Week 2 Blog

Part I:

    Authentic Intellectual Work is not concerned with a student's superficial comprehension of academic concepts but more with the value of these concepts outside of school, students' ability to construct knowledge to solve unique problems by using existing knowledge, and their in-depth understanding and ability to extensively communicate that understanding. The nature of this work is connected to the work of successful adults and the value of their work in the professional world. What stood out to me most in the reading was the emphasis on in-depth understanding and the importance for students to be able to display this knowledge both through communication but also through problem-solving (Newmann et al., 2007).

    In the fast-paced, assessment-obsessed public school culture it is seemingly impossible to create the type of learning experiences described in the reading. With increased pressure on teachers to provide instruction that leads to passing test scores on standards-based tests, the rote, regurgitation of superficial knowledge seems to be the go-to technique for teaching students, at least in my school division. Little time is spent tending to the student as a unique individual and learner and teachers are restricted by benchmark deadlines and mandatory, division-provided pacing guides to take the guesswork out of building state assessment-passing machines.

    The three components of AIW are described in the reading as "construction of knowledge, through the use of disciplined inquiry, to produce discourse, products, or performances that have value beyond school" (Newmann et al., 2007, p. 16). In my experience, the construction of knowledge is the most neglected of the three components because it requires students to synthesize previously learned knowledge to solve unique problems. Creating these types of learning experiences takes a lot of planning on the teacher's part but also draws on Dewian ideals of students taking control of their own learning and sharing in the responsibility of creating learning objectives and experiences that are unique to their interests. 

    The reading itself is a research report describing that its findings "conclude(d) that if the framework for AIW and the scoring rubrics were deliberately used by teachers to guide instruction, students and teachers alike should benefit" (Newmann et al., 2007, p. viii).

    An example of a learning experience that makes use of the AIW model in the theatre classroom might be asking the cast of the Holocaust drama about young concentration camp children's diary entries, And A Child Shall Lead, to write their own diary entry describing the conditions of their specific concentration camp and what they do to help keep the hope of survival alive. This would draw on previous knowledge to create a new product, it would certainly be important and valid outside of school, and would ask students to display deep knowledge by communicating creatively through the product they are creating.

Part II: 

    One component of AIW that is deeply connected with the content of the NETP update is exploring content and learning experiences that are important outside of school and its obvious connection to digital citizenship. This is described best by the NETP update: "...helping students learn to use proper online etiquette, recognize how their personal information may be collected and used online, and leverage

access to a global community to improve the world around them can help prepare them for successfully navigating life in a connected world" (Office of Educational Leadership, 2017, p.11). Another opportunity to connect technology engagement practices with AIW is described in the NETP update as a student who published a research report online to engage with researchers and other communities for feedback. This ties directly into the idea of elaborated communication (Office of Educational Leadership, 2017).

Part III:

Engagement goes hand in hand with the AIW framework. The more engaged a student is with the educational objective, the more likely they are to engage in AIW. Kolb states in Chapter Two of Learning First, Technology Second In Practice that students must not be simply engaged with the technology they are using but with the educational objective (2020). In the article about AIW, Newmann connects the two readings best by stating that "Increased opportunities for student engagement offered through authentic intellectual work not only make schooling more “fun;” they lead to more effort which pays off in increased student achievement on both basic skills and more complex intellectual challenges which are likely to be recalled as valuable parts of one’s education" (2007, pp. 12-13).

En

Wha. References

Kolb, L. (2020). Learning First, technology second in practice: New Strategies, research and tools for Student Success. International Society for Technology in Education.

Newmann, F. M., M Bruce King, Carmichael, D. L., & Iowa. Department Of Education (2007). Authentic instruction and assessment:         Common standards for rigor and relevance in teaching academic subjects. Prepared For The Iowa Department Of Education.

Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 
        National Education Technology Plan update. Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov