now. But the solution isn't to lift lockdowns early as a "solution" to address the rise in domestic violence. If we do that, then the disease might spread and you have more suffering in other areas of society. We should think of the rise in domestic violence as *part* of the crisis, and act accordingly. We should do both (a) reduce domestic violence and (b) keep people safe from coronavirus. For example, communities can start to do deal with domestic violence issues, by providing housing for victims in hotels, and offer moving services and security. A major conclusion is that false dichotomies lead people to make bad decisions, by improperly framing the problem into a choice between two (bad/incomplete) solutions.

Money Issues at Colleges
One major false choice facing universities are budget vs. lives. It's not presented like this. We talk about it in terms of enrollment. Lower enrollment should be expected for fall. Some students might prefer to take a gap year. Maybe their parents lost their jobs or have reduced income, and they can't go to college for financial reasons, whether virtual or in-person. Economic downturns of this speed and magnitude will create lower enrollments. When 10%+ of workers have filed for unemployment in just a few weeks, that is going to affect college enrollments. I don't think virtual vs. in-person is the kicker here. It's more likely money and a tanking economy. We are in something like the great depression, and fewer people can afford college. That's just a fact. We should expect lower enrollment.

Colleges are not immune to broad, deep shifts in the economy like the one we are experiencing now. But some administrators may think virtual means lower enrollment and in-person means higher. I don't think that's a clearcut case or even true. I understand budget concerns are real. A real, systemic solution is for state and federal governments to bail out colleges and universities. We did this for airlines and other industries. We did this for banks during the last financial crisis. Why not protect the future of our younger generations? Of course I am not naive. That's not happening. But this line of reasoning illustrates the folly of chasing dollars to address a wider societal failing, by trading the health of our communities, faculty, staff and the students we serve to run in-person classes during a pandemic (all the while assuming this is palatable to students and their families).

Some have argued on my campus that we need to keep businesses and the economy going. So bringing students here is worth it. The gist of their thinking is that some are going to die anyways, so you might as well save the local economy. I think this is wrong and immoral.

Let's start with the fundamentals. Education is a social responsibility to our youth. It's not a business. We aren't maximing profits. Educational institutions do not have in their mission statements the goal of supporting and upholding the regional economy. People try and spin education in materialistic terms, but education fundamentally is a social responsibility. Thinking of students as consumers or bags of money is wrong or at least significantly incomplete.

We also can't just ignore the bodies in the corner and get on with taking tests and doing labs. If people are sick and dying, even if it's "just a few dozen," it's not going to feel like a learning institution. At least it won't for me. Maybe others are harder and tougher that I am. But if I am losing colleagues and students to coronavirus, I'm not going to be all excited and happy to go to my next committee meeting and act like all is normal. The fear of death or illness has a way of souring the mood, amping of stress levels, and killing morale. I can't think of many ways other to make a community feel more like a disposable cog in a machine than pushing them into the middle of a global pandemic.

If faculty and staff feel like they are disposable cogs, the ones with outside opportunities (i.e. the ones who get more grants and publish more) will leave or get poached by savvy institutions. It'll be harder to recruit good faculty and staff, and the quality if the institution would take a hit. Students who don't feel safe will not attend or go elsewhere. So going down the route of in-person fall term has serious long-term risks, beyond easily quantifiable things such as positive test cases and number of fatalities.

Outro

Here's a hard pill to swallow. The key societal mistakes were made before we arrived at the present day. We did not invest in pandemic preparedness, we responded slowly and with disorganization as a society, and we have gaps in our society that are being laid bare. It's like we are on a raft and the river is leading us to a dangerous section. The college is in the raft and decision makers in the past put the raft in the river. We like to think colleges are independent from society. In some ways colleges are highly autonomous. But we are in the "river of the society" we have, and what happens to the world happens to us. The tough part is we can't do anything about upstream decisions. We are now left with a set of hard choices and tough realities, ranging from bad to horrible.

I don't like virtual college. We are not supposed to like it. It's going to be the hardest period of our careers. I hate thinking of the long slog back up the hill, and this is if I make it. But this reality is the definition of living during natural disaster. In the grand scheme, we are the lucky ones, given that we live in a modern, advanced nation and still have jobs and paychecks. We have opportunities to revamp and update some things that need to be fixed. We can be creative and human for our students during this time, and teach them about morality, community, solidarity, and steadfastness during difficult times. There exist things we can teach virtually in this environment that are both sorely needed and would have been scoffed otherwise. So while I see virtual (and the pandemic) as an unwelcome reality, I also see upside in the opportunity it presents and most importantly a clear, moral case for why going virtual in fall 2020 is the right choice.

Stay safe and stay healthy!

Edit: An different version of this blog post is published in the Chronicle of Higher Ed

Putting Humanity First

2020-03-28T12:51:00.001-04:00

When you unfortunately need to go to a friend’s funeral, you also have to figure out how to get there. You need to make arrangements for hotel stay, travel, find out exactly when and where the services will be. Maybe travel won’t go to plan, and there are things you can rightly complain about. But the main reason why you go to the funeral is for your friend you lost. It’s about the celebration of life, not the travel details.

At present, we have a lot on our plates. Converting an in-person class to online/virtual format is a huge task, and all the more challenging under the weight and stress of a crisis. But in the big picture how we deliver our content online is like the travel details to attend a friend's funeral. We have a lot of huge issues now that we never had to deal with before.

Lots of things don’t compute right now, since coronavirus arrived. I don't have a lot of answers. I do have some thoughts. Our whole world, our daily lives, even potentially our very own health and the health of loved ones are threatened. We are witnessing leaders call for trading lives to save the Dow Jones average. We are hearing reports of healthcare workers on the front lines, without proper equipment and support. Family businesses are going out of business. We are also seeing racism against Asians and Asian Americans.

In light of this, going on with business as usual with our teaching is for me something I am struggling with. I know this is a personal viewpoint. Some may need to dive into the details of a class to cope and distract. I get that, and I’m not arguing against what others are doing in this same situation. What I am saying is that I personally can’t just sit back and say nothing or just teach my spring quarter class just like I did the last time. The world has changed, and so have I. In April, May and possibly beyond, we’ll be in the midst of toughest part of the first wave of the coronavirus. You can’t just ignore all the bodies in the corner, while going on about integration by parts without acknowledging what’s happening.

At the same time, we can’t lose sight of the goals of our classes. We still need to educate. Students still need to learn and build up for their lives and careers. I’m not advocating for not teaching content either.

The world has far too many damaging, false dichotomies. Choosing between lives and the economy is the latest, terribly inhuman example. Others suggest we must choose between skills and conceptual understanding. Some suggest, falsely, that the choice is between helping underrepresented students or white students, as if kindness and inclusion is like pie. False dichotomies are red flags. It signals an agenda, bias, lazy thinking, or unwillingness to dig into the details of a complex issue.

The question for me at least is whether we will choose to be responsible to each other and ourselves and behave like grown ups. Responsible adults study the data and evidence, and get on with solving problems in this new normal.

Specific to education, teachers can inspire and attend to basic skills, as well as ask students in earnest, “How are you doing?” Teachers can be flexible with lessons because the news we all just received is truly bad. Teachers can keep the door open, create space in class and in office hours (even virtually), check in on students, and show their own humanity, reasoning, and maturity in the face of a global crisis. We are all scared. We all feel a range of emotions, and none of us have it all figured out or know what the future holds.

I’m teaching integral calculus online starting in about a week, and I plan to create spaces to build some community and have time set aside for us to discuss the global pandemic and how students are dealing with it. We (students and instructors) all have smart things we can share that will help others, and we can teach and learn to be better to one another. I'll also spend a lot of time developing an assessment plan that is standards based/mastery based, so that the stress of testing is taken off. The focus should be on learning (as always and even more important now). That in a nutshell is how I'll try to be a responsible adult in my role as a math instructor. I teach students first and foremost, with Math as the context.

Yes, we can teach the usual things, all the while putting humanity first.

Thoughts On Human-Centered Virtual Teaching (Coronavirus)

2020-03-19T00:58:00.003-04:00

My head is still spinning. We're living through the start of a global pandemic. I've had to do so much at home and work to prepare, that's it's been tough to even get enough sleep and take care of myself. Or fold that giant pile of laundry that's been sitting in the corner for days.

On to teaching... I've read many posts on twitter, in email, and articles about what to do to go virtual with our teaching. These discussions are great, and I've already learned a lot. People are stepping up and sharing really useful, real-world advice. In this post I'm going to focus on one aspect of all this. I call it human-centered teaching.

When we teach in person, it's easier to get to know your students, mentor during office hours, run into students on campus and have a conversation. All these things are part of the package of student-centered instruction and being on campus, and many of these things are harder or nonexistent or must be recreated in different way in online settings. I have not figured this all out by any stretch. I don't think it's something we should feel bad about, and I know over time we will develop and figure some of this out.

I'm on quarter system, so we actually start spring term in early April. But even if we were on semesters I'd do the same thing I'm going to mention. On the first virtual meeting day, I have two main goals. One is to meet and set virtual class norms (e.g. everyone turns on video, raising hands, muting), and practice using the technology. All of this is new, so we're going to need to get comfortable with our new normal routines.

The second goal is to open up a space for students to share some of their thoughts and feelings and make human connections with their classmates and me. This is the most important thing, in my opinion, to accomplish on day 1 (and keep going). The context surrounding us is a global pandemic. Millions will get sick, and globally many will die or lose someone close. This is hard stuff, and it's desperately real. Students who are young and just at the beginning of their adult lives are dealing with the uncertainty and turmoil of an enormous natural disaster, all the while going through the disruption of having to move home and be separated from their friends. In light of this, it's even more important to try and create a team spirit in our classes.

How will I try to do this? I plan to set aside class time for students to share their thoughts on the coronavirus pandemic. One specific strategy I used to get people to participate online (zoom conference calls) is to use a google doc with a 3xN table (N= number of students +1). Here's a hypothetical example:

Students pick a row and are paired with another student with the same number. I give them a pronpt, and they type at the same time, while I observe and make comments. (Using this strategy also needs to be normed.)

Further, I plan to create a chat space on Canvas for discussion strategies for how to study, self care, random questions or comments. I'll send out regular emails to keep the door open for students, and invite students to virtual office hours (or 1-1 meetings) to discuss math, learning, be a mentor, just be there to listen. I'm sure I'll have to adapt and add more things, but these are my initial plans to setup a framework for human interaction.

Another important mindset I'll focus on is keeping a healthy perspective for myself. We are not trying to recreate our in-person classes. Almost all of us are going online for the first time. Trying to cover everything just like before and in the same way is not going to happen. My focus will be on being present in each moment, trying my best, and working to improve each and everyday (Shokunin Spirit).

Lastly, I'd like to mention that we should be gentle on ourselves. We all going through a lot, and we should allow ourselves to be human, to make mistakes or not have the "best" class session. What truly matters is that we care and our students know we care about them. If it doesn't go like we planned, it's ok.

That's my initial plan for implementing human-centered virtual teaching. Sending positive thoughts. Stay safe and healthy!

Draft Plans for Running a Virtual Class

2020-03-05T14:40:00.003-05:00

Let me frame this post first with some initial thoughts... Sometimes life throws us all a curveball. Coronavirus is here, and CDC and others have warned us that major disruptions are coming. This is a very serious situation with a lot of levels, nuances, emotions, and sadly tragedy. People have and will suffer, and first and foremost I am wishing you all the best and hope you can stay strong and safe.

Some basic things I'm doing now to help keep my students and myself safe:

Inform my students about what they can do.
I bring cleaning supplies to class daily to clean desks.
I also bring tissues and will bring hand sanitizer when it's in stock again.
I've adjusted my attendance policy, and am asking students to stay home if they feel sick.

School closure is a strategy used in country for social distancing. This is used to flatten the epidemic curve to slow spread, provide necessary time and capacity for medical care, and a necessary part of battling a disease to keep people safe. I'm for whatever keeps us the safest.

What this means is many of us may have to teach virtual classes. I'm on quarter system, and we are wrapping up winter term. Spring term starts at the end of March, and that could be when things change significantly. People on semester system might need to switch in the middle of the term, so that brings its own set of issues.

A bit about some of my relevant background. Many of us have not taught online. I haven't, at least not a fully online class. I have taught hybrid online here and there, and have run faculty development workshops using zoom and a couple other tools. Tools like zoom are going to make this easier, and I think the tech is there to make this work well enough.

I'm sharing my own draft plans via google slides (linked HERE and embedded below). These are my draft thoughts on how to organize class via a simple framework, which others might find useful as a starting point. I'll update this regularly as things develop. I know there are much more experienced people on this issue, so find and share resources you have.

At the bare minimum, an instructor can give lectures via zoom at the scheduled class time, and setup office hours via zoom. I personally will do much more, since I use IBL methods, but I think it's worth sharing that switching to virtual is not that scary, and certainly worth it given the situation.