Sept+11-+Marzano+Ch+5&6,+H&A+Ch+1

Chapter 5 of Marzano's book examines the writings of Dr. David Berliner. Berliner's examination is based upon the time involved and the many distractions and distortions produced by high-stakes testing. The High-stakes testing that Berliner refers to is assumedly the SOLs under the policies of No Child Left Behind. Berliner examines how many teachers can fall into the situation of "teaching to the test" versus spending time on arts, music, and notably, recess. The first half of the chapter is filled with tables and graphs demonstrating the time involved in various subjects and topics by teachers and personnel, as well as the student. Page 128 stood out in the teacher's views in curriculum and time section. A Florida teacher is cited as saying, in reference to time "teaching to the test", "I know the way I was teaching was building a better foundation for my kids as well as a love of learning. Now each year I can't wait until March is over so I can spend the last two and a half months teaching the way I want to teach (Berliner, 128". What I took away from Berliner is that teaching for fun is being replaced by tame management for "teaching for the test". Students are not given the choices to learn what they want, which can demonstrate a great refining of their higher-order thinking skills. Berliner ends the chapter admitting the only real way to change the problem is to change the NCLB policy. Chapter 6 of Marzano's book examines the research of Dr. Debra Pickering, who studied with Marzano at the Marzano Research Laboratory. In the beginning of her analysis, Pickering states, "The proposal here is that we recommit to thinking skills, learn from the past, and then take the steps necessary to move beyond rhetoric (Pickering, 147)". Pickering has adapted a good portion of her ideas from Bloom's Taxonomy and it's six levels of achieving higher-order thinking. Pickering proposes that teachers teach thinking skills versus such a focus on the topics and subjects. I agree with this. However, with the strict mandates placed on teachers to perform through their students, this theory may take years to reverse the effects of NCLB. Pickering even discusses how many teachers are too focused on their students passing tests versus critically thinking and evaluating, which she claims lead to greater testing success (Pickering, 53). As a future History teacher, Pickering's example on pages 155 and 156 really struck me. The student examined fails to incorporate higher-order taxonomies in the project undertaken in the history class. I will want my students to know the "hows" and "whys" of history, not just the "whats". Unfortunately because of time constraints in the school day, week, month, and year, it will be a great challenge to teach all three of these parameters and gain passing test scores as I will be mandated to accomplish. I would like to find ways to accomplish Pickering's theory in my class, because it does appear as sound and grounded. Lastly, Chapter 1 of Alper and Hyerle provide thinking maps and graphs. As a future History teacher, I found a great deal of these models as blueprints to understanding for students. The chapter provides a clear direction of application based on visuals and explanations. Because Social Studies uses many cause and effect scenarios, Figure 1.2 on page 4 serves as a clear differentiation model list. Also useful was at the end of the chapter Hyerle and Alper examine the five criteria of the thinking maps: consistent, flexible, developmental, integrative, and reflective. Consistency can be accomplished by using some of the same maps the same way in the class. A flexible map will allow for as many ideas as students and teachers can generate, thus, leading to higher-order idea origination. The developmental criteria determines that any student of any age may use the map with a blank sheet of paper. In this case, the learner can determine the simplicity or complexity of the map from a young age. The Integrative dimension allows for two aspects: thinking processes and content knowledge. The student can understand the content more easily based on the thinking skills based on expanding the map. The last dimension is the reflective. The reflective stage appears as the stand back and look at what was created aspect and reflect on the content and ideas developed based on the consistency, flexibility, development, and integration of the map construction. **James Cheatham**

Berliner's opening to his chapter is eye-opening. I was unaware of the lack of opportunities to take liberal arts and humanities courses. I knew that several schools district push to drop several arts courses when their budgets are under scrutiny, but liberal arts includes more than just painting and music. Many people have disapproved of No Child Left Behind from it's beginning and as a new teacher I can somewhat understand, but "high-stakes" testing enacted by NCLB resulting in this disparity is news to me. Berliner discusses data revealing an increase in instruction time of math and science and the detrimental effect of constant drill lessons resulting in only an increase on specific NCLB required tests. He proves that teachers have been teaching to the test by mentioning the lack of success on other tests covering the same curriculum, but involving more higher-level thinking. It is difficult to wrap my brain around why high-stakes testing is still used to hold school districts accountable when there is able evidence that it decreases high order thinking, reading and problem solving skills. I obviously have a problem with the lack of school districts concern when their science scores are less than desirable. Berliner is correct, how are we to compete with other countries if science is determined to be unimportant. Oh and it is perfectly acceptable for America's children to be fat (please note the sarcasm.) I have noticed a difference in curriculum and opportunities among the rich and poor in my own schooling compared to many of the girls I went to college with a Sweet Briar. I went to a large public school where the only arts available was an arts class and journalism. I took only requried basic subjects with AP curriculum. My school even emphasized vocational courses because many of my peers were not wealthy and felt all they could do with their lives was become a mechanic or work on construction sites. Many of my friends at SBC went to private school and remember many of them telling me that half of their school day was spent learning languages, taking dance, or horse riding. These were not after school extracurriculars. I was confused as to why public schools were so different, but Berliner has cleared up some of my haze. I agree that schools and teachers should be held accountable for imparting knowledge to their students in a friendly, fun, and intriguing way, but testing accountability cannot be the only way. There has to be a way that improves higher level thinking and increases liberal arts and humanities courses. Berliner suggest longer day, decreasing math and reading drill time, and allowing students to pick their own courses instead of forcing them. I am too inexperienced to determine how these ideas will be recieved, but they seem like a start. Critical thinking is considered important, but impossible to teach? I disagree wholeheartedly. We have read several texts in our MAT courses that tell us students look up to teachers; if this is the case then we must model Berliner's list of qualities of a critical thinker. Also, we must follow the Asians technique of letting our students struggle to figure things out on their own and learn to work collaboratively with others to learns social skills and how to deal with criticism. I feel we are spoon feeding information to them because of standards set upon us by political giants. High stakes testing not only effects how we teach, but how students feel about educations. It is depressing that many students, especially lower socioeconomic, do not feel like they belong in school because of the environment that has been created by NCLB.

Pickering acknowledges the complexity of higher-level thinking and difficulty in teaching students these skills in chapter 6. She notes that most schools are more concerned with teaching basic skills and the curriculum set by state standards that teachers feel they do not have time to also teach students how to think critically. Pickering presses for teachers to teach thinking skills regardless of these drawbacks citing that they are necessary for students to succeed in life, not only school. She promotes the use of Marzano and Kendall's taxonomy to define higher-order thinking and emphasizes their definitions of analysis and knowledge utilization. I like that Pickering notes a concern for the generalized term of "higher order" in education, because it gives her argument beef that she has reviewed all sides of the argument in depth. She mentions, as a reason for use of Marzano's taxonomy, a fear that some people have that the term "higher order" in education may suggest that "lower order" skills must be learned first which will ultimately be taught to those few students who are in upper levels of schooling. I feel that higher thinking skills should be taught within disciplines and not separately, so students can practice the same skills in different areas. It will be difficult and time-consuming, but Pickering makes a good point that standards contain too much content and some topics in the standards are not necessary and can be cut out to make room for thinking skills instruction. Pickering notes, to solidify her argument, that many state tests only have lower level questions and students who are intellectually challenged perform better on other normed assessments. She offers the use of benchmarks on thinking skills to improve them across school districts and matrices in grading for students to follow while doing assignments as guidance on the classroom level. I agree that rubrics are a good assessment tool and are valuable when given to students so they can see how they will be graded. If they are given examples (not necessarily a set of steps) of how they must show their thinking skills, they will feel more confident when performing the tasks. They can also understand feedback and correct accordingly if they are given appropriate models. Pickering does mention that content teachers will have to continuously assist students as to what type of thinking skill to use in which situation, but they will eventually fly on their own. I have already seen this in my classroom when I push my students to complete vague homework assignments like create an experiment and show me all of the steps necessary. I give them free reign and at first they asked me every specific question you can think of and would get frustrated when I said, "You will figure it out." Now they are turning in wonderful assignments that are all different, but correct. I love it.

Hyerle's comparison of thinking maps to languages is pretty accurate and helps me understand the general principal of a thinking map beyond organizing thoughts. They are used to mapping many cognitive processes, but I have mostly come into contact with them in my science classes. I did not realize that entire school districts require their teachers to use a certain number of thinking maps in their lessons. Hyerle also brings up the issue of content teaching being more prominent than teaching thinking skills. He encourages cognitive engagement, metacognition, and dynamic feedback between students and teachers. He feels that thinking maps inherently foster these in classrooms because "the brain is a pattern seeker and is predominantly visual." I agree that thinking maps are a vital tool to be used in the classroom, especially as a science teacher. In my learning, I would have been lost without flowcharts and maps of biological cycles. Patterns helps me understand and recall imformation for later use. When Hyerle discusses his history with thinking maps, I began to understand how complex thinking maps can be. I do not fully understand when is the best time to use them, which ones are appropriate to use when, and which ones correctly utilize certain thinking processes. His five qualities of maps are helpful and I assume he goes into greater detail in later chapters. Hyerles "metalanguage" of thinking maps will help me scaffold my instruction and assess my students learning styles efficiently to better create lessons. They are useful in their flexibility.---Helen Phillips

Berliner's chapter on higher-level thinking was a very enlightening read. Being at a small liberal arts college, I found the chapter to be very similar to some personal experiences at Randolph College. Berliner opens the chapter talking about freedom and fostering the arts. However, the now common "teaching to the test" method, has eliminated many of the opportunities for students to have that intellectual freedom. Chapter 5 made me even more mad with NCLB just because of its relation to the arts. If teaching to the test wasn't bad enough, now students' intellectual and creative freedom is being taken away just for a score on a test. Even the sciences are being hindered. Being a science teacher, I cannot stress enough the importance of the sciences in student's lives. The fact that science time was being taken away in order to make more time for Math and Reading was just obserd (page 123). Schools of low socioeconomic status are hindered enough by the low income and assumed values of the students, why make their experiences even worse by not giving them a chance to explore their creative intuition? On page 124 I found it very disheartening knowing that the studnet's lunch time was being reduced just to spend more time in the classroom. Well, I can tell you from personal experience, nobody is going to learn if they are hungry. And furthermore, nobody is going to learn if they are hyper and cannot go outside for recess and take a break from the classroom. Because of NCLB, schools are hurting their students more than helping them, and I found this chapter to be a great defense against NCLB.

Pickering's chapter on higher-level thinking was again, very enlightening. I think she makes a great point when she quotes Gene Carter on page 146. If lawmakers and politicians can work together to bail out our gigantic national debt, why can't we help our student's develop critical thinking skills? The logic just doesn't make sense to me. We are working so hard to improve our nation, yet our nations prodigy are suffering. Therefore causing a chain reaction for later generations of suffering, because we are initiating the decline in thinking processess now. I get frustrated with teachers who "teach to the test" and always complain that their is no room to teach what they //want// to teach because of high-stakes testing taking priority. I've learned from first hand experience that I can still teach what I want to teach, while making learning fun, innovative, and engaging for my students. I was teaching a Thinking Map the other day on "Metric Analogies", and I saw my students start to get bored, so I turned it into a competition, and they absolutely LOVED it. They were thinking of analogies that I didn't even initially think of, and were drawing pictures for their analogies and asking me about how they could use the analogies in other classes. I was so pleased with the outcome. On page 147 Pickering hits the nail on the head when she says "teach the thinking skills we expect". I think it is so vital for students to have critical thinking and problem solving skills because they are becoming so crutial for survival in our society. If we teach our students the skills that we expect them to have, they will learn. If we just scratch the surface with higher-level thinking, the importance would be basically disregarded, and the students wont learn.

Hyerle and Alper's chapter on Thinking Maps was a very good refresher for me. I've been utilizing thinking maps in all of my classes since the start of the year, and I agree that they are totally their own language. My students constantly reference the thinking maps when I am referring to important topics we have covered. The process of developing the maps are endless. One of my classes made a huge double-bubble map on my white board that covered the entire board! It is a great tool because students bounce ideas off of eachother and are enlightened by other students opinions. I believe the chapter gives new light to student community as well. Every student thinks differently, and these thinking maps allow them to be expressive and share their ideas with others, sometimes even sparking new ideas in other students. The use of thinking maps is a great way to "train the brain" in certain higher-level processes. When students are drawing out the maps and filling them in, they are connecting seperate thoughts into one giant big picture. This process trains the brain in thinking a certain way. A way that allows students to build upon prior knowledge and explore new opportunities. All in all, I found this chapter to be a very good tool for teachers who are struggeling to fit in the "higher level thinking" into their classroom. --**Caitlin Unterman**

Dr David Berliner discusses the testing culture that has grown up around NCLB and the serious ramifications that come from a school's test scores; this has a deleterious impact of the teaching of topics and skills valued both by 18th century intellectuals and a modern, developed America. James mentioned the charts and tables--what I was most struck by in going over the impact of NCLB was the repeated mention that by averaging the data, the impact of low-scoring, low-income schools was more drastic than shown. The averages were bad enough. Cutting everything--possibly even lunch--to drill test preparation and reading mechanics is *most* felt by these schools and the students they serve, especially because these students likely have the fewest extracurricular opportunities. Furthermore, audit testing results have stagnated or suffered under this approach. Many of the skills Americans rate just behind basic skills like critical thinking skills and a thorough work ethic and are not tested and therefore not given their due. I am doing a reading-based practicum at Heritage Elementary, in a class with many students from low-income homes. When I walked in the room I knew it was instantly different than my elementary school classes. I went to a school in Florida that was overcrowded like many Florida schools, but it was in the heart of an upper-middle class subdivision. At Heritage, I have not seen a scrap of construction paper yet. I've only completed about ten hours so far but I remember making storybooks, coloring, and writing in my own "voice" in first and second grade as part of my language arts curriculum, even in the first few weeks of school. None of that has happened so far. It's just been worksheets and tests about their reading and their phonics. It's hard to blame the teacher I'm working with; I know she has to justify her choices in her lesson plans, cite SOLs, and show how everything she works on ends in an assessment. When I was in second grade, I didn't even get grades, whereas I wrote percentages on their spelling tests this morning.

Pickering details ways higher level thinking might be taught. Students need instruction in this, whether its as a part of their existing subjects, or taught independently. In any case, like other subjects the terms must be defined and clarified. Only then can the argument really be made to directly instruct students; she reviews the evidence that test scores "will be fine (153)", which is something of an understatement, given that many studies show scores on tests that evaluate basic skills rising once this is included in the classroom. Schools need to decide what skills they want to teach based on what students need for their education and for their lives. When I saw figure 2 on page 159, I immediately recognized it--I was only ever exposed to that method in one classroom, all the way back in 4th grade, but after that introduction I used it regularly. Even now, if I were truly stumped on a decision, there's the possibility I'd sketch one out. This is how I was taught to think. My teacher used it as a step between brainstorming ideas for projects, papers, or arguments to include in an essay--always situationally, as part of another subject. I do find myself leaning towards that approach because it demonstrates the methods have practical uses and are to be included in all work in school.

The matrix leads me to Chapter One of Thinking Maps. Hyerle makes an impassioned case for Thinking Maps to be regarded as a language that students and teachers can use together not just to communicate ideas but the relationships between separate thoughts. As human language is pattern-based, by providing consistent but adaptable patterns for students to use, the maps help develop the lines of their critical thought while being a useful tool for communication of complex ideas. I want to say I like the idea of maps--I draw images to show relationships all the time--and after much thought, I see why the most basic primitive of the circle map is warranted. At first I thought writing out a list of ideas under a heading would work just as well for brainstorming, but by having such a simple primitive, the idea of mapping can be introduced, distinctions can be easily conveyed if one were using multiple circles, and a frame can be introduced where it might not be possible to do so with just a list, not a formal outline, if one were just writing things out. It's been helpful to read your wiki posts--especially Caitlin's--about Hyerle because his insistence about all students, all schools did put me off a bit. It just came across as almost religious in his belief about the maps, given that Thinking Maps are trademarked. I love knowing that your students are taking the models and running with them in an organized way, instead of just a messy brainstorm.--Noren Bonner


 * Chapter 5 discusses high - stakes testing and its effects on skills needed for the 21st century. I found Berliner's opening using John Adams' letter to his wife Abigail very interesting. Then later in the chapter he discusses our founding father's views on education. Which frankly I do believe they would be disappointed in the way our education system works today. Each of the founders had a clear vision of how they saw the country functioning and each believed in some form of education. What I also found interesting was the teacher's views on the ****curriculum in terms of time and the content. The stories from teachers mentioned in the reading is what I fear most; teaching to the test. But, in today's world it seems as if most if not all content in based around the standardized testing. Therefore, many teachers are forced to teach to the test in order to cover all the material required. It is very sad that many subjects and life skills go to the side because teachers don't have time to teach what the students should or want to know about.**

**Chapter 6 discussed thinking skills and higher-order tasks. I do agree with her in regards to students need to be more exposed to thinking skills and need to be taught thinking skills. I am not sure if I agree with her idea of changing projects around to implement more higher thinking. I believe a project should have guidelines but it also should be left up to the students how they complete it and by which means they decide to complete it. Her comment, "Content area teachers will still need to help students identify what type of thinking is required for particular tasks and will need to guide students as they apply the processes to specific content (pg.161)." I am not sure if I fully agree with her on this. I think part of the learning must come from the students and the teacher cannot hand-hold a child for their entire educational career. I believe content area teachers should help the students but the thinking for certain tasks and the process in which they go about it should come from the students themselves.**

**The Alper reading in chapter 1 discusses thinking maps and their implications in the classroom. The thinking map idea of being visible learning and the different graphics that can be associated to certain maps is a very interesting idea. As he says later in the chapter it is a different form of a graphic organizer but with more thinking and less repetition involved. I could definitely see myself as a future teacher using thinking maps in my classroom. As I already am a big proponent of graphic organizers as learning tools. ~//Ashley Knowles//**

Both Berliner’s and Pickering’s chapters deal with teaching skills to prepare students for the twenty-first century. I appreciate Berliner’s focus on the arts and humanities as I agree these areas are crucial to personal growth and viewing the world in new ways. The US has never focused enough in these areas and now, in the era of high-stakes testing, instruction time allocated to the arts and humanities compared to that of core subjects is down even more. Berliner highlights the fact that educators and the public generally have similar ideas about the purpose of education with the highest concerns being: basic skills, critical thinking, social skills, responsible citizenship, and work ethic. Education in the arts and humanities passes our culture to the next generation of young people who will become leaders, advocates, decision makers, teachers, parents, members of their communities; yet, they are lacking in the education that will prepare them for these roles. I can’t make sense of the fact that, even though there is research supporting teaching critical thinking skills improves test performance, many educators still feel they must teach a limited curriculum focusing on test content. This ill prepares students to interact with the wider world when developing relationships, sifting through information, making life decisions, and working with others. This may be an underlying cultural issue in the US where competition and individualism are highly rewarded and certain institutions prefer the population to be ignorant and unable to distinguish between truth and falsehood, just and unjust, ethical and immoral. The issue now is how to teach these critical skills to students when teachers are held accountable for high-stakes test scores. Pickering outlines a rational process of overcoming the obstacles and teaching the skills we expect. First, she states that we must agree to teach critical thinking skills and require students to apply them. Then, redesign tests so that they measure critical thinking. Why is this difficult? Expanding education in the arts and humanities will also benefit development of these skills. The arts present alternate perspectives and forms of expression as well as foster cultural identity; history and philosophy provide a foundation in rational thought and ethical understanding; cultural studies provide a frame of reference for an expanding worldview. It seems our current educational system and stance on high-stakes testing of core subjects is intended to make students more competitive with the world without requiring them to understand or appreciate its complexities. I read an article over the summer summarizing a report related to student science test scores which found that a high percentage of students who made correct conclusions about experiment results could not explain their own conclusions. They could follow procedures correctly but did not understand why outcomes were as they were. In this case, how will these students (who tested high) be able to tranfer the scientific concepts and probelm solving skills to other areas? They can't because they didn't actually learn any. In some ways I feel fortunate that I will not be teaching in an area subject to high-stakes testing so that I can focus on teaching and not testing. On the other hand, I feel unfortunate that I will be teaching art and/or a second language because these areas (which I believe are important ) don't receive the same support as core subjects. I will have to work that much harder to inspire a lifelong love of learning about arts and cultures and to ensure students have access to the them before my program is cut. ~Joanna Bourque

Berliner's chapter deals a lot with the phenomenon of "teaching to the test" and the unfortunate pressure of high stakes testing, especially on lower income schools. I've always felt that the high stakes, standardized testing that happens is a poor indicator of just how much a student has learned throughout the year - test anxiety paired with the fact that the tests only gauge one type of intellect make it a poor judge of true knowledge. What the curriculum of schools should be, however, is a much more touchy and complicated subject. Reading through this chapter, I notice that every specialist thinks that their subject area is the most important and should be granted more time. We can't have it every way, granting more time to everything; what we need to do is learn how to teach everything better, create better teachers that know how to teach their subject areas in the same amount of time. This whole debate gets skewed when teachers are forced to teach for the test, putting possibly unfounded importance on subject areas which we deem important, even to students who are skilled in other areas.

Berliner and Pickering both talk about the importance of higher level thinking and how the standardized testing does little to evaluate how well our children can problem solve. I agree whole heartedly that the multiple choice questions presented on the high stakes tests evaluate knowledge, sure, but not a broad spectrum of it. Pickering offers the solution that we teach our children //how// to use higher level thinking skills in subjects across the curriculum. While I agree with her that teaching this would most likely benefit students across the board, it's a little daunting to think about how to teach it. She talks about how teacher's would have to change their style, become more of a coach as opposed to a lecturer. We spoke about this in class last time, how hard it will be, to //teach// the students and not just //tell// the students, but I feel like it would be even harder when trying to teach high level thinking skills as well.

While I agree that learning high level thinking skills would be beneficial to students, if it is not kept up with and used throughout subject matters, it is just as useless a skill as learning the recorder in 2nd grade. This becomes a problem if we continue on the path we are already on, where classrooms are based upon some multiple choice, high stakes test. Teaching these skills become low priority when the school board is telling teachers that students need to be proficient in only one type of testing skills. Personally, I am quite unsure of how to fix this problem - evaluation is an important part of learning, but how to accomplish it fairly across all barriers is something that will take quite a bit more thinking and research.

I think it's really interesting to think about how the thinking maps can be used as language for thinking. I was thinking about how I think last night (weird to think about!) and I wondered how my actual thought process differs from others. It's natural to use the cognitive process to think, but expressing it contextually is another thing entirely. Going through your own thought process and trying to dissect it, analyze it and put it down on paper is strange at best. Though, I do believe that this process is helping in the higher level thinking, as spoken about by Berliner and Pickering in the chapters we read. Perhaps using thinking maps more regularly could be one of the things used to teacher those high level thinking skills. **~Erin Caracappa**

Berlinger's chapter five delves into the most heated topic among teachers, administrators, and students alike--the test. Does standardized testing under NCLB render positive growth? I think the author answers that question quite clearly--no. The gap between impoverished and affluent students is not shrinking; students are more board and displeased in their education institutions than ever; and the tests are no longer measuring their intended constructs. Berlinger writes that in the midst of "test-oriented accountability cultures" an "intellectual decline" has occurred! It is no secret to skilled educators, nor to students who long to learn, that "the test" sucks the imagination right out of education; and without this kind of intellectual freedom real learning cannot be facilitated or nurtured. If you want a fish to bight your hook you have to put the right kind of food on the end of it. If you want a student to learn you have to entice him/her. To reiterate the yellow typing in Noren's comments, worksheets do not entice first graders. On a slightly separate note, regarding the letter John Adams wrote to his wife, I find it interesting that, even then,while they were held in higher esteem, the arts were last in line on the priorities list. My opinion may be biased, but I firmly believe that Art encompasses all of the higher level thinking strategies, problem solving, and differentiation needed in the classroom--all classrooms.

"Teaching the Thinking Skills That Higher-Order Tasks Demand," Pickering's chapter six, is fascinating. In my opinion, children do not need to be taught to think, but they do need to be taught that they must think. In other words, if they are always handed everything they need to complete a task or always told exactly how to do something, they will never venture to decide for themselves what they need and how to use those tools for themselves--they will always be waiting for the "silver platter". I think this is what Berlinger was getting at when he wrote about the "intellectual decline". The strategies that Pickering suggests in her chapter may be what is needed to undo the "hand it to me" disposition that has been instilled in today's students, but using higher level thinking skills, if education is done right, will be a more subtle expectation and a more automatic action. For example, when I was a camper in an outdoor christian education program (mid to late 90's) my counselors played mind games with us during flash rain storms. They never gave us the answers. We had to figure them out for our selves. Some of us spent three and four summers figuring out these riddles. The intrinsic value of learning was more important than the answer, and as a result, no one had to force us to be engaged or to seek intellectual gratification.

Alper's chapter one deals with thinking maps as a classroom tool. These are a brilliant way to organize thoughts and connections. A visual expression of of an oral lecture or words on a page can make all the difference in comprehension. I was in high school before I saw a concept map and there after my notes were shorter and more effective. These are also great differentiation mechanisms for those who cannot keep up with power points and other in class note taking. However, one of the things I have noticed about education is that it is much like fashion. When something is new it is stylish and everyone does it. So, naturally, when something else new comes along the old is tossed (regardless of effectiveness) and the new is like a catching fever. I think it is important to use tools and strategies where is makes sense to use them. Nothing in education, for the sakes of both the teachers and the students, aught to be used to the point of mindless redundancy.( This last comment was inspired by Catlin's (sp?) comment last week about her school requiring all teachers to implement thinking maps for every unit.) --Holly L. Tucker