I recently finished writing a story about Twitter for Education Week's Digital Directions, which included a profile of one teacher in Silver Spring, Md., George Mayo, who is using Twitter with his students for a variety of projects.

Mayo set up a Twitter account called Many Voices and invited students to submit a sentence or two to a rolling collaborative story, which he then published and made available to purchase in print or as a free download. As you might expect, Mayo said his students were thrilled at being able to participate in the project, and they found seeing their work in print to be a satisfying experience. Coming in to school to find that a group of students in a different school had added a new chapter to their story was extremely motivating for his students, Mayo said.

The story itself is a dark science-fiction story about a mermaid who is turned into a human after his family is captured by fisherman. And I have to admit, I was a bit skeptical before I read through the story, but now that I've read through it a couple of times, I am impressed by the depth and consistency of the plot. Seeing as how the whole thing was written one or two sentences at a time from a variety of contributors, I was expecting to feel somewhat jolted around by all the different voices, but the story is actually a fairly seamless tale.

And it's not a light read, either. On my first read, I was struck by how bleak and depressing the whole thing was. The narrator struggles with a sudden loss of family and impending death within the first few chapters. Those seem like pretty hefty topics for elementary and middle school students to tackle.

Mayo is definitely one teacher who has embraced Web 2.0 tools in his classroom. He also used Twitter to promote a project called Many Voices for Darfur, which drew responses from almost 700 K-12 students about raising awareness for Darfur. Read Mayo's blog post about the project here.

Although Twitter does has some drawbacks--such as not being able to control what students are saying or using it for, and possibly cutting into more traditional grammar and writing skills--this teacher's work is one example of how it can be a useful and motivating tool for the classroom.

Posted by Katie Ash at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

This article in the New York Times debates the pros and cons of 8th-grade graduation ceremonies. In recent years, that benchmark has become more extravagant, says the article, which could send the wrong message to students by treating middle school graduation as an accomplishment and not an expectation. A blowout 8th-grade graduation could take away from the experience of high school graduation and make students think that finishing middle school is a sufficient level of education, some educators contend. But graduating from middle school is an accomplishment for some kids, opponents say, and recognizing that can be a strong motivator for some students.

Like most things, I have a feeling that the solution probably lies on some middle ground. I think it's important to recognize students' accomplishments and congratulate them on milestones that they've reached--and graduating from middle school definitely qualifies--but maybe graduation dinners and dances akin to prom might be going overboard. However, I don't really think that a big middle school graduation ceremony is going to make or break a student's educational trajectory, either.

What do you think? How is 8th-grade graduation celebrated in your districtl?

Posted by Katie Ash at 12:34 PM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

This story by the BBC about encouraging more students to study science by putting more emphasis on hands-on experiments and less on testing is an interesting follow-up to a few of the recent blog posts on Motivation Matters. It's a quick and interesting read.

And on a technical note, a few weeks back, we had a glitch with our RSS feed. To start the feed up again, try unsubscribing and then re-subscribing, and it should clear up the problem. And if you don't already subscribe to the Motivation Matters feed, I highly suggest that you click the big orange RSS feed link on the right column to get started. It's a great way to keep up with the latest posts here, and with all your favorite blogs.

Here's a video to explain the basics and get you started:

Posted by Katie Ash at 11:21 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

This commentary, by Leonard Sax, makes an interesting point. He says:

The real gender gap is not in ability but in motivation--not in what girls and boys can do, but in what girls and boys want to do: specifically, in what they want to learn, and how they want to learn it.

The number of women studying physics and computer science has dropped by 50 percent in the past 20 years, says Sax, and part of the reason may be that girls respond better to different teaching methods than boys do. They're more interested in "the nature of things" than "kinematics and momentum"--which is what most piques the interest of boys, he says, and is the introduction to traditional physics classes in the United States.

But as one commenter points out, and this blog post by eduwonkette explains, data from the National Science Foundation as well as the American Institute of Physics shows that women studying science are actually growing in number, not dwindling.

Still, for purposes of this blog, the more fascinating debate for me is whether different teaching methods actually motivate one gender more than the other. It makes sense that different people are motivated by different things, but whether those preferences fall easily down gender lines... that I'm not so sure about.

Have you experienced this phenomenon in your classroom? Do you think girls and boys could benefit from being taught separately, or do you think that separation would cause more harm than good?

Posted by Katie Ash at 1:21 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Here's a story from The Seattle Times that tackles an important question: Does standardized testing motivate students? This year, on the Washington Assessment of Student Learning, students passed in much higher numbers than predicted.

"The kids rose to the occasion," [said one superintendent]. "I don't know what else to say. I was just absolutely blown away."

Of course, this was not the case with all students, and some education organizations, including the Washington Education Association, don't believe that WASL scores should determine whether a student can graduate. Still, there are plenty of students and teachers who believe the test does motivate kids to raise the bar on their schoolwork.

After reading the article, it seems to me like the students who were motivated to do better by the WASL were those who were on the cusp of passing, while students who had trouble in school and didn't think a passing score was in reach were further discouraged by the test.

What do you think? Do tests have the power to motivate students? Or do they put too much pressure on kids and end up squelching motivation levels? Does it depend on the student? And if so, is there a way to provide a standardized test that takes that into account?

Posted by Katie Ash at 1:23 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Debbie Viadero has a new story up on edweek.org about a book that explores the number of "rudderless youths" who go through high school and sometimes college without a clear sense of what they want to do with their lives afterwards.

The book, The Path to Purpose: Helping Our Children Find Their Calling in Life, calls on both parents and educators to help students focus their interests and explore possible career paths at a younger age. A narrowed curriculum, says the author William Damon, along with feelings of alienation from society, may be contributing to an increase in the number of students who are "disengaged" with their future. Only about one-fifth of students surveyed for the study felt that they had a strong sense of purpose, whether that meant building a career, starting a family, or participating in a religion, according to the article.

This phenomenon is one that I am perhaps a bit too familiar with. As an English major with philosophy and French minors, when I graduated college, I was bombarded with questions of what I was going to do next. "Are you going to teach?," was the most common one. I told them no, probably not, but the truth was, I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life, nor did most of my peers. It was definitely one of the most unsettling, times of my life.

Fortunately (and sort of miraculously), I found a job that I enjoy, working in subject areas that I am interested in. But a lot of my friends who graduated at the same time as me are either waiting tables, working retail, interning, volunteering, or trying out other odd jobs to see what they might want to pursue as a career. It's not that these people aren't passionate or dedicated to certain subject areas, it's just that I don't think anyone ever told us how to translate those interests into a career.

And, as the article points out, I think this has major implications for education. If students aren't engaged with their future, they are much less likely to find their classes relevant and be motivated to do well in them. Damon contends that schools play a pivotal role in helping students figure out what they want to do with their lives, and more emphasis should be put on exposing them to different career paths and encouraging interests that could help fuel a sense of purpose.

However, while I initially agree with the idea, I'm not totally sure that such a plan would help. Job markets are constantly evolving, and a lot of jobs that students may want to have in the future haven't even been invented yet. Plus, I think it's sometimes hard to tell what you want to do until you try it out. I mean, I completely resisted the idea of being a reporter until I became one, and now I love it.

What do you think? Is it the educator's job to help students figure out future plans? Or is that the job of the individual student? Or perhaps their parents? Would such an emphasis on the future even make a difference?

Posted by Katie Ash at 11:25 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

My colleague Sean Cavanagh, who covers math and science here at Education Week, recently wrote an article about science labs in elementary schools. According to the story, although science standards generally call for hands-on experiments even in the early grades, such lab work doesn't always happen because of time constraints and a lack of teacher training. But introducing students to science experiments at an early age not only helps reinforce scientific laws and concepts, but also increases students' enthusiasm for the subject, says the article.

I, for one, do not recall ever conducting science experiments when I was in elementary school, and we certainly did not have anything like the labs or equipment described in the story at that level. The first time I ever saw a science lab or Bunsen burner was in middle school. As a student, I didn't start liking science until I was in college, and I won't go so far as to say that it was because I didn't experience hands-on science at a young age. But cultivating an enthusiasm for the subject in the early grades seems like a pretty good idea.

What do you think? How early does your school start introducing science experiments to students? How old were you when you started doing them? Does it make a difference?

Posted by Katie Ash at 2:36 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

I just finished writing an article for Digital Directions about using digital video in the classroom. It was a fun article to write since all of the educators I spoke with about using digital media in the classroom were passionate and thoughtful speakers, which makes my job pretty easy. And it seems like every time I write about teachers who are using technology in their classes, student motivation is a topic that inevitably comes up. When I asked one art teacher in my story, Kristine Fontes, whether or not her students were more engaged when she used digital media, I think she summed it up pretty well with three words: "Are you kidding?"

All the teachers I spoke with observed a noticable increase in the level of engagement students exhibited with their projects when they were encouraged to use digital media. In fact, a lot of the projects that these teachers did with their classes were spearheaded by students who would come in after school, during recess, or during lunch to complete. Part of the appeal for students, teachers noted, was the idea of sharing their work with a wide variety of people from all over the world through the Internet. I completely relate to this phenomenon. After all, isn't that one of the main attractions of blogging?

Another man I spoke with, Brock Dubbels, for my Digital Directions article about alternate-reality games had a really interesting point to make that I couldn't exactly fit into the article, so I'll share it here with you. Dubbels, who teaches 9th graders in the Minneapolis public school district, said that there's a disconnect between today's students and teachers who do not encourage the use of technology in the classroom. In their normal lives, kids really like technology, he says. They're surrounded by it and use it for all sorts of reasons--entertainment, social networking, education, etc. Banning gadgets such as cell phones and video games from the classroom, he says, pits education against what kids are interested in, which is a battle teachers simply can't win.

"By taking away the things [students like]," Dubbels told me, "you're saying my values are more important than yours." A better approach, he suggests, is to integrate technology with education and make the idea that you have to choose between them null and void. By recognizing where student interests lie and tapping into that, teachers can begin to develop a deeper relationship with students, he says.

It's worth noting, though, that technology can be a distraction to learning, a nuisance, and students often use it for obnoxious purposes, such as to bully other students using online tools. Plus, the jury is still out on the impact technology actually has on student achievement--some suggests it helps, some that it has no impact at all.

But what do you think? Has the Internet and new technology helped you find better ways to motivate your students? What might prevent teachers from being able to follow Dubbels' advice? On the other hand, what are the downsides of using technology in the classroom? How can it have a negative effect on student motivation?

Posted by Katie Ash at 1:07 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

This story, written by my colleague Erik Robelen, is about a study of student reward programs conducted by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes, which found that such programs improved students' reading scores, but had no discernible effect on math performance. One interesting thing about this study was that it grouped together different kinds of incentives--from cash and MP3 players to certificates of merit.

What I didn't expect to see when reading the article was such a strong backlash against these initiatives in the comments. One reader wrote that educators were turning students into "trained dolphins" that would only perform when a fish was dangled in front of their faces. Other readers responded to this with thoughtful commentary on the line between motivation and bribery, how NCLB factors into the debate, and how different kids are motivated in different ways.

It makes for an interesting read about a topic that obviously touches a nerve for a lot of people. Check it out and weigh in, if you feel so inclined.

Posted by Katie Ash at 1:04 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend