Monthly Archives: February 2015

What Spock Taught Me

The thing I loved most about Spock on Star Trek is that, occasionally, his human side would show through. He was that logical being with no emotion for most of the series; but as the movies came out, we saw a side of Spock rarely, if ever, seen on tv.

Growing up, I was an extremely emotional kid who saw my sensitivity as a weakness. In school, the other kids called me “the smart kid.” My ability to be (seemingly) logical saved me many times from breaking down in front of other kids or teachers. Every once in a while, it would still happen, but I learned to keep those emotions in check for the most part. Spock was my model. Stay logical.

Over time, Spock’s character explored more of his human half. As I watched the movies, especially the ones where they spent time on the friendship between Kirk and Spock, I noticed how much wiser and “complete” Spock seemed. He was happier, even when his emotions caused him distress.

For so many years, I hid the part of me that feels too much. Sometimes, the world is a very overwhelming place when you allow yourself to feel.

But Spock seemed better when he allowed himself to feel, even though he was often ostracized by the other Vulcans because of it.

As a new teacher, I learned to distance myself from my students and show that tough, outer shell. That’s how I was taught to do it in my education methods courses. “Don’t let them see you be human.”

Is there worse advice for a teacher?

(Do you ever feel like you’ve “grown up” long after you’re considered a grown up?)

As a more experienced teacher, I now know I’m better when I show how I feel and allow that human-ness to shine through. I feel wiser. More complete. Just like the older Spock.

I don’t know how much actual influence Leonard Nimoy had on the evolution of his character, but I read somewhere that he wanted a chance for Spock to be able to explore his human side. I’m grateful for that, because somewhere along the way, Spock showed me the way.  The scene where Spock dies in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was sad and serene for me at the same time.

Leonard Nimoy was a very interesting person, and the more I read about him post-Star Trek, the more I appreciated his intellect and humanity. While many actors tend to rebel against their “defining” roles, he came to embrace Spock more and more, especially recently with the retooled Star Trek movies and his guest stints on Big Bang Theory. I’m grateful for the man as well as the character he cultivated.

Live long and prosper, indeed.

It’s All About Context

Apologies to Meghan Trainor and her 2014 earworm… but it really is all about context. 

Have you ever heard a parent or teacher say something to the effect, “My child/student has regressed in the last 6 months. She knew this stuff last year! She passed tests and everything.”

Learning is fluid. Period. Brains are remarkable and in constant states of learning, unlearning, and relearning.  (Research in neuroplasticity is fascinating, and if you have any contact with kids, I hope you are reading about it.)

But here’s the deal: if your child has truly LEARNED something, she most likely won’t forget it or regress. While there are exceptions, most kids do not forget things they have truly learned.

What is more likely the case is that something was introduced without context. Kids- and adults- forget things they have committed to short-term memory that do not connect to something meaningful and relevant in their lives.

(OR… the context was only briefly visited because there wasn’t enough time to develop a real connection. Mile-wide curriculum that’s about an inch deep doesn’t leave a lot of room or time for context. But I digress…)

I’m on a math kick, so let’s use this as an example.

Young children who learn to count to ten do not actually understand counting. They’re simply mimicking a verbal pattern they memorized. Put 4 objects in front of a child who has just learned to count to 10, and he’ll point to each object, multiple times, and count to 10, not 4. This is a developmental issue, because the child does not connect the numbers he learned to say versus the number of objects in front of him.

If you put 3+2=5 in front of a child, she might memorize it easily, but if you give her the same number of objects to count, can she separate it into a group of 3 and a group of 2?

Children do not have context for numbers in print UNLESS they have something concrete in front of them. Even still, they need more exposure and experience with the concrete long before they begin to comprehend the abstract (number sentences in print).

I feel the same way about teaching music. Children should be singing songs and playing instruments long before they ever learn musical notation. You can memorize where the notes go on a staff and which note’s duration is a “ta” or a “ti-ti,” but if you have not had extensive experience with playing and singing those notes, you have no context for the notation. Some really brilliant man named Karl Orff believed this, too. (My fellow music teachers are laughing at me right now, because Orff is a really big deal).

Think about this: small children learn the alphabet song long before they’re able to make sense of the letters in the alphabet. You can recite the alphabet but not know which letters make which sounds. And you most definitely cannot read simply by reciting the alphabet.

I can sing hundreds of songs in various languages –  Italian, Portuguese, German, etc. – but I did not LEARN these languages. I memorized them and how to pronounce words in these languages. There’s no context there, other than what’s in the songs.

Those in real estate have their mantra, “Location, location, location.”

Educators should add to their repertoire, “Context, context, context.” Context helps kids make connections and move to deeper understanding, even if that deeper understanding happens down the road.

A recent example…

My 5 and 6 year old students have been using base ten blocks to help them think about adding and subtracting larger numbers. They know that, to subtract 35 from 50, they will have to swap out a ten for 10 ones. If I gave them 50-35 and taught them to “borrow,” some of them would remember HOW to do this, but they would not understand WHY. Most of them would not understand how to borrow and would become easily frustrated. Developmentally, they’re not in this place yet, but when working with the base ten blocks… every single one of them knows he has to swap a ten for 10 ones. There’s context there.

When I asked them to help me cover a wall with some paper, we learned that we had to measure the wall first. Our tape measure wasn’t long enough to measure the entire wall, so we measured in two steps. The tape measure ends at 120 inches. The second measurement was 58 inches.

I asked them to add 120 and 58. Blank stares. (Of course)

When I asked them what 120 would look like in base ten blocks (without actually using the blocks), they were able to tell me it was one blue (100) and 2 greens (10). I asked them to pretend the blue one was put off to the side for now. “You have two greens and 58. What does that mean?” They counted 58… 68… 78.

The said, “The answer is 78!” When I reminded them we still had a blue one off to the side, they were able to quickly say, “it’s 178!”

They did all of this in their heads without actually handling the base ten blocks. Because of our previous work with the blocks, they now have context about place value and adding larger numbers. Are they consistently able to do this? No. Not yet, and I want to really emphasize yet. They are 5 / 6 year old kids! But if they are able to get context in everything we’re doing – math and all the other things we learn every day – think about where they can go!

I could share so many more examples, but this post would never end. I will share a “part two” soon, because I have another wonderful example of poetry and context with my students.