Teaching at GHP

As you work on your instructional goals, here are some things to keep in mind.

Make them realistic in terms of time and materials. Don’t plan on your students reading huge thick books or spending hours after majors on your class. Remember that GHP is more than what goes on in your classroom plus students have their minors plus students have their summer AP reading plus they have to eat and sleep sometime.

Also, realistic is not the same as achievable, which your goals do not necessarily have to be. In fact, achievable may be setting your goals too low! There’s that fine line between inspiring and frustrating: find it and make it your home.

In fact, this is a good time to talk about failure. One huge gift you can give your students is the opportunity to fail safely. Celebrate mistakes—celebrate crashing and burning! Remind them over and over: there are no grades, why not just take the chance? Audition for the dance minor, take the NaNoWriMo class, pick a project topic you know nothing about.

With that in mind, in developing your goals, your expectations need to be high. Assume that what you want them to do, they can do. Remember, above all, that you don’t have to know it for them to learn it. It is perfectly OK for you to explore and learn alongside them. Indeed, in Phase III activities, we hope at least some of your kids leave you in the dust—and so should you!

And then motivate them to do it. “Ad hoc” empowerment, safe failure zone, your dazzling instructional framework: use it all to maximize your agenda.

If for some reason things are not working out, you have several resources. Your fellow department members, your department chair, and us (i.e., Marcie and Dale)—in that order!. That is part of our job, to make this a safe failure zone for you. Remember we’ve been here forever; we’ve probably seen your problem before and might even have a solution at hand. So track us down in the dining hall or poke your head into Marcie’s apartment . That’s what she’s there for.

NEXT: 9. The nature of the beast, part I

If you work in the Georgia public schools, you are probably required to post your standards and your instructional goals on the board. We don’t do that at GHP, of course, but it is nonetheless a good idea for you to formulate explicit, written instructional goals for design purposes.

Couch them in terms of the knowledge, skills, and behaviors that you want the students to leave with.

As you design your class, if it all seems fuzzy (“…and then a miracle happens”…) try this: On one side of a sheet of paper, write When you finish this activity/lesson/unit/class, you will

1. have a better understanding of…
2. be able to…
3. apply…

Complete the sentences as if you’re talking to the students as you begin the unit.

On the other side of the paper, write We will know you are making progress toward meeting this goal when you… List 1-5 evidences that span whatever cognitive hierarchy you like to work with.

You can see how this little exercise would clarify your thoughts on the matter. (Remember the quote, “There is nothing quite like facing the hangman’s noose to focus one’s mind.”)

As we go through the summer, Marcie (and Dale) will be observing your class. It will help you alert us to what we’re seeing if you already have in your head the framework of what’s “supposed” to be going on. Also, at the end of the summer, you’ll get a form to evaluate yourself, and the first thing it asks you is what your instructional goals were. Go ahead and write them now.

Can you change your goals? Absolutely. You don’t know what you’re getting into—you really don’t; none of us did—and more than likely you’ll start making adjustments at lunch on Monday. That’s not only acceptable, that’s good teaching.

NEXT: 8. Goals: further thoughts

How has Renzulli’s three-phase model of learning activities been put into practice at GHP? We’ll look at the art department and the math department, both of which have structured the overall summer along these lines. [N.B.: These examples are from the past when the program was six weeks long. Adjust your expectations accordingly. —Dale, 2011]

Phase I: Teacher as director

The art department spends the first two weeks cycling the students through the various media being offered for the summer: painting, ceramics, drawing, 3-D, etc. In each, the student is given a basic assignment, such as painting a still life, creating a teapot (must have a handle, a lid, and a spout; need not contain water), and so forth. Throughout, teachers give direct instruction on techniques the students need in order to perform the assignment.

The math department moves its students through several research projects independently of the classes it offers. The first one is a “scavenger hunt” activity, designed to introduce students to the resources of the library and the internet, as well as the various areas of mathematics.

In both departments, the notion of “ad hoc” empowerment is first and foremost at this stage.

Phase II: Teacher as facilitator

Next, the art department brings in guest artists and has them demonstrate “how they do it” for the students. Then the students are invited to replicate those strategies and techniques, experimenting with them and either incorporating or rejecting them in their own work. Here we see the replication of models at work.

The math department gives its students a menu of topics to choose from and asks them to explore one of them. Once again, the teacher sets the problem, but the student devises the solution.

Phase III: Teacher as mentor

Finally, art majors are asked to propose a series of work they’d like to work on. It might be an exploration of a particular medium, or subject, or strategy. For example, a student several years ago did a whole series of mixed media works on household appliances. At this point, the teachers just sit back and observe, and the kids know they can ask for assistance on any problem they’re having, either technical or artistic.

In the math department, students must find a final research topic that interests them from the broad fields they’ve been exposed to. It might be an actual math problem to develop, or some historical or technical topic to explain. The math teachers, again, serve as backup when students hit dead ends.

These two departments use the Renzulli model as an overarching structure for the entire summer, art as the basis for their whole program, math for one strand of theirs. You can see how the structure might apply to your coursework, whether to a one week course in social studies or a brief lab unit in science.

Perhaps others can share how they’ve implemented it in their GHP classes.

NEXT: 7. Instructional goals

The following is based on the research and ideas of Joseph Renzulli.

Renzulli proposes a three-phase model in empowering students as learners.

As shown in the following charts, the responsiblity of the teacher for the learning activity decreases as the student’s increases.

In Phase I activities, the teacher serves as the director. The teacher sets up the problem and the path(s) to the (generally) predetermined solution. This is the “ad hoc” empowerment phase, the frontloading phase. It is here that lecture as a delivery model would be most appropriate.

In Phase II activities, the teacher serves as the facilitator. The teacher sets up the problem, but solutions and the structures for those solutions are more the student’s responsibility. The teacher helps the student manage the information and its outcome. Often, Phase II consists of replicating classic models in the subject area.

In Phase III activities, the teacher sits back and plays the mentor. The student defines both the problem and the solution. The teacher is there only to provide guidance when the student needs it.

It should be pretty clear that Phase III is where we want students at GHP to be operating. However, while our kids certainly have all the potential for Phase III, we sometimes dump them there without making sure they’re ready. Phase I activities at GHP may last five minutes instead of a semester, but don’t make the mistake of thinking they’re unnecessary.

In our next post, we’ll look at the application and examples of this model at GHP.

Our second mandate states that we will provide instruction that empowers the students to become lifelong learners.

We think of empowerment in two different ways, “ad hoc” and “roots & wings” empowerment.

“Ad hoc” empowerment issues have to do with getting students ready to do whatever task you’ve set up for them. They have to do with immediate instructional concerns.

For example, if your assignment requires that they be able to use a chromatograph, you want to ensure they actually can do that before you turn them loose. (We will return to this idea in the next post.) Likewise, do not assume that they already know how to research periodicals, or use Google Scholar, or know how to write a sonnet. Be prepared to teach them.

“Roots & wings” empowerment is what the program is all about. Your course content is secondary to preparing your students to become lifelong learners.

By “roots” we mean establishing your students in a sound intellectual environment: questioning, tolerant of ambiguity, resisting easy answers, seeking clarity and accuracy, refining and defending ideas and positions. Is what you’re planning for the classroom conducive to creating a lifelong learner?

And by “wings”we mean the ability to go beyond what you’ve set as the limits of your class. It does us no good as a program if students leave us unprepared to continue doing what you’ve started them on. I am reminded of students auditioning in theatre for GHP who are very, very polished in their audition piece, but when you ask them to alter it, to pursue a different emotional impulse, they are stymied. They can only repeat what their teacher has taught them to do.

[DALE’S NOTE] Remember, oh remember, that this taking flight may not happen in our brief span of six four weeks. It certainly did not for me. I attended GHP as an art major in 1970. My painting teacher was Diane Mize, who recently retired after 40+ years of teaching. I know she despaired of me; why had this kid been sent in art? He just didn’t get it. And I didn’t.

But in September, October, November, something happened. I did get it. What Diane Mize was trying to teach me about the creative process and what it means to make the thing that is not began to dawn on me, and the rest of my life has been living out what she taught me in those eight weeks. [Can you imagine having to teach this program for eight weeks??]

Therefore do not despair if all those things you designed so carefully to provide empowerment don’t produce obvious results. They may do so long after the student has left Valdosta.

So design carefully.

NEXT: 5. The Renzuli model

Everything we do at GHP is governed by two mandates:

• We must provide instruction that is significantly different than the regular high school classroom.
• We must provide instruction that empowers the students to become lifelong learners.

As you think about what you’re doing in the classroom, remember these two mandates. At the end of the summer, we survey the students to see how well the program did in terms of differentiation and empowerment; you want your classroom ranked high on both.

What do we mean by “significantly different”?

We expect to see instruction that differs from the regular classroom in terms of

• content
• delivery
• expectation of student response

Ideally, your classroom should be observably different from a regular high school classrom in all three areas.

We’ll begin looking at these three areas in the next blogpost.