Tag Archives: professional development

Term of Art: Heuristic

“heuristic: A rule of thumb or procedure that works to provide a satisfactory if not optimal solution to a problem; a technique of discovery, invention, and problem solving through experimental or trial-and-error techniques. Some examples of heuristics include throwing out parts of a problem and solving the simplified version; breaking a problem into parts and solving each one separately; and means-end analysis–defining the current situation, describing the end state, and then taking steps to reduce the differences between them.”

Excerpted from: Ravitch, Diane. EdSpeak: A Glossary of Education Terms, Phrases, Buzzwords, and Jargon. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2007.

Megavitamins and ADHD

“megavitamins and ADHD: the use of very high doses of vitamins and minerals to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is based on the theory that some people have a genetic abnormality that requires higher levels of vitamins and minerals.

However, there is a complete lack of supporting evidence for megavitamin treatment for learning disabilities, and there are no well-controlled studies supporting these claims. Both the American Psychiatric Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have concluded that the use of megavitamins to treat behavioral and learning problems is not justified.”

Excerpted from: Turkington, Carol, and Joseph R. Harris, PhD. The Encyclopedia of Learning Disabilities. New York: Facts on File, 2006.

A Glossary of Terms from Martha Stone Wiske’s “Teaching for Understanding”

Last week, after reading a few pages each morning with my coffee before leaving for work, I finished Martha Stone Wiske’s (ed.) Teaching for Understanding: Linking Research to Practice (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997); yesterday I finished its companion, The Teaching for Understanding Guide by Tina Blythe (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997). From the latter, I cribbed this glossary of Teaching for Understanding terms if you’re inclined to use this planning and instructional framework.

If you find typos in this document, I would appreciate a notification. And, as always, if you find this material useful in your practice, I would be grateful to hear what you think of it. I seek your peer review.

Generative Topics in Teaching for Understanding

“Generative topics have several key features: They are central to one of more disciplines or domains. They are interesting to students. They are accessible to student (there are lots of resources available to help students pursue the topic). There are multiple connections between them and students’ experiences both in and out of school. And perhaps most important, they are interesting to the teacher.”

Excerpted from: Blythe, Tina, et al. The Teaching for Understanding Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.

Examining Students’ Understanding

“The quality of students’ understanding rests on their ability to master and use bodies of knowledge that are valued by their culture. More specifically, it rests on their ability to make productive use of the concepts, theories, narratives, and procedures available in such disparate domains as biology, history, and the arts. Students should be able to understand the humanly constructed nature of this knowledge and to draw on it to solve problems, create products, make decisions, and in the end transform the world around them. Put differently, students should use knowledge to engage in a repertoire of performances valued by the societies in which they live.”

Excerpted from: Wiske, Martha Stone, ed. Teaching for Understanding: Linking Research and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.

Generative Topics

“Determining the content of curriculum is a thorny problem. Whose favorite ideas are addressed, whose interests are served, whose passions are engaged, who makes curriculum decisions, and how do we ensure that all students are comparably prepared? The history of previous efforts to teach for understanding, as Vito Perrone describes in Chapter One, reveals reveals some recurring features of curriculum designed to foster understanding. One is that curriculum the taught in school relates to the concerns and experiences that occupy students in their regular lives. Perrone argues that in order to make these connections between schoolwork and students’ daily lives, teachers must be primary decision makers about curriculum. Teachers must select the substance and adjust the shape of curriculum to meet the needs of their particular students. Another basic criterion for curriculum designed to promote understanding is that it does not simply impart information. Rather the curriculum must involve students in continuing spirals of inquiry that draw them from one set of answers to deeper questions and that reveal connections between the topic at hand and other fundamental ideas, questions, and problems. Yet teachers must balance these needs for curriculum tailored to particular groups of students and for open-ended inquiry with a concern for some degree of standardization, equity, and legitimacy. How should teachers choose and design curriculum that meets these various requirements?

This question occupied the Teaching for Understanding project and its group of university-based researchers and teachers from middle and high schools who taught a range of subject matters–history, mathematics, science, and English.They readily acknowledged Dewey’s idea of organizing curriculum around themes as a fruitful starting place. But the question of which topics to select remained. A list of generative topics for different subject matters would be too cumbersome. Instead of stipulating particular topics, this collaborative group set itself the task of defining criteria to help teachers identify and evaluate generative curricular topics?”

Excerpted from: Wiske, Martha Stone, ed. Teaching for Understanding: Linking Research and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.

Term of Art: Rites of Passage

“rites of passage: The rituals associated with a change of status, for example from youth to adulthood, and from unmarried to married state. In his classic study by the same name, Arnold van Gennep distinguished rites of separation, rites of segregation, and rites of integration. Rituals associated with a change in status were identified as having these three stages. Between each there are clear symbolic demarcations.”

Excerpted from: Matthews, Gordon, ed. Oxford Dictionary of Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Daniel Willingham on Reading and Mental Overload

“Just how much unknown stuff can a text have in it before a reader will just declare mental overload! and call it quits? This quantity surely varies depending on the reader’s attitude toward reading and motivation to understand that particular text. Still, studies have measured readers’ tolerance of unfamiliar vocabulary, and have estimated that readers need to know about 98% of the words for comfortable comprehension. That may sound high, but bear in mind that the paragraph you’re now reading has about 75 unique words. So 98% familiarity means that this and every paragraph like it would have one or two words that are unfamiliar to you.”

Excerpted from: Willingham, Daniel T. The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Reads. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2017.

Term of Art: Indo-Aryan

“Indo-Aryan: Branch, within Indo-European, of Indo-Iranian: first attested by texts in Vedic (Sanskrit) dating from the 2nd millenium BC, and by transcriptions from the first. Also called ‘Indic.’

The modern Indo-Aryan languages are indigenous to most of the north and centre of the Indian subcontinent, with outliers in Sri Lanka (Ceylon) and the Maldives. Hindi-Urdu and Bengali are by far the largest; of the remainder, Marathi, in the south of the main area, Gujarati in the south-west, Sindhi to the west, Punjabi in the north-west, Assamese in the east, Oriya in the south-east, and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka all have a current literary standard and are linked to major political units. Others, such as Bhojpuri or Maithili, also have speakers in the tens of millions.

Across the main area, separate languages have arisen largely by divisions within a geographical continuum. Hence internal branches are not definitively established.”

Excerpted from: Marshall, P.H., ed. The Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Term of Art: Indo-European

“Indo-European: Family of languages including, at historically its major limit, most of those spoken in Europe and, at its eastern limit, the major languages of all but the southern part of the Indian subcontinent. Usually divided into eleven main branches: in the order in which they are first attested, Anatolian (now extinct), Greek, Indo-Iranian, Italic (represented by the modern Romance languages), Celtic, Germanic (which includes English), Armenian, Tocharian (extinct), Slavic (Slavonic), Baltic (represented by Latvian and Lithuanian), and Albanian. Groupings larger than these are problematic to varying degrees: the safest hypothesis is that of a common Balt-Slavonic.

The comparative method has its origin in the intensive study of Indo-European, especially in the German-speaking universities, from the early 19th century. The size and complexity of the family, in comparison with many others that can be established with the same certainty, reflects in part the early date at which the forms in several branches can be compared.”

Excerpted from: Marshall, P.H., ed. The Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.