Sticky Initiatives

If you’ve been in education for more than 5 years you know about initiatives.  Initiatives are those “new greatest things to hit education” since…well, the last initiative.  Don’t get me wrong, many of the ideas I’ve seen  the past 25 years have been great. Students have been the beneficiary of these ideas.  The only problem with educational initiatives is their longevity. Just when teachers adjust to the “new idea” the next one comes along.  That continual turnover of ideas, and the teaching practices they necessitate, has worn down educators.  The turnover has made us not buy into some really great ideas.  The best example of this I experienced about 7 years ago.  On our district institute day in August all science teachers were given a book as we entered the high school auditorium.  The book was, “Negotiating Science: The Critical Role of Argument in Student Inquiry” written by Brian Hand, University of Iowa, and Jay Staker, Iowa State University, two of  men I now consider my mentors.  My colleagues looked at the book and said, “great, another new idea that will be here for a year or two.”  Admittedly I had my reservations, but I read the book and gave it a shot.  It has become the primary methodology of my trade craft.  The book coined the term: Science Writing Heuristic.  SWH to me is the perfect initiative, one that sticks.

Right around the time SWH came around we had been hearing about this new set of science standards, NGSS.  Many of us had the same old thoughts about the new standards, but like SWH, NGSS was different.  NGSS was also something that was going to stick.

What makes initiatives like SWH and NGSS different?  That is a simple answer.  They are a process not a plan.  They allow teachers to use their experience in a new way.  SWH and NGSS also make students and active part of the educational process.  I’ve often said in Twitter chats that my students are co-owners of my classroom.  That ability comes directly from the process SWH and NGSS propose.  They “stick” because they adhere to methods that teachers and students have used for years.  They are not newfangled approaches, rather they are a compilation of what always has worked, in not just education, but other fields as well.  Both SWH and NGSS involve teamwork. They take solid best teaching and learning practices and make the classroom a joint venture.  NGSS on a national scale, and SWH on a local level, will always work in the classroom.  They will stand the test of time because they require teachers and students to work together in the learning process.  They have done what others failed to do; unite teachers and students on a common path.

SWH has changed how I teach.  Likewise, NGSS has changed how science teachers teacher their students. Both, at their core, are simple.  They may look complex, but when you dig into them you see solid teaching and teacher/student collaboration.  I am going to stick with both of these initiatives because the stimulate teachers and students to go deeper into the learning process.  In 25 years I know these two ideas will be around.  Not because they are the greatest, but because they bring the two primary components in education together.  Teacher and students can stick with these two ideas because we can go through their processes together.