The way Andrew and I have been teaching is new for our students.

It's new for us, for that matter.

It's not the Teacher Lectures and Student Studies the Textbook paradigm.  And our students really struggled with the transition.

So I decided to ask them what they were learning in my class.  We've been working on these three playlists.

I wasn't expecting much because it really seems like they weren't "getting it" and making the right connections.

Here were the results for the topic:

What are you learning in this class?  What do you think we want you to know/be able to do?


Wordle (all classes combined)

Original notes from the 1st period discussion:

Sorry it's not super legible.  The check marks indicate when another group said something that was already up there.

I'm really proud of them.  

They ARE learning! :-)

As teachers, we have lots of opportunities to think about, plan for, and look back on first days.  We're trained to think in terms of "starting strong" and told to "not smile until [insert fall/winter holiday here, depending on how strict you are]" - that if we don't "set firm boundaries" that we can "never be more strict than we are on the first day."

I think that's all crap.

Am I anti-structure?  No.  I think you'll find that beneath the seeming-chaos in my room, there is a definite order and structure to what's happening.  In the next few weeks, Andrew and I will be writing in depth about, and sharing all our resources/plans for our course.  There has to be order for the chaos to function effectively.  You will see a few of our resources at the end of this point so you have more of a framework to understand what our classes look like.

****

At one time, my ideal classroom looked a lot like an example from a Harry Wong book.  Students were conditioned (some would say manipulated) to perform actions by rote to the point that class runs without teacher guidance.  

It's funny how close the end result is to flipped class, while being on the complete opposite pedagogical scale.  In a flipped class, students take responsibility for their LEARNING, which leads them to use behaviours that make the classroom function seamlessly, whereas in a Harry Wong class, students take responsibility for their actions, which is supposed to make the learning function seamlessly.  

But what often happens is that students learn to act that way in one context, at one time.  How many students sit in a classroom like that and by the end of the year permanently morph into compliant, disciplined learners?  No, they go to the next class, and if the teacher has different structures, they start all over.  Even if the teacher is similar, at some point, they will be expected to do more than show up, take notes, and follow procedures.  And they won't know how to do it.

In a flipped class, the idea is that when you teach students the habits of mind, the skills, and the knowledge they need to be responsible for their own learning, they also start to learn that certain behaviours are more conducive to them reaching mastery, so they start regulating themselves without even thinking about it, in order to push themselves and their peers to learn more.  This is exactly what happened in my class last year - they went from unmanageable to self-managing.  In a matter of weeks.

So both Harry Wong and flipped class reach similar end results in terms of behaviour, but vastly different in terms of learning and attitude.  And if we really think about it, as educators, which should we value?  Should we value teaching students to be compliant, while explicitly managing their behaviour for them through the use of punishments and rewards?  

Or should we be teaching our students how to engage in the messy and beautiful process where making mistakes, failing, trying again, and finding their own way out helps them find not only what they were looking for, but something that is far more valuable: the ability to find, manage, curate, and create information in any discipline, situation, or venue?


****

As someone who values backwards planning, I like to start with my desired end result before I know where to begin.  If I want students who can think critically and creatively, who can build and use with skill a toolkit more vast than just the one used in my own discipline, and who refuse to give up when they fail, but instead reach out to find different solutions from the resources available to them, then starting the year with Harry Wong just won't cut it.

It's why I'm starting with Blank White Page, a project where students generate questions, then find answers to those questions.  They can work on their own, or with peers (from their own school or from three others around the country).  They can use any resources they can find.  They have complete freedom on what to study, how to study it, and how to demonstrate their knowledge.

It's why I'm starting with a video introducing not only myself, but Andrew as well.  Where we explain why we've decided to team-teach their class from 2,500 miles apart.  Where we model what it looks like to have your ideas become something better than you ever could have imagined.   

But most of all, it's why I flipped my class.  I don't know of any other way to teach students to be who and what I want them to be...no, who they NEED to be to succeed in the "real world" outside my classroom.

There are lots of things I want my students to understand about me and about the class on the first day.  But I'm not the centre of my classroom anymore.  If I stand up and talk about my rules and policies on the first day, then I'm still trying to be the centre.  I am communicating to them that what's really important is ME and them following MY rules, MY procedures, and fitting into MY world.  I am telling them that I have all the answers.

That's why I'm not going to talk much on the first day.  I am going to assess my students on the first day - who they are, what they know, what interests them, how they interact, what they expect from school, who they like/hate, etc.  I am collecting evidence and making inferences...which is exactly what I'm teaching them how to do in the first unit.  Because THEY are important.  And the end goal is for THEM to learn, to grow, and to succeed.  

I want them to see that NO ONE has all the answers.  That there will always be blank white pages ahead of them, and it is their job to find ways of filling them in most effectively.  I want their life to be a Blank White Page project - prompted by curiosity, driven by a constant search for answers, and always building towards becoming a life-long learner.

So as I plan for the first day, I ask myself if I'm backwards planning for that end goal.  Will our students walk away equipped with a toolkit that will transfer from the content taught in our class to the content of the rest of their lives?  Will they learn not just compliant behaviours, but habits of mind, skills, and how to be a critical and creative thinker?

****

First days are important, sure.  But what's really important is the LAST day, and thinking forward to One Day, when they leave our class and go on to whatever comes next.  The time when routines and structures are gone, and they are left facing their future.  Will they see something that is chaotic because they have no one imposing structure on them?  Or will they see a blank white page that is just waiting to be filled in and expanded and created?

I know which one I'd choose for them.





I linked to a few videos in the post, but here are some other resources for our first unit:
Mentor Mob Playlists for BWP and Strand 1
Video playlist for unit 1

School starts, for most of us, within four weeks.  What that means is that many teachers are starting to gear up, and have begun to plan their upcoming year.  That means lots and lots of people are discovering the flipped class model for the first time.

So there have been a lot of tweets sent to me and others in the #flipclass circles asking for information about how to flip their class.  Some of the most common questions:

1. What if I don't have the technology to use in class?
2. What if my students don't do homework?
3. What if the students haven't watched the video?
4. How can I flip if I can't make videos?
5. Am I already flipped? I do everything you describe except the video?
6. How can I make this work for me in x context or y situation?

I can't answer all of those. 

And these ideas are not mine.  They were developed in conjunction with several other teachers...the usual suspects really: Andrew Thomasson, Karl Lindgren-Streicher, Crystal Kirch, and Kate Baker.  Between the five of us, and based on conversations with and presentations from hundreds of other educators on Twitter, Edmodo, and in person or in Google+ hangout, we have developed a definition of what it means to flip your class.

So I can tell you what we've discussed, and what I've told people on Twitter:

There is no one right way to flip your class.

There is no How-To binder for sale.

There is no panel of experts to tell you what to do.

However, there is the Flipped Mindset. 

We chose to use the term Flipped Mindset intentionally - we don't want to define Flipped Class as a pedagogy or an instructional method or a theory. 

We want to define it not as something you do, but something you have. 

Within this framework, you can have thousands of different iterations that are all flipped, but are equally different.  In fact, I would argue that no two flipped classes should look the same; if we are differentiating for the kids in the room, then every classroom, and even every period, HAS to be different. 

So what makes up the Flipped Mindset? 

There are three pillars:

1. Teachers make the best use of their face-to-face time with students.

2. The classroom uses student-centred pedagogy.

3. There is an intentional focus on higher-level thinking, rather than rote memorisation.

******

What do those pillars mean?

For the first pillar, what you're really talking about is being a reflective educator who uses the tools they have available to reach their students in the most effective possible way.  For me, that means using social media and video (both collaborative with Andrew Thomasson and on ShowMe, my iPad app) because technology is the language my students speak, and I think it's important to A) teach them how to use it responsibly, and B) show them that learning can happen regardless of what tools are used.  Additionally, I think there are some really cool things that can only be done through use of technology (see: collaborative videos with someone from across the country).

However, if the use of video is what is holding you back from flipping, then hear this: IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT THE VIDEO!  What it IS all about is your students, and how you can best serve them in the time you get face-to-face in the classroom.  If something is less important, you can off-load it to out of class time.  If your students won't do homework, then make your class asynchronous or set up stations for different learning tasks.  I should clarify: this doesn't mean that there is never time given in class to students acquiring knowledge.  If that's the best use of your class time, then that's fine.  The key here is reflection and understanding of your students.

The other thing to consider is the tasks in your discipline that would be most difficult in terms of cognitive load.  Those are the tasks that would be most productive to have students engaged in while the teacher is present.  In English, those tasks are reading and writing.  Having students read in class and write in class, while they have access to their peers, who are working on the same thing, and access to their teacher, who can help when they get stuck, gives them the opportunities they need to build those skills, make mistakes, and catch those mistakes without becoming overwhelming.  Students learn to collaborate, but they also learn that even "experts" make mistakes and have to work through them.  And using the face-to-face time you have with students appropriately lets you guide them through those processes which they will find most challenging.

For the second pillar, the teacher is no longer the centre of the classroom.  The entire environment is geared towards the student not only being an active participant in the learning, but also helping to drive the learning.  While it's not possible for students to always create content or allow student choice determine what is taught, including students in the process is key.  Rather than the teacher being the one driving learning and dragging the students along, the students are collaborative.  Rather than being competitive with each other, students share their understanding, which leads to a deeper comprehension and increased ability to make meaning from it.

When Andrew and I started making our collaborative videos, we began at the same point that most other Flipped Class educators do: with content videos.  We wanted to make videos that would allow our students to learn the information they needed to write a research paper.  However, we quickly found that what we were teaching was not content, but rather process.  We were showing students the steps and content of what goes into an essay, but we were also showing them what it looked like to compose that essay, with all the mess and all the problems, and all the real things that happened. 

We went from being teachers with all the answers to students who were actually learning from each other, collaborating with each other, and composing an essay that was far better as a result than one we could have written alone.  That element is key in the shift we made to a more student-centred approach to video in our flipped classes.  It also pushed us to go even farther than that, and develop something we're calling the MetaFlip, or making the process we go through when we read, talk, write or think visible and transparent to students.  It takes us one more step off the stage, and shows students that we make mistakes, that we have to work to understand material, and that collaboration is the key to all the good ideas we ever have.  We'll talk more about MetaFlip later.

The third pillar, engaging in higher-order thinking, is based on Bloom's Taxonomy.  At the top of the pyramid are the higher-order thinking tasks: application, synthesis, analysis, and evaluation.  At the bottom are the rote tasks of comprehension and knowledge.  A class using the Flipped Mindset does deal with facts and basic information, but the priority is taking those facts and working with them, transforming them, and making meaning out of them. 

********

Those three pillars are the three things you need to flip your class.  And guess what: YOU DON'T NEED VIDEO!  And guess what: YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE STUDENTS DO HOMEWORK!

If you really want to know whether your class is flipped, ask yourself these questions:

1. Do I intentionally plan my face-to-face time in order to allow for the tasks that require the highest cognitive load?  Do I use that information to guide my students as they learn the content and processes?

2. Are students at the centre of my classroom?  Am I in a "guide" role, rather than a "sage on the stage" role?  Am I emphasising collaboration over competition?  Can students see me as a learner, including when I make mistakes?

3. In the assignments I create and assessments I give, is the emphasis on knowledge that is not "google-able"?  Am I asking students to analyse, apply, synthesise, evaluate, and create, rather than just know and understand?

If those questions can be answered yes, you have the Flipped Mindset.  You HAVE flipped your class!

That being said, while I believe that using technology is essential for ANY modern educator, the three things that define what it means to flip your class do not have to include technology.  There is no reason that equity, technology access (or lack thereof), or teacher familiarity and skill with technology have to be barriers to flipping your class.

I know that most of the ideas that build the three pillars returns to the constructivist pedagogy of the past.  And that's why I believe that using technology is important for all teachers.  Students "live" in the world of technology, and if we speak their language, we can help them transfer all the skills they use every day and make them work for their education as well. 

When you have the Flipped Mindset AND you embrace the technology you have available to you, your students will only benefit.  But flipping isn't and shouldn't be synonymous with video.

******

Wow.  That's a lot.

You can read Andrew's post on this subject here.  We will be making a video about this soon, because I think talking about it on screen, with multiple educators, using real examples of how it looks in their class, makes this subject much more clear and comprehensible.  We also will be covering the tools in the toolkit for each discipline and how those apply to our flipped classes.

I know that there is a lot of work to be done before the start of school in a month.  But it's exciting work - and it has helped me become a far better teacher than I was before I flipped my class.  I flipped in the middle of the year.  I wish I had started over the summer, preparing and getting things ready so that those first few months weren't so chaotic.  So if you're looking at this and wondering where to start, find us on Twitter!  Leave a comment!  Get in touch in some way.  There are loads of us willing to help you get started, because there were people before us who helped us get started, and you will in turn help others when you've on your way.  The collaboration I've found through the #flipclass community is amazing, and I am blessed to count my co-authors/originators on this post not only as collaborators, but as friends.

*****

Thanks to Jon Bergmann for the shout out/Friday Follow in this tweet a few days ago:

I don't know a single teacher who hasn't, deep down, wondered if they were doing a good job.  I don't know a single good teacher who doesn't think that constantly.

Some doubt that more than others.  In fact, some of the best teachers believe that they are failures, and wonder if they even should be in the profession at all.

I stake no claim for being a great teacher; I've never been happy with the job I'm doing in my classroom.  For years, I've masked it with a completely fictitious act of over-confidence or with a tendency towards perfectionism (the socially acceptable form of always feeling not-quite-good-enough).  But deep down, it's there.  Lurking, rearing up whenever I feel most vulnerable.

It's the blessing and curse of the reflective teacher: you are always thinking about how to make your classroom better, but you're always struck by just how far you have to go before you are where you want to be.  It's an exhausting place to be in, emotionally, physically, and professionally.

And while I don't trust teachers who say their class is perfect, I also don't trust teachers who say they are doing a bad job.  Because here's the thing:

Learning is messy.  Teaching is messy.  Life is messy.

When we hide that, we hide the reality of who we are and what we do.  In a weird way, we have to show how much of a mess we are to show what a good job we're actually doing.  And in a flipped class, if your class is not a little chaotic then it's not truly student-centred.

Part of the partnership Andrew and I have built is on the premise that we never "hide the mess" - from each other or from our students.  We believe that it's essential to show students how we fail and then try again and then fail again and then eventually (maybe) succeed.  We want them to see us fail because it shows them how NORMAL it is, and that the acceptable response is not to give up, but to get up.  To slip and not be buried.  To fight and not be defeated.

In any educational movement, including the flipped class movement, there are people held up as "experts," but here's what I have learned: there are no experts.  We are all constantly learning, and if we stop learning, we stagnate.  And if we stagnate, we become irrelevant and ineffective...which is death to the classroom, and certainly does not an expert make.

While I see the value in there being people who are willing to put their information out there (I am a blogger who claims to know something about teaching in a flipped English class, after all), I think it's also vital to stop perpetuating the myth that they are (and I am) doing an amazing job and should be revered and held in awe. 

Put even more bluntly: if you don't show me your mess, I'll assume you're lying or irrelevant.  Because the mess is there, whether I can see it or not.

Some of us have been lucky enough to have had some of the mess cleaned up by years at good schools.  That's where I'm coming from.  I went from being a broken teacher, disillusioned with teaching and with everything that wasn't about the relationship between me and my students, to someone who was suddenly a valued and respected colleague.  It helped me clean up my metaphorical living room, even if the rest of my house was still a mess.

But San Lorenzo was the school that taught me how much I had to give and how much I actually stole from my colleagues by not sharing with them.  It was there that I first learned that in the act of sharing your curriculum, you actually are sharing your mess alongside your ideas.  And when it isn't thrown back in your face, but rather taken and made better just by the act of sharing and collaboration, you start to wonder why you held back for so long.

There is a concept very close to my heart that drives at this same idea.  It derives from the Bantu word, "ubuntu."  It is the South African driving principle that affirms that, "I am who I am because we are." People are people THROUGH other people.  There is no such thing as being alone.  We are all interconnected, and as such, we must act accordingly.  We may not see the ties that bind us together, but that doesn't mean that they are not there.

In America, we've never really had this concept, let alone valued it the way my South African friends do.  In fact, it's so foreign to us that we are genuinely surprised when people make choices that are not in their own self-interest.  And yet, according to ubuntu, acting in the interest of others IS acting in self interest, because when someone else is exalted or esteemed, we all are exalted and esteemed.

On the flip side, when one teacher is disillusioned and broken, we are ALL disillusioned and broken.

And that is the state most of us are in.  Is it any wonder that schools are so broken and students are so disillusioned?

And yet.  By showing all of you the mess underneath my thin veneer of competence, I'm hoping to give you some hope that by embracing the mess that is our lives and profession, we can become something better together than we can alone.

Andrew and I named this blog Ion Lucidity, partially as a joke.  

But we were recording a few nights ago, and suddenly, it didn't feel like a joke anymore.  As weird as this sounds, it became the exact phrase we needed to explain what had happened in a single moment.

I'll back up a little bit.

We had spent hours planning a complicated shoot that included topics on which neither of us are experts.  When we started filming, my physical exhaustion and his mental exhaustion was palpable.  I can hardly watch the footage because of how present that exhaustion is.  

After about 20 minutes, we did our typical stop and check-in to see what else we still needed to cover.  And we did something that we do far more than work:  we just talked as friends.  It was an attempt, for a few minutes at least, to try to hold on to our last bit of sanity.  Through that conversation, it became clear we needed to start the recording over from the beginning (this is something that happens regularly in our partnership...which explains the many, many 13 GB Camtasia files on my hard drive).

So we started over.  And that's when it happened: we reached Ion Lucidity.  The ethereal moment when we went from exhaustion to clarity, solely through the act of conversation and collaboration.

Here is something I know: We are so much better together than we are alone.  By working together, we have ideas that are better than any either of us had alone.  It starts from incoherent rambling and flowers into something neither of us expected or imagined.  

And not only are we lucky enough to work with each other, we have been so fortunate as to find other like-minded educators to share our mess with us. 

But what I barely understand is that they care so much that they refuse to leave it that way.  They jump in and help figure out how to make the mess visible, and by doing so, exorcise it for good.  To loosely quote the Avett Brothers,  they love me for the person I'll become, not the person that I am.  That is something beautiful and incomprehensible.

Here is something else I know: the only word other than Ion Lucidity that makes this concept make sense is ubuntu.  

And here is what I believe more than anything: There is a magical quality to collaboration that allows you to be so much greater than the sum of your parts.  It allows you to see what was obscured when you tried to view it alone.  It pushes you beyond where you could ever imagine going.  It supports you when you feel like you will be crushed under the self-doubt and failure.  It reminds you that you are never a failure...it is just your mess becoming visible.

And it is there that we are most powerful: When your mess is visible to the world, people recognise their own mess in the midst of yours and it becomes okay to show theirs too.  And by the simple act of sharing, you are living ubuntu; the ties that bind you to everyone else go from being invisible to being so obvious you wonder how you've missed them for so long.

And you wonder how you ever lived without seeing them, because your life is so much more rich and full than you could have ever imagined.

Call it collaboration, call it Ion Lucidity, call it ubuntu...it doesn't matter.  It replaces that deeply held belief that you're not doing well enough with something even better: the realisation that when you AREN'T good enough, there are people who will love you anyway, and will help you be far better than good enough.

In the last post, I talked about Guiding Principles for flipped reading instruction.  This is now two posts because someone...who will remain nameless...told me that it was too much for one post (he's right, of course.  I just spiral out of control when I'm excited about an idea. Or fifty).

Today, I'll deal with the last Guiding Principle, particularly as it applies to shorter works (GP 3):

4. Flipping reading has to be about process and skill rather than content

For my Essay and Exposition class (an 11th/12th grade English semester-long elective):

• Units are roughly a week, but part of a larger sequence, planned using Understanding By Design, and incorporating my adaptation of Ramsay Musallam's Explore Flip Apply structure:

            Explore Flip Apply Explore Apply Assess

More on that in a minute.

• Students will be about 75% self-paced. Monday will be the one day that is rarely/never self-paced.  
• We will read a short text together on Monday - the class focus is on essays and creative non-fiction.  This includes selections from Essay Connections, The Orwell Reader and The Blair Reader, as well as Me Talk Pretty One Day.  Because I realise that is VERY different from what most people are teaching in US English classes, I've done my example here with two poems, which at least are easy to modify for your own context.
• After reading together and assessing basic comprehension, students will either work alone or in groups to look at theme/structure/style/whatever the focus is.  This will usually take the form of inquiry.  
• • Sample Inquiry/Explore Questions (again, these are 11th-12th grade level, but could be adapted for lower levels):

• • What common structures can you find in the language in the text? 
    
  • skill: analyse impact of author's choices on text, analyse impact of word choice on text, CCS 11.3-11.4
  • Example with one text: What patterns can you find in the LANGUAGE (i.e. only the explicit/literal words in the poem, not the inferences you might make) in "Red Dust"?  
  • Example with two texts: What patterns in the language are found in both "Red Dust" and "Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock"?
  • How is the idea of (x theme) developed in the text?  
    
  • skill: determine theme and trace development, CCS 11.2
  • Example with one text: What explicit words and implicit ideas/inferences in Philip Levine's poem "Red Dust" would lead you to believe that the author is writing about sorrow?
  • Example with two texts: What explicit words and implicit ideas/inferences in "Red Dust" and "Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" can you find?  What common theme can you draw from those patterns?
  • Compare (x text) to (y text).  What do you notice about (x) pattern in the text?  
    
  • skill: analyse author's choices and development of theme in two texts, CSS 11.2-4
  • Example (with two texts, obviously): What do you notice about the patterns related to mortality in "Red Dust" and "Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock"?  What is similar?  What is different?  Which (in your opinion) delivers the theme/impression most effectively?
  • What [figurative language/literary device/poetic meter/etc.] is used in the text?  What patterns do you notice?  What inferences can you make about the text based on those patterns? 
    
  • skill: determine meaning of words and how word choice impacts the text/theme, CSS 11.4
  • Example: Levine uses intense juxtaposition throughout the poem "Red Dust" - what controlling impression does that create?  What word patterns help you understand the controlling impression?
  • What personal experience have you had that you can relate to this text?  Explain the connection and how it relates to the text using specific examples of the language in the text that made you think of the connection. 
    
  • skill: cite textual evidence to support a claim, CSS 11.1

After they read and complete the inquiry task, we will discuss those ideas in class.  This may bleed into Tuesday (or homework for Monday night), depending on the length of the text.

• From there, students will be self paced, using roughly this format:
• Skill: Video on technique/theme/style analysis (flip)
• Practice Skill: Complete task that builds skills with a similar text (apply)
• Process-Teacher Model: Video on choice of texts with guiding questions (explore)
• Practice Process: Analyse text of choice (apply)
• Process-Student Model: Write/do project to show mastery (assess)
• Work on WBP project, either as homework during the week or with left-over class time (explore/flip/apply)

I didn't want to break up the flow of that list, so here are some additional details about those steps:

The work will be completed in order, but it can be done in class or at home, as the kids find easiest/most productive for them.  They do have to be working during class time, but not requiring the videos for homework makes it more self-paced and asynchronous.  There will be a "Watch" station so they can view the videos during class.  

There is potential that some students can skip the skill/practice steps if they can demonstrate mastery.  No point in making them build a skill they've mastered, right?  In that case, the assess phase would have to show mastery AND excellence, since they are now challenging themselves beyond basic mastery.  The will probably end up also having masses of time to work on WBP, which is okay with me.

I'm using these loose definitions for the skill/practice/process terms:
[note: these are VERY under-construction.  Feedback appreciated]

Skill: anything that builds a necessary reading, writing or thinking skill.  Usually modelled explicitly in a video.

Practice Skill/Process: anything that allows a student to work on the skill or process.  It will usually be a reading assignment, a conversation, or a piece of writing.  This is the skill-building stage that allows students to move towards mastery.  This is the step I will be most directly involved in during class time.  I will be working with students individually or in small groups.

Process-TM: these are videos that I'll make with Andrew Thomasson where we model the writing process, a reading strategy, or have a reflective conversation.  Whatever process we model, students will be expected to show mastery of in the Process-SM phase.  If we show a reflective conversation, they will be expected to have a reflective conversation.  If we show writing, they'll be expected to write.  Etc.  

In this example, we will talk about the three texts as a preview and walk through the beginning of each text, showing the beginning of the process we expect them to finish (like marking up figurative language and analysing the impact on tone).  This will evolve as we start trying it [as of now, we've only hazily talked about it and this is probably the most complete description he's read at this point...so Andrew, if you have feedback or think this is a stupid idea, we can/will talk about it more...].

Process-SM: this step is where the students use the exact same process Andrew and I modelled in the Process-TM to show that they've mastered the process AND skill taught that week.  So in the unit I've outlined above, students would have to film themselves (alone or in a team) walking through the process we modelled on a brand new text, or they could mark up the text in writing or in a VoiceThread.  That would be assessed, and if students need to go back to build mastery, they will repeat the Skill/Practice steps with more explicit guidance from me.


*****


This is overly reductive, but using that model means that the content you use (i.e. what you read/watch/talk about) doesn't matter NEARLY as much as the process and skills you're building.  You can read a Cornflakes box and make it work in this format if you're clever enough.

I also know that I tend towards overly complicated systems and structures.  It always gets more simple as I bounce it around with Andrew and the rest of the Cheesebucket Posse.

I've spent a considerable amount of energy this summer trying to figure out this difficult problem: How do you flip reading instruction, particularly in a self-paced, asynchronous mastery environment?  

I don't know that I have an answer yet.  But I have thoughts.  These thoughts were HEAVILY influenced by lots of people (yes...the usual suspects).  In fact, let me make that more explicit.  These ideas are not mine.  I can't claim them and I refuse to claim them.  They only exist because of the amazing people on Twitter who process with me constantly.  They only exist because of the webinar we had last Tuesday.  They only exist because of Andrew Thomasson and Karl Lindgren-Streicher.  Andrew said it better here...and that's how things tend to work.  I talk forever and in circles, and then he just puts it so simply and beautifully, in a way that is perfectly understandable and yet so profound that I just shut up and agree with him.

So I agree with him.

That being said...writing "we" instead of "I" just sounds weird.  So mentally, when you read "I" know that there are multiple "I"s represented in this amazing collective of colleagues.

I'm going to start by listing the general ideas, then I'll give specifics after the list.   This got really, really long.  And it's probably confusing to anyone outside my own head.  For that I apologise in advance.  

Guiding Principles
1. Flipped reading is more than "reading at home" and "talking about it in class."
2. Flipping reading requires way more creativity than flipping grammar or vocabulary or even writing, and it greatly depends on instructional context.
3. Flipped reading works better with shorter texts than with longer texts.
4. Flipping reading has to be about process and skill rather than content.

Explanations of those Guiding Principles

1. Flipping reading is not reading at home and talking about it in class.
This pops up every now and then, and I just have one thing to say:
How is it flipping when you're just following the commonly accepted instructional paradigm?  That's not flipping.  That's traditional.  

So stop saying that is flipped English...please?

You can read Troy Cockrum's thoughts on the matter here.

2. Flipping reading requires creativity and depends on instructional context.
The first part is obvious - the reason there are VERY few strategies for flipping reading is because conceptually, it's really difficult to get your head around.  It takes creativity, which is where the Explore Flip Apply model comes in (more on that later...and there are tons of entries if you look back through my post history).

The second part, about instructional context, is really important.  What will work with me at Redwood High School is not what worked at San Lorenzo High School, and it may not work in your school either.  I don't know.  You're the teacher, thus you're the expert on how to teach your kids.  I can only tell you what I do, and give you guiding principles for how to structure your units and instruction.

When I flipped Night last year, I made videos of myself reading the text.  We had Today's Meet live discussions in class as the videos played (basically, it allowed me to participate in the discussion and manage the room instead of trying to read + do all of that).  Then students compiled theme and figurative language examples in separate Today's Meet threads and on Edmodo.  Then we did a lot of writing and discussion questions.  We watched a lot of related documentaries and film clips to give context.  We discussed them all.  I had a few skills videos, but not many - probably because the skills were mostly higher-level and based on lower-level skills they had learned earlier in the year (either on video or back before the flip, by direct instruction).

I consider that unit flipped.  But a lot of people wouldn't.  This is why we need to come to a common understanding of what flipped English is and isn't.

It also leads to my next Guiding Principle:

3. Flipped reading works better with shorter texts than longer ones.  
Jessica McGrover lays out in this post why this is true.  When you're having students flip a longer work and go at their own pace, they will inevitably do what you want them to do and end up working at their own pace.  And you can't have discussions about the book unless kids are at roughly the same point.  Imagine trying to discuss the theme of fate verses free will in Romeo and Juliet when one student is in Act I, scene v (after R&J meet), another student just finished Act III scene i (where Mercutio/Tybalt are killed), and another student just finished the play.  Unless you explicitly give them permission to talk about the entire play (which "ruins" it for the student in Act I), you are going to have frustrated students and a flat discussion.  Which ruins the whole experience of collaborative conversation.

The plan I've got for my flipped classes this year is to have some strategies for flipping shorter texts, and some strategies for flipping longer texts.  

Read the second part of this entry here.  It was way too much content for one post.

I've been in a frenzy of collaboration in the last few days.  First, I participated in a webinar with other English/Social Studies flippers: Troy Cockrum, Andrew Thomasson, Karl Lindgren-Streicher, and moderator and blogging-flipping-extraordinaire, Math flipper Crystal Kirch.  Kate Petty tried to join us on video, but due to technical difficulties wasn't able to be there the whole time. She did participate in the comments and wrote up some blog posts afterward that were really helpful to clarify and crystalise the thinking behind flipping English. 

We screencasted the entire webinar so anyone could watch it.  Here it is!

I've also been working intensely on a definition for what Flipped Humanities is and should be.  Andrew Thomasson and I will be recording a video about it soon, based on the five page (in-progress) collaborative Google document we developed with Karl Lindgren-Streicher.  

It's one of the coolest things I've done.  Karl and I started it with nothing, and within an hour, we had argued (in different colour text, obviously) back and forth and clarified our thinking and come to something that I think is the most clear and well-composed definition I've seen.  It's about 90% there, and still needs some work, but you'll hear more from Andrew and me about that soon.

It also came out of the debrief we had after the webinar and a conversation that started on Twitter the day after the webinar, and included Kate Baker, as well as the others mentioned above.  

Working with the people I've been blessed enough to meet through Twitter and the Flipped community is making me a better teacher, and giving me SO many great ideas and projects that it's just staggering.  I want to publicly thank everyone I've mentioned so far, for making me a more reflective teacher and helping me bring my ideas to life.  I also credit you guys for most of those ideas because they wouldn't exist without the collaboration we've shared.

More than anyone else though, I want to thank Andrew for the role he's played in my life the past few weeks.  It is an intense privilege to have him as a collaborative partner, and I have learned so much from him, both professionally and personally.  I can't say thank you to him enough, really.  None of this would be possible without you, homie.

Something else Andrew and I have been working on all week is the video Jon Bergmann asked us to make describing our collaborative video process.  We shot the original footage on Monday.  On Wednesday, after spending about 15 hours editing, not to mention the original 3 hour shoot, we decided it wasn't good enough and started over...even though it was VERY late in North Carolina.  That footage can't even compare to the original.  It's so much better, probably because we did what we do best: make an explicit plan, then ignore that plan and just talk to each other candidly. 

Then, with a TON of help from Crystal and Karl, we edited it into two videos:

1. The basics of what we're doing:

As well as the longer and more complete video that covers 

2. The applications and pedagogical underpinnings of what we're doing:

*******

I'm looking forward to the next series Andrew and I have planned: writing an analytical essay.  We will also start making some flipped reading videos as we start to plan our year of curriculum.  

So that was my week.  

Spending it with the Cheesebucket Posse makes it pretty much the best week ever.

And if I haven't convinced you that you need to be on Twitter, go back and read every entry tagged with Andrew Thomasson.  Then tell me why you want to miss out on potentially creating this kind of awesome collaborative partnership.  

If Twitter scares you, let me know WHY and Andrew and I will make a video that addresses those concerns.  Seriously. 

ETA: here's what Jon Bergmann thought of the video.  He was the one who asked us to make it, so it's totally relevant.

Can Jon Bergmann write a blog entry about our video?  Seriously?

I don't know if I can handle how awesome that is.

As promised, here is the story of why my blog is now called Ion Lucidity.  It was written by my good friend, Andrew Thomasson (although I wish I had written it.  It's that good).

I don't even want to ruin this post by putting any more of my own words in.  Here is his beautiful explanation for why my blog is titled Ion Lucidity.


The Creation Myths of Ion Lucidity
by Andrew Thomasson

All great and beautiful creations need stories about how they were birthed into the world.  The sun rises, sets; the sky explodes into a million shades of blue and sunset; babies are born & begin to cry; ions become lucid. We all know this, deep in our hearts: it's human nature to want to explain the unexplainable, the mysterious, and the sublime. 

And this blog is sublime. Here is its story.

Once upon a time, high up on Mount Olympus, hiding in one of Zeus's most special thunderbolts, lived a little ion. 

Once upon a time, two teachers living on opposite coasts of a very large nation wanted to create a band--a band with a name that would inspire the proper amount of fear, trembling, and reverence on concert flyers. 

Or this: once upon a time, a lie was told, but it contained an ion of truth.

Even better: once upon a time, a group of students--a nation and world of students, really-- needed a jolt of energy, a change of pace, a bringer of Zeusian-level light. 

Once upon a time, a wise friend demanded self-confidence out of his partner-in-academia, partly in hopes that when he needed it, she would return the favor, the ion, the positive charge, and the light that came with it. 

Once upon a time, there was a blog. 

And once upon a time, before coffee, there was a typo. 

Before I tell you about my exciting unit plan, I'd like you all to go read my friend Andrew Thomasson's NEW BLOG.  Follow him.  He may not have much there yet (he literally built it in a couple of hours today) but he is definitely an amazing writer.  Just sayin'.

On to the main post.

So I got my first REALLY GOOD IDEA about teaching the Essay and Exposition class to which I'm assigned this semester.

I was reading this awesome article.  If you haven't read it, go read it now.  

Thinking through all the typical "first day of class" activities, one thing I just can't NOT do is have them write something describing themselves.  But I hate the way I've done it in the past.  Either I give them a million guidelines and it sounds more like a shopping list than a "here's who I am" letter, or I give them few guidelines and they turn in five lines that describe their epic love for sleeping, hanging out with family, and video games.  

That's when it occurred to me that I could have them write an essay in the style of "Snapshot of a Modern Learner" as their "introduction letter" assignment.  Then this unit plan just fell together in no time.  It's based on a (slightly asynchronous) mastery model, and the bell schedule is M, T, F 55 minutes, and one 90 minute block day (either W or Th depending on the class).  

As always, please tell me what you think about it.  




Unit Plan in the Explore-Flip-Apply Model


Explore:
Students can put the article into categories like I just did (see the bottom of this post if you care to know how I analysed the text).  I will either:

1) Give them four categories (description of action/inaction, and description/antithesis of self).  I will then ask them to add one more category they see in the text to those four categories and justify their choice.

2) Tell them to find their own categories of language and justify why/how they see them developing in the text.

General "inquiry"-type questions:
--Which categories have more?  Why?
--Within the categories, what language patterns do you notice?  
--Why are those important?  
--How do they tell you about the author’s purpose?

They will then write that up into a textual analysis blog entry.

Flip Video Sequence:
1. Finding and analysing patterns/themes
2. Text preview/model conversation questions [for the three options of texts]
3. Essay guidelines for Snapshot of Me as a Learner

Apply:
--Students read another text and apply patterning to it.
--Students have a reflective conversation or write a blog post about the patterns in the piece (similar questions to the ones in the Explore phase)
--Students write their own “Snapshot of Me as a Learner” essay

******

So those are the activities and how they fit into the Explore Flip Apply model.  But I still needed to understand how it looked in a week.  So here's what I mapped out:

Unit Outline
Monday: explore activity (including textual analysis blog entry), first video as HW

Tuesday: debrief video and check for understanding.  The task in class is to read and pattern a second text, and then create an analysis similar to explore phase, so students who can do it on their own will do so (or they can self-select into groups).  Students who need more guided practice (based on my CFU or self-identified need) will work with me on [possibly an easier version of] the same text, with scaffolding along the way to help them prepare for the next activity.

At the end of class, we'll have a short discussion about the patterns they found, which will allow me to assess understanding and assign remediation as necessary.

HW is to watch text preview video and come to class ready with which text they are most interested in reading

Block day (90 minutes): debrief video and give out the text to students based on their own choice. Divide into stations/groups based on chosen text.  After reading and patterning, students will do one of the following:
1) pairs/small groups that have reflective conversations and film it (advanced) 
2) write a blog post about the text and comment on others’ posts, or 
3) re-watch the patterning video with guided analysis questions that will lead into writing reflective questions 

HW is to watch the video on starting their SOMaL essay (many students will probably finish early in class, and therefore will watch the video and start the essay that day)

Friday: debrief video and write essay in class. If students are not ready, they can continue the tasks from block day or work on their Blank White Page project.  If necessary, they can finish the essay over the weekend.


Required tasks for the week:
--Analysis of SOML article and one more short article (everyone does the same)
--Textual analysis blog post
--Watch three videos with CFU assignments (probably an embedded google form) 
--a third [student choice] text/pattern assignment and assessment [have a reflective conversation or do a reflective writing on the second text - students who need remediation may use the guided notetaking, but it won't give them the full 85% for the week]
--write a short definition essay (Snapshot of Me as a Learner)

Grading/Mastery:
If students complete all of that work to the required standard in the week, they get an 85% in classwork (if they fail to complete it to the standard, they will earn lower than 85%). 

To get the last 15%, they need to either 1) show at least "an hour's worth" of work on the BWP project, complete an additional task (like finding another model text and doing a reflective blog post/conversation) AND they must show excellence in the writing task.

The Snapshot of Me as a Learner writing task is on a mastery grading system.  They will not “pass” this unit until they get at least a 75% on the essay.  They can complete as many revisions as they wish, up until the end of the quarter (8-9 weeks).


Additional Texts I'm Considering for this Unit:
--Myth of Latin Woman
--The Key to My Father
--Sanctuary of School
--Mother Tongue
--Why I Want a Wife
--On Being a Cripple
--Why I Write (Weisel) 
--Fat
--Shrouded in Contradiction

All of these are from either Essay Connections or The Blair Reader, both of which are class texts.  I'd also love other suggestions, so long as they are readily available and around the 12th grade reading level (higher is preferable actually).

*******

I had one more additional revelation while I was writing this unit.  I don't have to have all the students read the same texts, because as long as I offer different choices in each unit, they never have to read the same text twice.  So if a kid reads "Mother Tongue" in this unit, when we do the "Politics of English" unit, they will just read another of the choices.  I just need to have the "Explore" text not be an option for any of the self-selected options in any unit.

If you want to know what that paragraph looks like at midnight, here it is for your enjoyment:

AAAAAHH!! I don’t have to use diff texts for diff units if there are choices every time!!

Yeah, I'm not all that grammatically correct past 11 PM I guess.  I forgot that was in there, until I was sharing a draft of this document with my good friend Karl, and he laughed at me.  To be fair, I'd laugh at me too.


*******

If you're interested in my textual analysis of the article, here you go!


Stylistic Notes about the Article:
[I left my own stylistic notes in because I thought it might help you understand my pattern system a little.  Sorry if they are unintelligible] 

Style: paragraphs have contradictions/parallels in them, all in present tense, except for when referring to what he “learned” in his history project; switches to imperative in the end (they MUST); the definition of himself is built implicitly throughout, but finally defined explicitly in the end (reverse pioneer - important defining language), becomes an argument at the end.  It really blends a whole lot of styles - narrative, observation, definition, argument and evaluation
Patterns: Santos/He is always the subject of the sentence; language of disconnection/connection, he thinks/they think/the reality is; mixing what is/isn’t “acceptable”, language of involvement but not creation

The thesis/antithesis in this article is interesting - maybe make a list of competing descriptions?

Linguistic Patterns in the Text:
These are the patterns I notice in the way the text is constructed.  These are literally just copied and pasted from the article.

HE DOES:
Santos sends approximately 125 texts per day. 
He sneaks his phone into his classes either in his book bag or his jacket and 
is online just about all day. 
He posts messages to Facebook during class. 
He looks up answers to definitions of words online. 
He checks sports scores, 
plays games, 
posts his location so his friends can find him easily, and 
streams music through an app on his phone.
Santos opens books and is frustrated when he can’t click on the words or pictures for more information.
Santos listens to his teachers lecture, feeling strange that he can’t pause, rewind, fast-forward, or have anytime access to the information
Santos often helps them when his teachers have trouble with technology or web tools
He knows how to bypass his school’s internet filter and often helps his teachers access Youtube videos to aid in instruction.
he can articulate every detail if you ask Santos what he DID for his History project, 
he recites the definitions to a couple of the words he defined.
Santos participates in school as if it were a giant check-off list
he is always DOING something
When he finishes one task, he moves on to another. 
He does okay, though
When Santos is assigned a big task at school, he goes home and creates a Facebook group around it. 
He shares what he finds on the topic with others and they share back. 
He creates his own opportunities for collaborative learning. 
Santos knows where to find information
he knows where information lives: everywhere
He is more likely to find and copy information without attribution
He learns about these things at night on his own.

HE DOESN’T:
Outside of school, he doesn’t separate technology from other activities. 
think about [technology] because it’s always available.
When asked to give an example, he falters. 
He’s not necessarily always learning at school,. 
His grades are better when he’s interested in what he is doing at school, and marginal when he’s disinterested. Unfortunately, that happens more and more often as he gets older.
He does not necessarily discern what information is relevant and 
he doesn’t necessarily know what he needs to learn from the information. 
he is not likely to connect ideas and create something new from it.

HE IS/WILL BE:
he is misunderstood.
he would be really good at developing Augmented Reality programs or designing nanocircuitry that would enable the creation of incredibly small computing devices
Santos is connected to kids in China, England, Germany, and Australia
he is translating the language with an online tool so that they can effectively communicate
He is connected to these kids because of a mutual interest in nanocircuitry. 
Santos is a good kid. 
Kids like Santos are reverse pioneers, navigating worlds that everyone older than them values. 
he is constrained by system frightened by “what ifs” rather than magnificence of “what could be.”

HE IS NOT:
Santos is not an enigma, 
His parents think he would make a good lawyer or doctor. Santos thinks. He told the Career and Technology teacher at his school what he was learning. The teacher handed him plans for a canned cardboard rocket project.
he isn’t thinking about distances or time when he interacts. 
Santos is not being adequately prepared for the world he will graduate into, at least in school.

HE THINKS (or other thinking tasks):
He accepts the role he has at school, like most of the other kids, and like most of the other kids, Santos thinks that school is largely a time machine.  
He leaves his world and goes back in time at 7:30 AM Monday through Friday. At 3:30 PM, he re-enters his world.
Santos recognizes that the topics he is really interested in are largely blocked/ignored at school. 
He thinks it’s funny that he goes to school to learn a few things that he will be tested on, but don’t really represent his current or future worlds. Santos believes he learns more outside of school than he does inside of school.
Santos knows that they are accountable for specific content, delivered in ways to help him maximize his score on state assessments
he stays up late at night to learn about nanocircuitry, w/a worldwide cadre of like-minded peers.
Santos knows that technology doesn’t move backwards

HIS TEACHERS:
His teachers can’t dismantle his reality to maintain comfort in their professional practice. 
His teachers are going to have to embrace all that modern learning means, though, act on it with purpose, and make technology as ubiquitous as a pencil. Right now, 
His teachers mean well, but Santos knows that they are accountable for specific content, delivered in ways to help him maximize his score on state assessments, which leaves little time for anything that would matter to him in a meaningful way.

Thesis: If kids like Santos will become the future innovators, then they need opportunities to innovate with the tools and technology of tomorrow, not yesterday.

So this project on which Andrew Thomasson and I have embarked is exciting.  The filming has become less of "how do I write a research paper adequately?" and more of friends hanging out, and oh, we just happen to also be writing a research paper.

And that makes it really hard to edit the videos well.  There's also the fact that our last session clocked in at nearly 70 minutes, and is breaking down into five videos.

I've finished videos six, seven and eight.  They're posted up in the Thomasson & Morris Instruction tab if you want to see them.  Just keep in mind that I haven't added YouTube annotations yet (all the places that say "click here" will eventually redirect to the other videos in the series), mostly because I didn't want to do it before all ten videos were on YouTube.

This whole problem is compounded by the fact that Mr. Thomasson left for the weekend and so I'm missing half my filter for "is this good or not?" - which is one of the reasons our partnership works so well.  

Posting this blog entry is also sort of procrastination.  The hardest video is yet to come - the actual "writing the draft" one includes a lot of me just sitting there typing, while Andrew gets up and leaves a few times.  We're figuring we'll need to do a voice-over track on it...which means waiting until Andrew gets home tomorrow.

Other things I've done to procrastinate:
--posted to Facebook about my project with Andrew
--tweeted and surfed my timeline
--started planning my courses (i.e. assigned a different colour pen to each class, counted the weeks in the semester, then gave up)
--made some Blue Bottle coffee (if you don't live in the Bay Area, that reference is probably lost on you...and that's a shame.  Best coffee in the Bay).
--pretended to do some dishes
--filled up my water bottle
--posted a question on Ask Metafilter (my other favourite time-killing website) to solicit the best humourous works to use in my Language of Humour class
--started reading an essay about writing essays in The Essay Connection (Bloom)
--responded to the following Tweet:

Okay.  Back to work...


...after I check Twitter.