The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin

International Journal for Professional Educators

2017 • Volume 84-1

Generational Issues for Educators

2 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin

Editorial Board
Kolbrún þ. Pálsdóttir, PhD, 2016-2020
Assistant Professor, School of Education
University of Iceland
Reykjavik, Iceland

Barbara Perry-Sheldon, EdD, 2014-2018

Professor Emerita of Teacher Education,
North Carolina Wesleyan College
Rocky Mount, North Carolina

Nora L. Pollard, PhD, 2014-2018

Senior Disability Policy Consultant
Educational Testing Service
Princeton, NJ

Margaret Trybus, EdD, 2016-2020

Senior Associate Dean, College of Graduate Studies
Provost Concordia Dalian China
Professor, Educational Leadership
Concordia University
Chicago, Illinois

Judith Merz, EdD, Editor

Doctoral Advisor, Educational Leadership
Nova Southeastern University
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

The Bulletin, an official publication of The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International, promotes
professional and personal growth of members through publication of their writings. Three online issues
per year, subtitled International Journal for Professional Educators, focus on research-based and documented
works—applied and data-based research, position papers, program descriptions, reviews of literature, and
other articles on announced themes or other topics of interest to educators. Two print issues, subtitled
Collegial Exchange, focus on articles based on practice and experience related to education, the Society,
women, and children, as well as personal reflections and creative works. All five issues include book and
technology reviews, letters to the editor, poetry, and graphic arts.
Submissions to the Bulletin, a refereed publication, are reviewed by the Editorial Board and the Society
editorial staff. Selection is based on relevance of the topics addressed, accuracy and validity, contribution to
the professional literature, originality, quality of writing, and adherence to Submission Guidelines (see page
63). Editorial Board members evaluate each submission’s focus, organization, development, readability, and
relevance to the general audience of Bulletin readers. Due to the diversity of the Bulletin audience, material
that expresses a gender, religious, political, or patriotic bias is not suitable for publication.
Please send materials to [email protected] or to Bulletin Editorial Staff, The Delta Kappa Gamma
Society International, P.O. Box 1589, Austin, TX 78767-1589.The Delta Kappa Gamma Society
International, P.O. Box 1589, Austin, TX 78767-1589.

The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin (ISSN 0011-8044; USPS 715-850; IPM 0302295) is published five times each
year by The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International, 416 West 12th Street, Austin, Texas. Mailing address:
P.O. Box 1589, Austin, TX 78767-1589. Periodicals Postage paid at Austin, Texas. Periodicals Postage paid
at Austin, Texas. Subscription, U.S. $31 per year; single copies, $7 each (journal) or $5 each (magazine).
International dues include subscription to The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin. Views expressed do not
necessarily agree with positions taken by The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin
P.O. Box 1589, Austin, TX 78767-1589
Generational Issues for Educators 3

The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin

International Journal for Professional Educators
2017 • Volume 84-1
Published by the Delta Kappa Gamma Society International

The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International

promotes professional and personal growth of women
educators and excellence in education.

Call for Submissions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

From the Editor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

On the Theme: Generational Issues for Educators

Food for Thought: Learning More about Generations
By Barbara Perry-Sheldon .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Teaching Side by Side by Side: An Intergenerational Case Study

By Kathleen Lozinak. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Of General Interest:
The Impact of Teacher Efficacy and Beliefs on Writing Instruction
By Ginnie Curtis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Creating Schools that Emphasize Democracy and Citizenship

By Jóna Benediktsdottir. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

The Importance of Questioning in Developing Critical Thinking Skills

By Judith S. Nappi.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

The Development of an Online, Graduate Practicum Course

By Linda K. Lilienthal, Dennis Potthoff, and Kenneth E. Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Cool Tools for School: Twenty-First-Century Tools for Student Engagement

By Kyoko Johns, Jennifer Troncale, Christi Trucks, Christie Calhoun, and Michael Alvidrez. . . . . . . . . . 53

Special Report:
DKG Dues Adjustments: A Study
By Phyllis A. Hickey, Nita Scott, Theresa Waller, Carolyn Pittman, Kara Hamann,
and Judith R. Merz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Submission Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Submission Grid .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

© 2017 The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International. All rights reserved.
4 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Call for Submissions

Members are encouraged to submit manuscripts for consideration by the Bulletin
Editorial Board. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: Journal accepts research-based
articles including Action/Classroom Research, Qualitative Research, Quantitative
Research, Reviews of Literature, Program Descriptions, Position Papers, and
Book/Technology Reviews. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: Collegial Exchange
accepts articles of a more practical, personal nature, including Classroom and
DKG Practices/Programs, Viewpoints on Current Issues, Personal Reflections or
Anecdotes, Inspirational Pieces, Biographies and Interviews, Book and Technology
Reviews, and Creative Writing.
Submissions should be focused, well organized, effectively developed, concise,
and appropriate for Bulletin readers. The style should be direct, clear, readable, and
free from gender, political, patriotic, or religious bias. For more detailed information,
please refer to the Submission Guidelines on page 63 and the Submission Grids on
page 64.
Listed below are the deadlines and, where appropriate, themes. Although there
is a suggested theme for each issue of the Bulletin: Journal, manuscripts on all topics
are welcome. The Bulletin: Collegial Exchange is not theme-based.

Journal: Accountability (84-3; Online)

(Postmark deadline is October 1, 2017)
Professionalism • Tenure • National-State-Local Policies •
Student Learning • School Improvement

Collegial Exchange (84-4; Print)

(Postmark deadline is December 15, 2017)
No designated theme

Journal: Disruptive Innovation (84-5; Online)

(Postmark deadline is March 1, 2018)
Change • Collaborative Innovation • Systemic Change •
Different Models of Leadership •
Challenge-driven Innovation • Problem Solving

Journal: Schools and Societal Issues (85-1; Online)

(Postmark deadline is May 15, 2018)
Immigrants • Refugees • Poverty • Bullying • LGBT • Transgender

Submit all materials to:

Bulletin Editorial Staff
[email protected]
Generational Issues for Educators 5

From the Editor

Educator, author, and businessman Stephen Covey once offered this provocative
thought about perception:
Each of us tends to think we see things as they are, that we are objective. But this is
not the case. We see the world, not as it is, but as we are—or, as we are conditioned
to see it. When we open our mouths to describe what we see, we in effect describe
ourselves, our perceptions, our paradigms (The Seven Habits of Highly Effective
People, 2004, p. 28).
Included in the “conditioning” that shapes one’s perceptions—that, in effect, shapes one’s
sense of self—are factors associated with the era in which one comes of age. The power
of such generational identity and the relationships between and among generations have
been the subject of literature ranging from Shakespeare’s dramatic Romeo and Juliet to
the humorous musical, Bye Bye Birdie; in both, the older generation essentially frets and
muses about the younger—“Why can’t they be like we were?”—and those in the younger
generation, in turn, wonder why they must conform to the outdated ways of their elders.
As educators, DKG members naturally interact with those in younger generations—
as well as with colleagues and community members who may represent still other age
groups, each replete with its own experiences and perceptions. Clearly, an understanding
of generational issues is thus important for educators and serves as the theme for the first
two articles in this issue. Editorial Board member Perry-Sheldon provides an overview
of the significance of generational issues in a variety of fields and then reviews two recent
books on the topic. In a limited but interesting case study, Lozinak endeavors to determine
whether educators across generations are more alike than different.
Although not specifically focused on generational issues, other articles provide insight
to working with students at varied levels. Reporting on an action research project, Curtis
explores the value of modeling in impacting teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes
about teaching writing at the kindergarten level. Benediktsdottir discusses a program that
promotes democracy and citizen awareness among students at a grade school in Iceland,
and Nappi argues for the importance of questioning in developing critical thinking skills
at all levels. Indicating that use of technology is important to widely disparate generations,
Lilienthal, Potthoff, and Anderson share the structure, benefits, and challenges of an
online practicum course for graduate students, and Johns, Troncale, Trucks, Calhoun, and
Alvidrez promote the benefits of student engagement via use of specific online tools.
Delta Kappa Gamma includes members from diverse generations, working together
to achieve the mission of promoting professional and personal growth and excellence in
education. Each carries her own perceptions regarding education—views that are often
shaped by the lens of generation. May the articles in this issue help readers to embrace the
challenges of being educators of all generations collaborating toward the common goal of
excellence in education for new generations of learners.

Judith R. Merz, EdD

Editor
6 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Food for Thought: Learning

More about Generations
By Barbara Perry-Sheldon

T his article continues a series initiated by members of the Bulletin’s editorial board. The goal
of the series is to provide insight on a topic related to the theme of the issue. Here, editorial
board member Perry-Sheldon provides an overview of the significance of generational issues in a
variety of fields and then reviews two recent books on the topic.

“Every generation imagines itself to be more intelligent than the one that went before it,
and wiser than the one that comes after it.” George Orwell

The construct of generation and related issues are explored in many books and
professional publications. Interest in the topic has grown because this is the first time that
so many generations are employed together (Franksen, 2009). Authors and publishers
differ in names for the generations, their positions on the traits of the different generations,
and whether a combination of generations makes a difference in the work environment.
What is written comes from diverse fields such as business, government, and all areas of
education, from medical schools, universities, and public libraries to K-12 settings. The
following sampling of ideas from the diverse fields sets the stage for brief reviews of two
books on the topic.

A Sampling of Relevant Quotations

Libraries. Park, Scott, and Schnabel (2014) concluded from their research, “As we
have explored the literature and analyzed the survey results, our eyes have been opened to
the importance of generational issues in the workplace. Generational differences, whether
perceived or real, have huge implications for library services and administration” (np).

Medical Fields. “Medical educators face many of the same challenges as other faculty
in trying to communicate with a generation they may not fully understand” (Twenge, 2009,
p. 403).
“This is the first time in American history that four different generations have worked
together in the workplace. For that reason, it is vital to examine what divides the distinct
generations and what is important to each of them”(Frandsen, 2009, p. 34).

Higher Education. “The current workforce composition of the academy is comprised

of multiple generational cohorts: Traditionalists, Leading Edge Boomers, Trailing Edge
Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials. These [research] results draw attention to the
value of knowing the generational composition of a higher education institution in order
to take into account the unique needs of each generational cohort when planning ways
to improve recruitment, retention, and productivity of administrators, faculty and staff ”
Generational Issues for Educators 7

(Kleinhans, Chakradhar, Muller, & Waddill, 2015, p. 89).

K-12 Schools
In a 2016 Kappan position paper, Ferguson related generational issues to the current
challenge in many states of how to attract millennials to the profession to replace the veteran
teachers who are retiring. She cited polls suggesting millennials have “lackluster feelings
about teaching. The data bear this out as enrollment numbers for both education schools
and the once sought-after Teach for America program are on a downward trajectory” (p.
74). Ferguson further indicated that lack of time and support are two key issues causing
millennials to leave the classroom.
Lovely and Lancaster (2010), in an article in School Administrator, noted that
administrators must work to build a community within a school with diverse generations:
The intergenerational dialogue so vital to the development of strong learning
communities doesn’t come naturally to educators. But when age-based differences
are factored in to professional development, hiring practices and staff assignments,
it sets the stage for a collaborative outcome. On the other hand, if we ignore such
differences, culture wars will obstruct progress. The wider the divide becomes, the
harder it is to bridge. Knowing what binds staff together or pulls them apart allows
you to bring out the best in your people. (“Unnatural Dialogue,” para. 3)
The article built on ideas presented in the 2007 book, Generations at School, co-authored
by Lovely.

Political and Economic Policy Makers

Rather than focusing on the workplace, Taylor (2016) explored the impact of
generations on America’s political and economic future in his book, The Next America:
Boomers, Millennials, and the Looming Generational Showdown. He cited numerous
statistics gathered by the Pew Research Foundation. In a chapter titled “Battle of the
Ages,” Turner wrote, “If ever there was a moment to gird for a generation war, now would
seem to be it. The unsparing arithmetic of a graying population is about to force political
leaders to rewrite the social contract between young and old” (p. 79). He posited, “Young
and old in America are poles apart. Demographically, politically, economically, socially, and
technologically, the generations are more different from each other now than at any time
in living memory” (p. 61). In his book, Taylor outlined his views on the coming “reckoning”
within generations in America, asking, for example, what will happen to safety nets such as
Social Security and Medicare and taxes? He noted the challenges of generational equity:
“At the end of the day, though, this is a challenge that can only be overcome by presidential
leadership. What’s needed is someone who can use the bully pulpit to educate the public
about the inequities in the status quo” (p. 235). The book is a great read for those interested
in a different perspective on generations, supported by data and implications for policy.

Dr. Barbara Perry-Sheldon is retired from North Carolina Wesleyan College, where she
directed the teacher education program. A member of Alpha Gamma Chapter, she serves as
Executive Secretary for North Carolina State Organization and is a member (2014-2018) of
the editorial board for DKG. [email protected]
8 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Businesses
The quote from George Orwell about generations cited at the head of this article is
used by Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak (2013) to open a chapter on cross-generational
workplaces in their book, Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Boomers, GenXers,
and Gen Yers in the Workplace. They noted,
There is a problem in the workplace—a problem of values, ambitions, views, mind
sets, demographics, and generations in conflict. The workplace we inhabit today
is awash with the conflicting voices and views of the most age-and value-diverse
workforce the world has known. (p. 11)
The authors updated their first edition that focused on awareness of the generational
differences and added more on ways “to tap the potential of workers from all the
generations” (p. 3). The second edition gives facts and myths about each generation and
offers suggestions for handling the clash of generations in the workplace; many of the
suggestions would work in school settings.
Bollan and Lopes (2014) presented a contrasting view for business leaders. Based
on their review of generation literature and their own research, they concluded that the
construct of generation is important in families and not “significant for work” (p. 255),
but they argued that other characteristics, especially age, are more important than the
traditional, popular way of looking at generations as “worthwhile descriptor(s)” for
managing people (p. 237).

Suggested Further Reading

In a foreword to a book by Lancaster and Stillman (2002), well-known businessman
and journalist Harvey MacKay argued that reading, knowing, and understanding the
generation gap and differences is something every leader needs. He further said that
understanding the generations is a “key to understanding yourself, your family, and your
friends better” (xix). If interested in reading more about generational differences, consider
the two newer books briefly reviewed below.

Harvey, E., & Clark, S. (2016). Millennials vs. boomers: Listen, learn and succeed
together. Naperville, IL: Simple Truths, an imprint of Sourcebooks.

Depending on which way this small, square book is held, the title is either Millennials
vs. Boomers or Boomers vs. Millennials. In one direction, Harvey presents the views of
Boomers, and when the book is flipped back to front, Clark
presents the Millennial perspective. Written in a friendly,
first-person style with many personal examples, the book
contrasts 12 workplace areas ranging from job loyalty,
diversity, and decision-making to personal growth. This
book’s brevity, dual perspectives, and interesting format
make it a quick introduction to two generations and useful
for discussions of the topic.
The book is filled with humorous sayings, such as “Life
was much simpler when Apple and Blackberry were simply
fruits” (p. 62–63). As the writers meet in the middle of
the book, both conclude, “With more understanding and
greater appreciation we can meet in the middle and succeed
together” (p. 107).
Generational Issues for Educators 9

Grubb, V. (2017). Clash of the generations: Managing the new workplace reality.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Although the title reflects much of the literature in viewing clashes
among generations, the author presents a positive set of principles for
building on differences for the common good. A lack of trust within
corporations and demographic changes demand a new set of leadership
skills according to Grubb. She writes that “letting go of old habits and
instead thinking about motivation and engagement in a new light—a
task that isn’t easy to accomplish” (p. 5) is a key to reducing turnover
and lack of engagement in an organization. Grubb presents the typical
characteristics of generations in a table.
Although Clash of the Generations is primarily a book for
corporate managers, many of the suggestions made are quite relevant
to educators and leaders in educational organizations. Grubb’s
descriptions of effective feedback (be specific, identify actions, state
what worked or didn’t, suggest different options, and give follow up)
and effective coaching (encouragement, active listening, questions,
shared perspectives, shared ownership; pp. 49-51) are good practices
in school settings as well as in businesses. Her chapter on delegating
and mentoring provides insights on promoting growth for individuals from all generations.
Grubb suggests that reverse mentoring, when the younger person coaches the older, is
helpful at times.
Other insights for educators can be found in the six short business cases that conclude
the book. In a case study on leadership, Grubb notes that mentoring is “one of the best
ways to improve leadership” (p. 157) and is most successful when viewed as a partnership
and not a top-down model. Another case describes building cohorts for new employees,
or what is called “onboarding,” as a key for successfully integrating newer generations and
helping them make connections to the culture of the workplace, an idea similar to what
some schools do for beginning teachers. It is a strategy that would work in an education
organization.

In Conclusion
Generational differences are discussed and studied across disciplines, often in
denigrating terms such as “clash” and “conflict.” But most individuals do recognize
generational differences and acknowledge that whether age, life histories, or changing
cultures add to the differences, encouraging generations to work together is important for
the success of the workplace.
Johnson and Anderson (2016) wrote, “The best way to overcome and prevent conflict
between generations in the workplace is to get past generational stereotypes and address
the underlying issues of communication, cooperation, and a positive work culture” (para.
8). They encouraged the use of perspective-taking skills as a way to bridge perceived or real
conflicts among generations. Perspective-taking skills
can help bridge cultural divides within the workplace, including divides between
younger and older workers. They also can help build understanding between
employees and customers, resulting in improved customer satisfaction and
increased sales…Adopting perspective-taking skills will result in a workforce
that hires and retains the best available talent regardless of age group and cultural
background. Organizations with such a workforce are then better able to engage
10 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

with customers of all ages, and are best equipped for success in an increasingly
global and diverse economy. (para. 10)
Although Johnson and Anderson wrote of business workplaces, their points still apply to
schools and organizations in an increasingly diverse, global environment. Continuing to
learn and broaden perspectives will result in providing students with a quality education
while building trust, understanding, collaboration, and support among educators from all
generations.

References
Bolland, E., & Lopes, C. (2014). Generations at work. New York City, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.

Ferguson, M. (2016, February). Keeping millennials in classrooms requires time and support. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(5), 74-75.

Frandsen, B. (2009, February). Leading by recognizing generational differences: Long term management care. Long-Term Living,
58(2), 34-35.

Grubb, V. (2017). Clash of the generations: Managing the new workplace reality. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

Harvey, E., & Clark, S. (2016). Millennials vs. boomers: Listen, learn and succeed together. Naperville, IL: Simple Truths.

Johnson, W. L., & Anderson, A. (2016, February). Perspective-taking skills for a multigenerational workforce. Talent Development.
Retrieved from www.td.org/Publications/Magazines/TD/TD-Archive/2016/02 /Perspective-Taking-Skills

Kleinhans, K., Chakradhar, K., Muller, S., & Waddill, P. (2015). Multigenerational perceptions of the academic work environment in
higher education. Higher Education, 70, 80-103.

Lancaster, L., & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations collide: Who they are, why they clash, how to solve the generational puzzle at work.
New York City, NY: HarperBusiness.

Lovely, S., & Buffum, A. (2007). Generations at school: Building an age-friendly learning community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Lovely, S., & Lancaster, L. (2010, January). Generations at school: Building an age-friendly workplace. School Administrator, 67(1),
10-12, 14-16.

Park, B., Scott, R., & Schnabel, J. (2014). Generations in Tennessee libraries. Tennessee Libraries, 64(3) 1-9.

Taylor, P. (2015). The next America: Boomers, millennials, and the looming generational showdown. New York City, NY: Public Affairs.

Twenge, J. M. (2009). Generational changes and their impact in the classroom: Teaching generation me. Medical Education, 43, 398-
405.

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2013). Generations at work: Managing the clash of boomers, gen Xers, and gen Yers in the
workplace (2nd ed.). New York City, NY: American Management Association.
Generational Issues for Educators 11

Teaching Side by Side by Side:

An Intergenerational Case
Study
By Kathleen Lozinak

A bundant research exists in the area of generational differences. The author explores
that research from her perspective as the middle individual within three generations of
professional educators. Her research is built on a small case study and is centered on one basic
question: Are educators across generations more alike than different?

Introduction
Your new administrator is years younger, and the majority of your interactions with
this leader take place using technology. The paraprofessional assigned to your class is
coming out of retirement for the third time. You feel a need to reflect on articles you have
read concerning the impact of generational differences on the work environment. Do you
have cause for concern? Or are all the identified characteristics for each generation just
stereotypes? The result of educators—and workers in general—living longer and working
longer will create a number of issues in the twenty-first-century society and economy.
One interesting phenomenon will be that up to five generations will be employed together
(Knight, 2014). Will they thrive or struggle?
I wondered whether a small case study within my own family that includes three
generations of educators could provide insight to this issue. My mother, Arlene, is well
on her way to being 100 and shows few signs of slowing down. My daughter, Emily, is
considered an early-career educator and exhibits all the qualities of a master teacher. And
I am forever in the middle.

Problem
In The 100 Year Life: Living and Working in an Age of Longevity, Gratton and Scott
(2016) calculated approximately how long people will work if they are living longer. That
age increases with each subsequent generation. Predictably, workers of very different ages
will be working together in many fields, including education. So what will that mean? Are
the generational stereotypes accurate, and will they impact how effectively people can work
together?

Background
A generation is defined as a group of people who share birth years, age, and common
historical and significant events at given stages of development (Kupperschmidt, 2000).
Each generation is influenced by multiple forces, including popular culture, economic
events, media, peers, and parents. These forces help to impact a generation’s value system
and outlook on life. Researchers are currently working with labels for five generations and a
12 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

variety of traits associated with them, but they are quick to point out that their data reveal
common characteristics and not stereotypes (Twenge & Campbell, 2008). Those studying
this issue believe they are providing general comparisons between groups and acknowledge
that there are similarities as well as differences.
Burke (2004) grouped generations into four categories based on “values and experiences
common to each generation” (p. v). The Veterans or Traditionalists grew up during the
depression and war years. Anyone born before 1945 is considered a Traditionalist. The
Early Boomers, on the other hand, grew up as products of post-war optimism. Their
birth years include 1946 through 1964. Several social issues impacted their development,
including Vietnam War protests, Woodstock, Kent State killings, Watergate, and the
impeachment of a president. Later Boomers experienced declining economic prosperity.
Generation X members were born between 1961 and 1976. They grew up during an era
of failing marriages, latch-key kids, and MTV. X’ers tended to date cautiously and marry
late because they grew up during the AIDS scare. They are said to be entrepreneurial and
technologically savvy. Following them are GenNext, born between 1977 and 1995 and
seen as needing a solid work-family balance. They are characterized as more conventional
and very close to their families. They are used to getting information immediately and from
multiple sources. They do not know of a time when computers or Internet did not exist.
They consider Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia, and YouTube trusted sources of information.
Although all of these generations may be currently in a given workplace, my focus was on
the experiences and perceptions of three generations within my own family of educators,
spanning from a Traditionalist to a Millenial/Nexter.

Research Question
The purpose of this mini-research project was to examine the validity of characteristics
assigned to varying generations as they apply to teachers in the workforce. I also wanted to
explore if and how these characteristics might impact relationships among multigenerational
educators. Thus, my key research question was “To what extent do generational differences
impact educators in the workforce?”

Research Method and Participants

The research method was structured as a case study using information from three
generations of one family. To formalize this highly personal investigation, I first conducted
an informal review of the writings available related to generational differences. I then
created a list of interview questions (Appendix A) based on themes uncovered during my
reading. I included questions related to generational stereotypes as well as some directly
relating to current educational issues.
I interviewed my mother, Arlene, and daughter, Emily, and answered the questions
myself. I was interested to see if the characteristics associated with each generation applied
to us. Because this research was originally intended to quench my own curiosity, I also took

Dr. Kathleen Lozinak serves as first vice president of Connecticut State Organization and
president of Omicron Chapter. She was a 2016 Golden Gift Leadership Management
Seminar participant. Selected as a recipient of a DKG international scholarship, Dr. Lozinak
earned a doctorate in educational leadership from Capella University. She works as a teacher
and mentor in Stratford, CT. Lozinak’s mother is an active DKG member, as is her daughter,
Emily. [email protected]
Generational Issues for Educators 13

the opportunity to look for similarities regarding why we became teachers and a variety of
topics that might impact how we teach. Several patterns and themes emerged related to
the importance of strong teacher preparation programs and mentoring, but I was surprised
to find that topics I would have thought to be influential in certain generations did not
present as impactful.
My mother turned 86 in November 2016. She completed her teacher preparation
program at Hunter College in New York City at the age of 19 and began her teaching
career in Long Island, New York. As a newlywed, she went on to teach in East St. Louis,
Illinois, where one of the interviewers felt the need to ask her how she felt about teaching
Black children. My mother responded that “children are children.” Years later, she reflects
on a career that includes several states, teaching children with special needs, a variety
of administrative positions, public school, private school, and work for a university as
a supervisor of student teachers. My mother is currently working in the public schools
assisting students with special needs.
My road to fulltime employment as a certified teacher was a long and winding one.
I worked as a tutor and daycare provider to children with special needs while earning
my bachelor’s degree and teaching certificate—a journey that took 10 years. My field
experiences and student teaching were all in my hometown. I student taught at the high
school I had attended, working with students with learning disabilities and emotional
issues that impacted their learning. My first position was in an integrated preschool, and
my second position was back in my own high school. Currently, I am loving every minute
with my Grade 4 students and am mentoring colleagues younger than my youngest child.
Emily earned her bachelor’s degree in a non-education field and entered the New
York City (NYC) Teaching Fellows through St. John’s University. After completing an
intensive summer training program, she was assigned to teach Grade 6 mathematics in
a middle school in Flushing, Queens, NYC. She earned a master’s degree in secondary
mathematics education by attending classes at night. Emily currently teaches freshmen
algebra in a technical high school. She is piloting a mastery-based learning program in
which each student spends the majority of his or her class time completing independent
assignments on a digital device. Like her grandmother and mother, she holds degrees
in special education and administration. My daughter also currently holds leadership
positions in several teacher organizations

Results: Common Characteristics

The participants were presented with a list of characteristics drawn from all four
currently working generations (Traditionalists, Boomer, Gen X, and Millennials; Burke,
2004) and were asked to choose the five that best described themselves in a work setting.
From the 19 workplace characteristics most commonly associated with the four working
generations presented (Appendix B), all three professional educators placed the “need for
structure” in their top five characteristics. All also chose “ability to multitask” to describe
themselves. Three other characteristics shared by varying combinations of respondents
may have had more to do with varying life stages. My mother and I responded we needed a
“work life balance,” while Emily and I saw ourselves as “giving maximum effort.” Emily’s last
two traits were “tech savvy” and “process driven.” My mother’s final two characteristics were
“asking for help when needed” and “accepting authority.” My last choice was “staying with an
organization over time.” These differences may be attributed to the fact that, as educators,
we were at markedly dissimilar stages of our lives and careers.
 14 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Results: Vocation
It was interesting to see that three generations of women chose teaching as a career for
similar reasons. Responses from all of us indicated a desire to make a difference. We all also
referenced teachers who had made a difference for us. My mother, from the Traditional
Generation, also talked about loving school as a child, while Emily referenced the need to
choose a career where she could impact the future while minimizing student loan debt.
When asked about teacher preparation programs and early-career experiences, all
three mentioned the importance of quality field work experiences and strong mentors.
Administrators were also seen as factors who impacted the teaching experience for my
mother and me. We all stated that we continue to use strategies and tips learned from
our cooperating teachers. We also all discussed the importance of a mentor. Emily and I
believed that, although our first official mentors were not extremely helpful, subsequent
mentors and many professional educators and administrators were willing to help and
support us early in our careers.
The stories shared from those early careers returned to memories of impacting
children’s lives. Across generations, we three teachers saw our ability to make a difference
as the foundation for our work. Regardless of our specific generation, we could recall the
names of students from our first years of teaching and the relationships we built with them.

Results: Non-Issues
The interviewees were asked about the impact of any technological advances on their
teaching. The characteristics associated with Millennials had led me to believe that this
would be important to my daughter. We all listed varying forms of technology available and
our ability to implement them, but none believed
technology had a huge impact on how she taught.
The purpose Additionally, I presumed that historically
of this investigation significant events would impact teachers and their
teaching. I expected the participants to list wars
was to explore or school shootings as having a noticeable impact
on their teaching. But none of us, as professional
to what extent, educators, reported thoughts and feelings about
if any, generational teaching being changed by global issues, no matter
how near or how far. Furthermore, the question
differences impact relating to legislative impacts on educational
educators careers resulted in discussion about what is
taught and how it is taught—but not as an impact
in the work force. on the art and science of teaching and working
with children. Some reference to No Child Left
Behind and laws relating to where students with special needs can be taught, as well as
union issues, were shared by all.

Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

Although this study was highly personal in nature and thus limited by sample size,
it does provide a starting point for organizations interested in uncovering the many
commonalities of their intergenerational membership or workforce. Organizational leaders
and human resource personnel should take the time to investigate the varying strengths of
each person with whom they are associated and encourage individuals to share the stories
that have made them the unique individuals they are.
Generational Issues for Educators 15

Conclusion
The purpose of this investigation was to explore to what extent, if any, generational
differences impact educators in the work force. Clearly, learning about the characteristics
commonly associated with the four working generations is beneficial on many levels.
Understanding that different people have different values has always been helpful to leaders
and managers in all fields. Knowledge of generational characteristics may help in attracting
and retaining the best candidates for a position or members for an organization. Finding
that we are more alike than different across generations can help to put our minds at ease
when we are met with that worker who is coming out of retirement for a third time or an
administrator who is less than half our age. Ultimately, one can come to feel blessed if she
has the honor of working side by side with educators from varied generations.

References
Burke, M. E. (2004). Generational differences survey report. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved from
https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-surveys/pages/default.aspx

Gratton, L., & Scott, A. (2016). The 100 year life: Living and working in an age of longevity. London, UK: Bloomsbury Information.

Knight, R. (2014). Managing people from five generations. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/topic
/generational-issues

Kupperschmidt, B. R. (2000). Multigenerational employees: Strategies for effective management. The Health Care Manager, 19,
65–76.

Tolbize, A. (2008). Generational differences in the workplace. Minneapolis, MN: Research and Training Center on Community Living,
University of Minnesota.

Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, S. M. (2008). Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and
intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36, 1117–1142.

Wong, M., Gardiner, E., Lang, W., & Coulon, L. (2008). Generational differences in personality and motivation: Do
they exist and what are the implications for the workplace? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 878–890. doi/
pdfplus/10.1108/02683940810904376

Appendix A
Interview Questions
1. What factors influenced your decision to become a teacher?
2. Describe your teacher education program.
3. Share some interesting stories from your time as an early-career educator.
4. Discuss the impact of any formal or informal mentoring that occurred.
5. What technological advances were newly implemented in the early years of your
career?
6. How did that technology impact your teaching?
7. What legislation has had the greatest impact on your work in education?
8. Please discuss any significant/historic events that occurred during your teaching
career that impacted how you taught or your feelings about teaching.
9. Please review the descriptions provided on these cards [Workplace trait cards].
Which card most closely describes your attitudes toward work?
16 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Appendix B
Workplace Traits

• Accept authority figures in the workplace

• Ask for help when needed
• Embrace diversity
• Give maximum effort
• Good at multitasking
• Learn quickly
• Like informality
• Like structure
• Need supervision
• Prefer to work alone
• Prefer to work in teams
• Process driven
• Respectful of organizational hierarchy
• Results driven
• Retain what you learn
• Technology savvy
• Seek work life balance
• Stays with organization over long term
• Willing to deal with work related politics

Adapted from Burke, M. E. (2004). Generational differences survey report.

Generational Issues for Educators 17

The Impact of Teacher Efficacy

and Beliefs on Writing
Instruction
By Ginnie Curtis

T he purpose of this author’s research was to investigate how the modeling of effective writing
strategies impacted kindergarten teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes toward the
teaching of writing. One’s knowledge base plays an important role in the efficacy of a writing
teacher. Teachers must understand the writing process themselves before they can share with
students and develop each student’s skills as a writer. Teachers must feel confident in their
delivery of writing instruction through an effective, systematic process. Their beliefs and attitudes
can potentially impact students in the writing process and overall achievement. Through a mixed
methods approach, the researcher used both quantitative and qualitative data to explore the
research question. The findings suggested that the modeling of specific writing strategies does
impact teachers’ ability as writing instructors. Confidence and efficacy are outcomes implied
through this investigation.

Introduction
Writing is a difficult skill for educators to instruct and students to master. It is a
complex, multifaceted skill that requires explicit instruction by a trained teacher. Bifuh-
Ambe (2013) stated that “teachers must feel competent as writers and writing teachers
in order to provide the kind of instruction and modeling that will help students develop
into proficient writers” (p. 137). At least part of this inattention to writing instruction
stems from the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which resulted in writing being greatly
ignored as a focus on high-stakes testing preoccupied educators and students in American
classrooms (Cutler & Graham, 2008). Unfortunately, more recent research has also
identified a lack of time or teacher ability in providing quality writing instruction (Bifuh-
Ambe, 2013).
For kindergarten teachers, teaching writing to young children who are also learning to
read can be overwhelming. Kindergarten teachers bear much of the responsibility for the
foundational skills of these early learners. Many times, their writing instruction centers
on handwriting, sentence structure, and spelling (traditional writing instruction) without
much explicit instruction in writing itself (Cutler & Graham, 2008). Teachers must find
an effective balance between writing instruction that focuses on process and content and
on traditional writing instruction.
Perhaps this disparity is a direct result of lack of training on effective writing instruction.
The National Commission on Writing (2003) recommended the improvement of teacher
preparation as one of four findings in its study. In their 2011 article, A Year in the Writing
Workshop (2011), Troia, Lin, Cohen, and Monroe examined how teachers’ beliefs about
18 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

themselves as writing teachers influenced their teaching of writing. They concluded that
teachers who felt inadequate and poorly trained typically did not spend as much time
as needed delivering writing instruction. On the other hand, teachers who had received
adequate training felt empowered in their writing abilities and the delivery of instruction,
thus impacting students’ writing development in the early grades.
This article is based on a small case study with two kindergarten teachers who received
direct modeling of writing strategies. The researcher sought to answer one key research
question: “What is the effect of the modeling of specific writing strategies on teacher
knowledge, attitude, and capacity regarding writing instruction?”

Review of Literature
The complexity of writing instruction has left many teachers feeling inadequate
and poorly trained to teach writing skills. In this day of high-stakes testing, writing
instruction has taken a back burner to areas such as mathematics and reading, creating
a large fissure between teacher ability and consistency of instruction. In an examination
of teachers’ perceptions of effective writing strategies, White and Hall (2014) argued for
strong instructional support for teachers in writing instruction. In their research, 21% of
participants indicated a lack of preparation for teaching writing, either through professional
development or other training, thus affecting their ability as effective writing instructors.
Addressing this gap, Bifuh-Ambe (2013) noted, “Professional development can foster
teachers’ writing proficiency and in turn improve students’ writing achievements” (p.
137). Ultimately, students who have been taught by a trained writing teacher outperform
students of untrained teachers.
Teachers’ competency in teaching specific writing skills can be increased through
professional development in areas such as explicit prewriting activities, specific feedback,
and effective collaboration between teachers and students. Such competence also allows
the teacher to implement new writing strategies, including student-centered activities
(Troia et al., 2011). Cutler and Graham (2008) noted that teacher efficacy is an area where
improvement is desperately needed. Teachers cannot teach effectively what they do not
know or understand. Professional development can build teacher capacity in writing and,
hence, in writing instruction.
Teachers’ perceptions or attitudes toward writing instruction play an imperative role in
their work. Not only do teachers’ beliefs affect writing instruction, but they can also influence
attitudes toward students and student behavior (Troia et al., 2011). Bifuh-Ambe (2013)
provided insight into the teaching of writing based on teachers’ attitudes and perceptions
of their own ability as writers and as teachers of writing. In her study, teachers generally
felt more positive about writing after professional development and perceived themselves
as “good writers” (p. 145). Furthermore, when teachers perceived themselves as competent
writing teachers, they were able to deal with outside factors that might influence learning,
such as classroom behavior (Troia et al., 2011). The work of Bifuh-Ambe (2013) and of

Ginnie Curtis, a member of Alpha Rho Chapter in Mississippi State Organization and
National Board Certified Teacher in Literacy, serves as the Lamar County School District
Literacy Coach. She recently earned her specialist degree in instructional leadership from
William Carey University. She provides professional development to teachers in the five
components of effective reading instruction and writing in response to text. Working with
professional learning communities and individual teachers throughout the district, Curtis
promotes literacy instruction based on explicit, direct instruction through whole and small
group activities. [email protected]
Generational Issues for Educators 19

Troia et al. (2011) confirmed teachers’ beliefs and the role they play in teaching writing as
barriers that must be overcome. Feeling confident and qualified as a teacher empowers the
teacher in the delivery of instruction and positively impacts student achievement.
Discussing writing instruction in the primary grades, Cutler and Graham (2008)
drove home the importance of effective writing instruction in the early grades as the basis
of students’ future success as writers. Writing instruction at that level should be geared
toward the writing process and focus less on isolated skills in language and conventions
(Troia et al., 2011). Teaching skills through the context of the writing process and not
in isolation is essential in developing proficient writers and must start in kindergarten
and build throughout the elementary grades. Cutler and Graham (2008) and Troia et al.
(2011) both addressed the importance of writing instruction in kindergarten to help early
learners see reading and writing as reciprocal processes and to lay the foundation for future
learning.

Description of the Population

The study was conducted at a public kindergarten-through-Grade 8 school located in
a small, urban community of south Mississippi. One principal, a lead teacher, a counselor,
a part-time district literacy coach, and 18 teachers were on staff at the school servicing
approximately 300 students. The overall population was 98% Caucasian and 2% African
American. Based on the school’s student demographic data, 80% of students were
considered economically disadvantaged. In response to this information, a prekindergarten
class was housed at the school 2 years ago to provide early childhood education.
Participants in this study were two kindergarten teachers serving 14 students each
and sharing an assistant. The two classes were originally one, but due to an increase in
enrollment, the school administrators divided the class after the first semester. The initial
teacher was a seasoned veteran of 15 years and had been at the school for 3 years. She was
an older individual who had taken some time off from teaching to raise her own children.
The other teacher had been practicing for 3 years with only 1 month at this current school.
Prior to obtaining her teaching licensure, she had served as a teacher’s assistant for 10
years at another school within the district. Both of these teachers had worked only in
kindergarten through Grade 2 during their teaching careers.

Procedure
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the modeling of specific writing
strategies by the district’s literacy coach on teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and capacity
relevant to writing instruction. This 7-week plan was designed specifically for the two
teachers based upon conversations held during Professional Learning Communities
(PLCs) and through e-mail dialogue throughout the first semester of the 2016-2017
school year.
Three weeks prior to the onset of the study, teachers and the literacy coach engaged
in specific dialogue regarding the teaching of writing in their classrooms and their feelings
of inadequacy. From this informal conversation, a computerized pre-survey (see Table)
was designed by the literacy coach and administered to both teachers. The data from this
survey set a baseline against which to gauge a change in teachers’ perceptions of themselves
as writing instructors.
Prior to the modeled lessons, the teachers and the literacy coach met and discussed the
upcoming lessons on writing opinion papers. Based on the College and Career Readiness
Standards (CCRS) and the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) scaffolding
 20 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

documents, teachers determined what students must be able to do to demonstrate mastery

of the first writing standard. Teachers also viewed the rubric designed by kindergarten
teachers across the district to assess students’ mastery of skills. Based on the resources,
students needed to write about a topic or book and share their opinion through drawing,
dictating, or writing.
During the 3 weeks of intervention, the literacy coach created sentence prompts and
writing paper on large chart paper so that effective modeling could be conducted for a large
group. Books were selected, both fiction and nonfiction, so students could have multiple
exposures to different texts. The writing centers for small groups were organized to include
writing paper, copies of the text, and writing utensils for students to use in the teacher-led
center. Easels were also placed at the center so the charts created in whole group could be
relocated to this center.
For each of the six intervention sessions (two
Teachers’ competency each week), the literacy coach demonstrated
writing lessons for the whole group. Each session
in teaching specific followed the same format: beginning with the
writing skills can be increased reading of a text; modeling of opinion writing and
informative writing using the sentence prompts
through professional and chart paper; and ending with the students
development creating their own work at the small-group writing
center. During the final four sessions, the assistant
in areas such as explicit teacher observed so that she could facilitate the
prewriting activities, writing center in the future.
At the conclusion of each intervention session,
specific feedback, the teachers reflected on the modeled lesson
and responded to questions provided by the
and effective collaboration literacy coach. These questions gauged teachers’
between teachers understanding of the strategy modeled as well as
questions or concerns that needed to be addressed
and students. in order for the intervention to be successful. The
literacy coach kept a journal notating all of the
sessions and dialogue with the teachers.
After the 3 weeks of modeled writing instruction, the teachers were administered
the computerized post-survey form. Teachers were also asked to reflect upon the entire
process, sharing their reflections through e-mail with the literacy coach. Student work
samples were also collected to determine growth over the 3-week intervention period.

Analysis of Results
The purpose of this study was to determine if the modeling of effective writing strategies
would affect teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and capacity relevant to writing instruction in
two kindergarten classrooms. The research question explored in the study was based upon
collaborative discussions between the literacy coach and kindergarten teachers regarding
writing. A writing survey created for the study was administered as a pre-survey and post-
survey to measure to what extent the two teachers’ attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge
of writing were affected through the modeling of effective opinion and informational
writing strategies.
The survey was divided into four sections that focused on beliefs about writing, beliefs
about teaching language in writing, group writing and frequency of writing, and teacher
Generational Issues for Educators 21

attitude toward writing. Both teachers took the pre-survey and post-survey via an online
tool. As shown in the Table, quantitative data were collected to compare the pre-survey
and the post-survey information.
The analysis revealed an overall improvement in teachers’ attitudes toward writing
after the intervention of modeling effective writing strategies. The composite pre-survey
mean was 1.76; the composite post-survey mean was 2.2, an increase of 25%. The mean
was calculated for each subcategory in order to analyze specific areas for improvement.
No change was observed in group writing and frequency of writing, but a slight increase
was noted for beliefs about writing (9%). As displayed in the Figure, meaningful increases
were observed in beliefs about teaching language in writing (75%) and teacher attitude in
writing (37%). These subcategories indicated that the intervention, modeling of writing
strategies, effectively improved teachers’ attitudes about writing.
Subcategory Percentage Increases
9%

Beliefs about Writing

37%
Beliefs about Teaching Language in Writing

Group Writing and Frequency of Writing

Teacher Attitude Toward Writing
0%
75%

Figure. Percentage increases from pre- to post-intervention responses in subcategories of surveys.

Qualitative data were collected through teacher observation notes, the researcher’s
log, and student work samples. During initial meetings and e-mails, participating teachers
expressed concerns about teaching writing in their classrooms. Coinciding with the pre-
survey and post-survey results, teachers agreed that additional training in writing was
needed for them to be successful writing teachers. During the modeling of writing lessons,
the teachers scripted notes of the procedures used and how they could implement those
in their classrooms. A reoccurring theme existed in each teacher’s observation notes. As
they observed the modeled lessons, they noted high levels of student engagement and
enthusiasm by the writing presenter and the impact on students’ achievement. One of
the teachers stated in her observation notes, “Overall I feel much more confident and less
stressed that I can teach kindergarten students to write. I can do this, and the students are
going to benefit from this writing. They need lots of guidance and support.”
The researcher’s log revealed a shift in teachers’ attitudes regarding writing. Initially,
teachers were very hesitant to embrace writing in their small-group instruction time due
to a sense of incompetence. In the final few demonstration lessons, teachers were more
open and enthusiastic regarding writing instruction. Teachers were observed participating
with the students during the lessons, repeating hand motions and chants involved in the
writing strategies. During two different sessions, other school personnel attended the
demonstration lessons due to the excitement of the participating teachers. The presence
of these additional people did not, however, hamper the intended intervention in any way.
22 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Table
Pre- and Post-Intervention Survey Results
Modeling of Writing Pre-Survey Results Post-Survey Results
Instruction Intervention
Agree Somewhat Disagree Agree Somewhat Disagree
(2) Agree (1) (0) (2) Agree (1) (0)
Beliefs about Writing Mean= 2.2 Mean=2.4
1. Writing is more inborn than 2 2
learned.
2. Writing requires practice. 2 2
3. Writing requires critical 2 2
thinking.
4. Writing is more difficult to 1 1 2
teach than other language skills
such as listening, speaking, and
reading.
5. Teaching writing requires more 2 2
effort than teaching grammar,
vocabulary, and other language
skills. Therefore, I do not teach
writing.
Beliefs about Teaching Mean= 1 Mean= 1.75
Language in Writing
6. Students should not be made 2 2
to write in English before they
master the grammar of English.
7. Students should not be made 2 2
to write in English before they
master the vocabulary of the
language.
8. Writing is not as important as 1 1 1 1
oral language development and
phonics for students.
9. At the kindergarten level, it 2 1 1
is not necessary to teach writing
because students can learn it in
the other grades.
10. In teaching writing at the 1 1 1 1
kindergarten level, more focus
should be given to spelling and
sentence structure.
11. During writing time, more 1 1 2
focus should be given to making
students practice writing error
free sentences.
12. If students are allowed to 1 1 1 1
make mistakes while writing, it
will be difficult to make them
write correctly later on.
13. Teaching writing is as 1 1 1 1
important as teaching reading.
Table continues
Generational Issues for Educators 23

Modeling of Writing Pre-Survey Results Post-Survey Results

Instruction Intervention
Agree Somewhat Disagree Agree Somewhat Disagree
(2) Agree (1) (0) (2) Agree (1) (0)
Group Writing and Frequency Mean= 2.33 Mean= 2.33
of Writing
14. I usually encourage group 2 1 1
writing.
15. I make my students reflect on 2 1 1
and correct their own writing.
16. I make students correct each 2 2
other’s written work.
17. Students in my class write 1 1 1 1
daily.
18. I model writing and the 1 1 1 1
writing process on a regular basis.
19. My students and I write 2 1 1
interactively on a regular basis.
Teacher Attitude Toward Mean= 1.83 Mean= 1.83
Writing
20. Writing is a difficult process 1 1 1 1
to teach.
21. I prefer to teach other subjects 2 1 1
over writing.
22. I need additional training in 1 1 2
order to teach writing.
23. Writing was addressed in my 1 1 1 1
undergraduate program.
24. My insecurities about writing 1 1 1 1
keep me from teaching writing
effectively.
25. With additional support, I 1 1 1 1
can effectively teach writing.
Pre-Survey Mean= 1.76 Post-Survey Mean= 2.2
The ultimate goal in building teacher capacity is to impact student achievement.
Student work samples were collected throughout the study to gauge the impact on
students’ writing development. At the onset of the study, students were writing isolated
sentences not connected directly to a text during their writing center. For example, the
teachers provided words written on sentence strips. Students manipulated the words to
form a complete sentence and then wrote the sentence. After the intervention, students
were writing four-to-five-sentence paragraphs with a big idea sentence and details from
the text. This correlated with the kindergarten state writing standards and the purpose of
this study.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The research question asked if the modeling of specific writing strategies by the
literacy coach would impact teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and capacity regarding writing
instruction. Throughout the action research, self-study process, both qualitative and
quantitative data were collected and analyzed. The results from these data indicated that
24 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

modeling specific writing strategies over a period of time did have a positive impact on
teachers and their ability to teach writing. Teacher participants provided positive feedback
in the form of conversations, reflections, and observation notes, as well as through the
post-survey administered at the conclusion of the modeled instruction. Both teachers
indicated that the use of specific, systematic writing instruction benefited them and
increased their capacity to teach writing. In addition, teacher participants indicated a need
for more instruction on the different modes of writing in the future to continue to build
their capacity in this area.
Another result of this study was affirmation of the power of student engagement.
Although this was not an intended outcome, future research could be conducted to
consider the impact of teacher efficacy on both students’ writing ability and motivation
to write. Based on the students’ writing samples and the district scoring rubric, growth
was observed for all students. Teacher participants reflected multiple times during the
course of the study on the high levels of student engagement and enthusiasm shown by
the presenter. This study could be extended to an entire school or at least a larger school
with multiple sections of kindergarten classrooms over a longer period of time. Additional
study could consider the increased ability of teachers to implement the writing strategies
after the initial period of modeled instruction.
Certain questions might arise from the original study in an effort to duplicate the
study. What specific strategies were implemented for this study? How long were the
modeled lessons? Was the student growth impacted by the modeled lessons or through
the student engagement factor? How effective was the transfer of the modeled lessons
to the implementation of writing strategies by the classroom teachers? These questions
could be answered in future research as this study is highly applicable to writing teachers
in multiple grades. Ultimately, because writing has become a central focus of students’
readiness for college and careers, as Cutler and Graham (2008) emphasized, “teachers need
to be better prepared to teach writing” (p. 909).

References
Bifuh-Ambe, E. (2013). Developing successful writing teachers: Outcomes of professional development exploring teachers’
perceptions of themselves as writers and writing teachers and their students’ attitudes and abilities to write across the
curriculum. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 12(3), 137–156. Retrieved from http://education.waikato.ac.nz
/research/files/etpc/files/2013v12n3art8.pdf

Cutler, L., & Graham, S. (2008). Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4),
907–919. doi:10.1037/a0012656

National Commission on Writing. (2003, April). The neglected “R”: The need for writing revolution. Retrieved from
https://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/2523

Troia, G., Lin, S., Cohen, S., & Monroe, B. (2011). A year in the writing workshop. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 155–182.
Retrieved from http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/esj/curre

White, K. M., & Hall, A. H. (2014). Examining teachers’ perceptions of effective writing strategies and barriers to
implementation. Publications, 24. Retrieved from http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/eugene_pubs/24
Generational Issues for Educators 25

Creating Schools that

Emphasize Democracy and
Citizenship
By Jóna Benediktsdottir

T he author, Assistant Head at a school in Iceland, describes a program to promote democracy

and citizen awareness among students. At its core is a conference in which students reflect
on and develop potential solutions to key issues that affect their learning and the functioning of
the school.

The Icelandic National Curriculum delineates the educational principles for all
Icelandic primary and secondary schools. This curriculum is based on six main areas of
education: (a) literacy, (b) sustainability, (c) health and welfare, (d) democracy and human
rights, (e) equality, and (f ) creativity (Iceland Ministry of Education, Science and Culture,
2011). These six areas overlap to a certain extent, and most school work can be adapted
to include them. The project being discussed here initially focused on the development of
democracy and citizen awareness within a school in rural Iceland, but clearly teachers at the
school also used the principles in teaching other subjects within the school’s curriculum.

What is Democracy?
The concept of democracy can have different connotations, but for the purpose of this
article, the term is used according to John Dewey´s theories. Dewey (1976) considered
democracy a way of life that enables active participation within society. Applied to a school
setting, Dewey´s idea of democracy demands that students actively participate in their
studies and create solutions to their academic challenges. Working collaboratively toward
the most conducive solutions prepares them for participation in a democratic society.
On this basis, the educators at Grunnskolinn a Isafirði, a public school for children
ages 6-16 in the town of Ísafjörður, consider it important to empower all students in
discussions on how to create an educational society that best serves their needs. Dewey´s
theories of democracy contain the idea that people´s experiences effect change because
the experiences contain opportunities for learning (Dewey, 2000). This is the kind of
democracy educators at Grunnskolinn a Isafirði want to foster.

How Can a Vision of Democracy Permeate a School’s Curriculum?

Educators at the school decided to base the project first and foremost on Basil
Bernstein´s ideas of what elements are essential in order to bring democratic ideas into
effect. Bernstein (1996) considered two elements to be especially important for schools
that wish to create an atmosphere supportive of democratic development and enhance
students’ democratic awareness. First, people need to feel they belong as participants of
that society. This does not just mean that they have certain rights from which they benefit,
26 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

but also that they contribute to the society. Students need to feel that they are participants
in both receiving and contributing. Second, people need to have trust in the actions that are
taken within the society. Students need to understand that educational decisions are made
to the greatest extent possible in their interest and should be given clear reasons for actions
taken. Bernstein also maintained that for such participation and trust to be realized within
the classroom, educators must emphasize each student´s right to participate. Specifically,
he meant students need the right to participate in shaping, maintaining, and amending
values in an organized manner. The conditions mentioned here are in accordance with
Dewey´s ideas about the importance of interpreting and learning from experience and the
importance of students participating in shaping their learning environment.

Realizing Democratic Work Methods in Schools

These approaches emphasized by Bernstein (1996) and Dewey (1976) are linked to
teaching democracy within schools by giving students a chance to participate in discussions
that aid them in developing fresh views about their role in their education. When such
discussions help them realize that they can have an effect on what and how they learn,
then they learn concomitantly about democracy in action. New ideas alight from fertile
discussion, and the process of reaching an agreement about what is most important takes
on a value of its own, irrespective of the conclusion.
The discussions must have real meaning in a democratic context to be considered a
lesson in democracy. They must also relate to a subject close to the students’ hearts and
meaningful to them, such as their communications, obligations, or rights. Grunnskolinn a
Isafirði is a Restitution School: “through extensive collaboration and innovation Restitution
Instructors address discipline by focusing on how young people can correct their mistakes
emphasizing positive solutions” (Restitution Discipline, 2017, para. 1). Accordingly, for a
number of years, students have constructed class social contracts that replace class rules. As
they develop these contracts, students learn about democratic working processes because
such work demands that everyone participates and that everyone’s opinion is respected.
Democratic ways of working are therefore not alien to our students, but we wanted to
move their participation to a more “coherent level” in connection with shaping the school’s
curriculum to the principles outlined by the national curriculum.
The project had four aims:
1. to give students a chance to participate in a democratic discussion on the issues
affecting their daily life and organization of their school;
2. to enhance students’ awareness of their influence within the school;
3. to elicit students’ points of view regarding the role of those who affect the school
community;
4. to obtain suggestions from students about what each and every person can do to
influence positively the daily workings of the school.

Jóna Benediktsdottir is Assistant Head at Grunnskolinn a Isafirdi, Iceland. She is a member

of Iota Chapter in Iceland State Organization. [email protected]
Generational Issues for Educators 27

To meet these aims, we decided to have a conference in the style of a national conference that
had taken place earlier—focused on creating a new constitution—in which people from all
spheres of Icelandic society were urged to participate. Students from Years 6 to 10 formed
mixed-age discussion groups. Each group had a leader from Years 9 or 10 who had received
preparation ahead of the conference to make it easier to preside over the discussions. Older
students were otherwise spread randomly among groups, but we ensured that the younger
students would have at least one co-student in their group whom they felt they could trust;
siblings, however, were not permitted to be part of the same group.
Three items were topics for student discussion:
1. What groups of people form the school community? Students had 20 minutes to
discuss who can influence the school community.
2. What could the groups that form our school community do to make it better and
more effective? Students had 60 minutes to put forward suggestions on what each of
those group members could do to influence the school positively. When the group leaders
considered that all suggestions had been gathered, a group vote by students determined the
three most important suggestions for each group.
3. What would the member groups of the school community “gain” from everyone
doing his or her best? The discussion of this question was executed in the same manner as
item 2.
The group discussions, which took place in one school day, went well in general, and
the students were interested in the questions. They identified the member groups of our
school community, from the students to the town council and the minister of education.
They also put forward many useful suggestions for what each of the member groups could
do to enhance our school. For example,
many groups mentioned the importance of
students being listened to and that everyone
should be allowed to participate.
Following the conference, students
received three questions to answer, which
were used to assess to what extent this
process had resulted in their feeling more
empowered to affect the school’s work
using discussions of this type. The school
principals gathered conclusions from all
the student groups about what each group
that makes up a school can do to influence
the school work positively and how this
will benefit students’ education. These
conclusions were then discussed further Students at the conference practice democratic thought and action by
within students’ individual classes. Within brainstorming ideas and collaboratively processing solutions to the
problem at hand.
each class, discussion groups were formed
that prioritized the items and provided supporting arguments. Then a new group was
formed that put together conclusions from each grade level or year. Those conclusions
were put forward to the school’s student council, which is a group of elected officials from
Years 8 to 10. They refined the conclusions and determined similarities, and the most
common priorities were put forward as the main emphasis of the student council. The
student leaders then designed a poster and presented that to every class within the school,
ensuring that a copy of the poster is displayed in every teaching area of the school. The
 28 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

main ideas emphasized by the students were (a) in our school, we shall not accept bullying,
because bullying is bad for everyone; (b) students and staff should show respect for each
other every time; and (c) everyone should take responsibility for their own learning and do
their best in all classes.
The students’ ideas also formed a part of the school´s internal assessment. A list of
students’ suggestions about approaches to teaching
was compiled for the teachers and discussed with
each teacher individually during his or her annual
If students are willing review meeting. The purpose was to emphasize
to take responsibility that what students considered important should
be an integral part of teachers’ work methods.
for their own behavior All staff members were also asked to keep in
and practice, mind the things that students considered to be
most important whenever communicating with
they will do better the young people. These communication items
are displayed in the staff room and will also be
in every aspect covered during annual review meetings.
of their lives. The same work method was applied to
students. At the start of the school year, the items
that they considered would improve our school
community were reviewed, and students discussed and decided what needed to happen
so that this could become reality. During parent-teacher meetings in the autumn, the
effectiveness of this approach to school work methods was discussed.

Assessment of the Project

Students answered a survey about the conference and its conclusions. Asked if they
had found the conference interesting, 54% said they had found it so. Also, 60% of the
students thought the conference had impacted the workings of the school. A considerable
difference existed among students, however, in their attitude toward this project depending
on age. The younger students tended to be more positive.
Every member of the staff evaluated his or her performance regarding the items the
students found most important for them to emphasize in their work. These items were
discussed during annual staff performance reviews in the spring.

Continuation and Results of the Project

The students’ suggestions were taken into consideration when planning the following
school term and the following year. Another student conference was held the following
spring in which students discussed gender equality and what students, staff, and the whole
community could do to increase it. Those discussions also went well, and students brought
many propositions for consideration; we are now working on these suggestions.
Although this project first and foremost supports the basic elements of democracy
and equality within the National Curriculum, it is easy to link it with all of the principal
elements of the national curriculum. During this process, students are active participants
in forging their own understanding and receive an opportunity to react in a personal
and creative manner that falls under literacy. They are part of creating a co-responsible
community, having an opportunity to increase their impact and attitude to equality. They
also learn to tackle matters of opinion because not everyone always agrees within the
groups; these elements are covered by the element of sustainability. Realizing the symbiotic
Generational Issues for Educators 29

relationship of an individual with his or her environment and how one can contribute
as an individual to improve his or her surroundings and social situation falls under the
element of health and welfare. When children and teenagers sense the point of a project,
their creativity increases, which in turn affects their interest in studying. Creativity also
entails capturing the imagination and musing on possibilities, asking “what if ” questions.
The discussion element of this project entails creative work where students bring forward
new suggestions. They also reflect on their own behavior and have an opportunity to show
initiative.

Conclusion
The main core of the educational system is to provide good education for every student.
If students are willing to take responsibility for their own behavior and practice, they will do
better in every aspect of their lives. Measuring all aspects of education is complicated, and
no standard instruments have been developed to do that. Thus, we, like educators in other
schools, have to use the standard measurements that are available to compare our students
with students in other schools. Our school’s results in the Programme for International
Assessment (PISA) 2015, the international, standardized, educational achievement tests
developed by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
were better than ever before, among the best in Iceland, and above the OECD average in all
three subjects that were tested. Of course, we cannot point at one certain factor to explain
the improvements, but we believe the democratic conversations surely helped.
Our aim is to make the student conference a regular part of our school’s work, and in
autumn 2017 the students will discuss the pros and cons of using social media in schools.
We hope that our students become familiar with using democratic, communal discussions
in which everyone participates to lead to the best possible solution for the whole community.

References
Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Dewey, J. (1938/2000). Experience and education. (G. Ragnarsson, Trans.). Reykjavík: Research in Education.

Dewey, J. (1939/1976). Creative democracy: The task before us. In J. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works, 1925-1953, Volume
14 (pp. 224-230). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Iceland Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. (2011). National curriculum: The general part. Reykjavik: Author.

Restitution Discipline. (2017). Restitution social development. Retrieved from htpp//www.realrestitution.com

30 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

The Importance of Questioning

in Developing Critical Thinking
Skills
By Judith S. Nappi

A ccording to the Cambridge English Dictionary (2016), a question is a word or words used
to find out information. Questioning is an important component of the teaching/learning
process and is embedded in quality instruction and strategic thinking. Questions are used to teach
as well as to assess student understanding, and thus questioning plays a critical role in the overall
success of a classroom. Teachers pose up to 400 questions a day when in the classroom, with
60-80% of the questions requiring recall (Cotton, 1988; Tienken, Goldberg, & DiRocco, 2010;
Saeed et al., 2012). Accordingly, with more than 60,000 questions being asked in one classroom
on a yearly basis, approximately 12,000 encourage students to engage in higher order thinking.
For questioning to be effective, teachers need to plan for structured, higher level interactions. This
article examines the relationship between higher level questioning and the development of critical
thinking, which is a higher order thinking skill.

Observe any classroom, and one will most likely see continuous discourse between
students and the classroom teacher, with much of the dialogue being composed of questions
and answers. Questioning is an essential element of efficacious teaching (Hannel, 2009).
Teachers and students will both benefit from questions that are purposefully designed
(Peterson & Taylor, 2012) as students will acquire the ability to make connections to prior
learning as well as make meaning of the world around them. Through the planning and
implementation of questions that require high level thinking, educators foster the kind of
engagement and critical thinking skills that students will need to process and address new
situations. Higher level questioning requires students to further examine the concept(s)
under study through the use of application, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis while lower
level questioning simply requires students to gather and recall information. Lower level
questions are easier for teachers to produce but do not encourage students to engage in
higher level or higher order thinking (Tienken et al., 2010).

Literature Review
Questioning cannot be discussed without referring to the work of Socrates, a Greek
philosopher, dating back more than 2000 years. Socrates spent most of his life asking
deliberate and organized questions about people’s beliefs and values and examining the
same. Through questioning, Socrates encouraged his students to explore prior-held beliefs
and subsequently to build stronger and more scholarly views. What we now refer to as the
Socratic approach involves posing a succession of systematic and prearranged questions
Generational Issues for Educators 31

designed to help students to reflect and therefore improve their thinking and gain a better
understanding of their own beliefs and ideas.
An instructor using the Socratic approach is not looking for a specific correct answer
but is, in fact, inspiring students to reflect on their thinking. Socrates respected the
experiences, understandings, and knowledge that individuals had gained through life
experiences and believed that, through questioning, previously attained knowledge could
be used to develop thinking supported by rationales and logic (Byrne, 2011).
Tienken, Goldberg, and DiRocco (2009) focused on the procedures of questioning and
cited a distinction in the cognitive processes used when asked recall or lower level questions
as opposed to higher level questions that required students to analyze, synthesize, and
evaluate. Higher level questioning that requires students to analyze, synthesize, evaluate,
categorize, and/or apply information has been found to be particularly advantageous to
student learning, yet higher level questions are rarely used (Peterson & Taylor, 2012;
Tienken, et al., 2010). Generally, higher level questions do not have one correct answer
but encourage students to engage in critical thinking. Lundy (2008) found that addressing
higher level questions is essential to student learning. In addition, Lewis (2015) found that
asking higher level questions presents teachers with more information in relation to student
understanding. The implications are that teachers need to plan questions strategically to
encourage students to investigate further the concepts under study to obtain a deeper
understanding.
A seminal study conducted by Glaser (1941) identified the following three
characteristics of critical thinking:
(1) an attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems
and subjects that come within the range of one’s experience; (2) knowledge of the
methods of logical enquiry and reasoning; and (3) some skill in applying those
methods. Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or
supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the
further conclusions to which it tends. (Glaser, 1941, p. 5)
To exercise the components of critical thinking as identified by Glaser, students must
develop the ability to recognize problems, collect information that will enable them to
address the problems logically, weigh the issues against beliefs, and make accurate decisions.

Bloom’s contributions
In 1956, Benjamin Bloom worked with a group of educational psychologists to
organize the levels of cognition identified as important in learning. The levels of cognition
are understood to be consecutive, so that one level must be achieved before the next level
can be attained. The classification that Bloom and his colleagues created focused on the
levels of questions that were observed in a variety of educational settings. Through his
observations, Bloom noted that more than 95% of the assessment questions that were
posed to students at the college level only required recall, the lowest level of thinking.

Dr. Judith S. Nappi is currently an assistant professor of educational leadership at Rider

University in New Jersey. Previously, she was the Assistant Superintendent/Director of
Curriculum and Instruction for the Manchester Township School District in Ocean County,
New Jersey. A member of Omicron Chapter in New Jersey State Organization, Dr. Nappi
has also held positions as a principal, grade-level administrator, and teacher. She has degrees
in psychology, social sciences, educational administration, and administrative policy and
urban education. [email protected]
 32 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Bloom, Englehart, Furst, Hill, and Krathwohl (1956) developed a taxonomy that
provides an important framework for teachers to use when developing questions of all
levels (Figure 1). The taxonomy is represented as a pyramid with higher order thinking
(cognition) at the top. The taxonomy developed by Bloom et al. (1956) classifies educational
objectives into three domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. The cognitive domain
involves the development of knowledge and intellectual skills (Bloom et al., 1956), the
affective domain includes the manner in which individuals deal with things emotionally
(Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, 1973), and the psychomotor domain (Bloom et al., 1956)
involves physical movement and motor skills. Although all of the identified domains are
important, the cognitive domain is the focus of this article.

Eval

Synthesis

Analysis

Application

Comprehension

Knowledge
Figure 1. Bloom et al. (1956) Taxonomy

The taxonomy developed by Bloom et al. (1956) provides a scaffold for asking questions
that become progressively more challenging and provides a structure for teachers to model
complex thinking that, ultimately, can guide students to become independent thinkers who
can develop their own viewpoints. Figure 2 presents the taxonomy with examples of verbs
and student behaviors or outcomes (Huitt, 2011).
Bloom’s original framework was modified by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) to fit
outcome-based educational objectives. This involved retaining the original number of
categories with changes such as switching the names of some levels from nouns to verbs
and reversing the order of the highest two levels (Krathwohl, 2002). The two highest
levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, synthesis and evaluation, were reversed in the Anderson and
Krathwohl model and renamed evaluating and creating (2001).
Generational Issues for Educators 33

LEVEL DEFINITION
SAMPLE SAMPLE
VERBS BEHAVIORS
KNOWLEDGE Student recalls Write The student will
or recognizes List  define the 6 levels of
information, Label Bloom’s taxonomy of
ideas, and principles Name the cognitive domain.
in the approximate State
form in which they Define
were learned.
COMPREHENSION Student translates, Explain The student will
comprehends, or Summarize explain the purpose
interprets Paraphrase of Bloom’s taxonomy
information Describe of the cognitive
based on prior Illustrate domain.
learning.
APPLICATION Student selects, Use The student will
transfers, and uses Compute write an instructional
data and principles to Solve  objective for each
complete a problem Demonstrate level of Bloom’s
or task with a Apply taxonomy.
minimum of Construct
direction.
ANALYSIS Student Analyze The student will
distinguishes, Categorize compare and contrast
classifies, and relates Compare the cognitive and
the assumptions, Contrast affective domains.
hypotheses, evidence, Separate
or structure of a
statement or
question.
SYNTHESIS Student originates, Create The student will
integrates, and Design design a classification
combines ideas into a Hypothesize scheme for writing
product, plan or Invent educational
proposal that is new Develop objectives that
to him or her. combines the
cognitive, affective,
and psychomotor
domains.
EVALUATION Student appraises, Judge The student
assesses, or critiques Recommend will judge the
on a basis of specific Critique effectiveness of
standards and Justify writing objectives
criteria. using Bloom’s
taxonomy.
Figure 2. Bloom et al. (1956) taxonomy with illustrated verbs and student behaviors.
 34 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Research has indicated that the first four levels of both taxonomies (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001; Bloom et al., 1956) are hierarchical in nature; however, controversy
exists regarding the two highest levels (Hummel & Huitt, 1994). Krathwohl proposed
that evaluation is less difficult than synthesis, while Lutz and Huitt (2003) proposed that
evaluation and synthesis are equally difficult but are processed differently. Huitt (1992)
suggested that evaluation is critical thinking while synthesis is creative thinking…and both
are required to problem solve.
In addition to revising the taxonomy, Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) added a
knowledge dimension. The knowledge dimension illustrates where each of the cognitive
processing dimensions is used (Figure 3). Both frameworks (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001; Bloom et al., 1956) were constructed to assist teachers in developing questions that
will allow students to respond at all stages of the thinking process (low level and high
level), ranging from recall of fact to processes that call upon students to engage in critical
thinking. Although low level questions that are posed by teachers do not require students
to engage in deep thinking, it has been argued that low level questions lay the groundwork
for higher level cognition (Tienken et al., 2010).

Knowledge Cognitive
Processes
Remember Understand Apply y of Analyze Evaluate Create
Taxonom ctives
Facts nal Obje
Educatio athwohl 2001)
Concepts n & Kr
(Anderso
Procedures
Metacognitive
Figure 3. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) revision of Bloom et al. Taxonomy (1956). Adapted from http://peter
.baumgartner.name/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Anderson-Krathwohl-Taxonomy.png

Other Research Regarding Cognition

Bloom conducted the earliest work on levels of cognition (Bloom et al.,1956). Since
that time, however, others have applied various theories to cognition and learning and are
worthy of consideration.
In a seminal and comprehensive meta-analysis of studies of instructional methods,
Redfield and Rousseau (1981) noted a positive correlation between the prevalent use
of higher level questions during instruction and student achievement on assessments of
both memorization of facts (recall) and application of thinking skills. Marzano, Pickering,
and Pollock (2001) also identified higher level questions as a component of meaningful
learning. Therefore, if deeper learning is to take place, teachers must purposely plan to
present more high level questions than recall (lower level) questions when designing
lessons. Higher order questions will help students to make connections between previous
learning experiences and new material. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001),
retention and transfer are two important educational goals. Retention involves students
remembering what they have learned and transfer requires students to make connections
and use the information that they have learned.
Questioning Circles. Christenbury and Kelly (1983) designed the Questioning
Circles model (Figure 4) to classify or evaluate the level of questioning in the classroom.
Three intersecting circles represent different fields of cognition in this model, which
does not follow a hierarchical approach but suggests intereconnectedness. Christenbury
Generational Issues for Educators 35

and Kelly identified three aspects of cognition, each represented by a circle: The Subject
Matter, Personal Response, and External Environment or Reality. The subject matter is
the material under study. The personal response is the student’s reaction to the subject
matter under study. The external environment or reality is how the subject matter relates
to other disciplines. Questioning Circles is a teaching strategy that guides students from
perfunctory replies to a richer dialogue on the subject matter. According to Christenbury
and Kelly, instructors should plan questions that represent each of the separate circles
as well as questions that overlap areas of the circles. Questions that encompass all three
circles represent the most important questions and require the deepest thinking on the
part of the students (Meyers, 2002).
Christenbury and Kelly (1983) used the work of Mark Twain to illustrate the
Questioning Circles technique in practice.
Text: What does Huck say when he decides not to turn Jim in to the authorities?
Reader: When would you support at friend when everyone else thought he/she
was wrong?
World: What was the responsibility of persons finding runaway slaves?
Text/Reader: In what situations might someone be less than willing to take the
consequences for his or her actions?
Reader/World: Given the social and political circumstances, to what extent would
you have done as Huck did?
Text/World: What were the issues during that time which caused both Huck’s
and Jim’s actions to be viewed as wrong?
Dense Question: When is it right to go against the social/political structures of
the time as Huck did when he refused to turn Jim in to authorities?” (p. 16)

Text Reader
(Subject Enriched (Personal
Matter) Response)
Dense
Enriched Enriched

World
(External
Environment)

Questioning Circles
Figure 4. Questioning Circles Model, Christenbury and Kelly (1983).

Depth of Knowledge. While Bloom et al. (1956) focused on educational goals and
objectives or what educators want students to know and be able to do, Norman Webb’s
Depth of Knowledge (1997) model outlined the manner in which students interact with
content. Webb’s model centered on classifying tasks according to the difficulty of thinking
required to complete the tasks with success. Constructing lessons, activities, and assessment
utilizing Webb’s Depth of Knowledge requires students to delve into the thinking process
 36 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

in order to deepen their learning. For this reason, Webb’s model has been utilized in a
number of states to construct educational materials and performance assessments as well
as alignment between standards and assessments (Hess, 2008).
Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (Figure 5; 1997) analyzed the thought processes that the
educational standards, approved by each state independently, require students to master.
The model provides educators with a method and measure for analyzing the alignment
between standards, assessments, and curriculum. Depth of Knowledge is centered on the
supposition that parts of the curriculum can be classified by the cognitive requirements
necessary for an acceptable response.

Extended Thinking

Strategic Thinking

Skills and Concepts

Recall and Reproduction

Figure 5. Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (1997).

Models for Questioning

The connection between questioning and the cognitive processes involved has been
widely studied, as indicated by the number of theories and taxonomies discussed thus far. In
examining the relationship between Socratic questioning and critical thinking skills, Elder
and Paul (2007) developed a taxonomy (Figure 6) designed to cultivate and assess quality
thinking. The taxonomy provides a framework of the intellectual standards that evaluate
thinking by well-informed individuals. According to Paul and Elder (2009), questions are
what stimulates the thinking process, and unless the answers generate more questions, the
thought process will be brought to a halt. For an individual to be a proficient thinker, he or
she must be proficient in developing questions. Good questioning techniques need to be
modeled in order for students to become skilled in both thinking and questioning. Because
questioning leads to problem solving, quality questions will lead to quality decisions.
Elder and Paul (2007) stated that, ultimately, educators should model Socratic
questioning to allow students to internalize and apply the concepts of self-directed,
disciplined questioning themselves. Their taxonomy appears in Figure 6.
Generational Issues for Educators 37

1. Questioning clarity – No thought is completely understood other than to the degree an individual

can explain, demonstrate or give an example.

2. Questioning precision – Thinking is not always clear cut or completely understood other than to the

degree that an individual can provide details.

3. Questioning accuracy – Thoughts are only assessed to the extent that an individual has determined

the accuracy of facts and data.

4. Questioning relevance – Thinking is only relevant to the extent that supporting arguments have

been examined and applied.

5. Questioning depth – Thoughts are only as deep as the considered complexities involved.

Figure 6. Elder & Paul (2007). Socratic Questioning Taxonomy.

An examination of the cognitive taxonomies discussed above will reveal that the
ultimate teaching goal is providing students with the ability to apply knowledge and
skills to new situations. Learning for recall is important when new information is being
presented; however, higher order thinking is required for students to be successful in life,
because life outside of the classroom can be described as a chain of applying knowledge to
new circumstances as opposed to recalling information.

Engaging Students in Metacognition

Cognitive theory examines the process through which one acquires knowledge and
understanding. Metacognition involves the awareness of one’s thinking or thinking about
thinking. Acquiring knowledge about one’s own cognitive system, or thinking about one’s
thinking, is an essential skill that needs to be honed to recognize how one learns.
When teachers design quality, scaffolded questions for instruction, students are more
inclined to engage in metacognition, i.e., to think about their own thinking. Questions that
are effective promote inquiry, student self-assessment, and creativity even as they stimulate
critical thinking (Gose, 2009). Effective questions can be a means to engage students in the
learning process and enable them to take charge of their own learning. Caram and Davis
(2005) found that effective questions increased student interest and student motivation
(Lorent Deegan, 2010). According to Walsh and Sattes (2010), when a culture of inquiry
is developed through quality questioning, student engagement and achievement will be
stimulated.
Metacognition is a skill that teachers can model by stopping periodically, explaining
their thought processes, and posing higher level questions (Fordham, 2006). Teachers who
model and explain the different types of questions provide their students with the skills
necessary to discriminate between questions that require reasoning and questions that
require recall. Strategies that teachers can use include
• having students make predictions based on readings and/or classroom activities;
• having students relate information previously learned to new situations;
 38 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

• having students develop and ask questions of themselves and others; and
• having students explain how they have attempted to solve problems independently.
Students who are able to apply metacognitive skills to the learning process can increase
their level of comprehension as they are better prepared to make connections to prior
experiences (Gunn, 2008; Kängsepp, 2011). Research on the relationship between reading
comprehension and achievement has indicated that higher level questioning correlates
positively to increased student understanding (Lundy, 2008). Probing questions that
challenge students to think strategically about their reading (an aspect of metacognition)
appear to increase comprehension (Fordham, 2006; Kängsepp, 2011). Carefully planned,
quality questioning will allow students to make connections between the readings under
study and their experiences.
Students who are exposed to teaching that models questioning techniques demonstrate
the ability to ask more complex questions when learning new material (Lewin, 2010).
Metacognition involves having the capacity to ask and respond to questions such as
• What do I already know about this subject or issue?
• Do I have enough information?
• Do I know where to get additional information?
• What strategies can I employ to learn this information?
• Will I be able to determine errors?
In addition to increasing the potential of student achievement, higher level questioning
has also been found to have a positive impact
on the work of teachers. Planning higher order
Designing higher questions requires teachers to reflect upon their
practice and often involves collaboration among
order questions colleagues (Peterson & Taylor, 2012). Peterson
is not an innate skill. and Taylor (2012) found that collaboration and
peer observations increased the value of teacher
Developing questions reflection and the implementation of higher level
questioning. Collaborating and observing peers
that are scaffolded— allows teachers to engage in conversations that will
beginning with recall build upon their own ideas, consider new ideas,
test their thoughts, weigh the value of different
and working up viewpoints, and ultimately develop questions
to analysis, synthesis, that are designed to engage students in problem
solving. Unfortunately, as important as strategic
and creation— requires questioning is, questioning is often a characteristic
careful planning. of good teaching that is not developed in teacher
education and teacher training programs (Caram
& Davis, 2005).
Critical thinking activities can be implemented in the classroom to hone thoughtful
reasoning. A recent study conducted by McCollister and Sayler (2010) suggested that
teachers use questioning techniques that allow students to engage in metacognition and
develop activities that require students to evaluate information through collecting and
analyzing data rather than memorizing and recalling facts. According to various studies
(McCollister & Sayler, 2010; Tsai, Chen, Chang, & Chang, 2013), when students view
the acquisition of information as a process, they are developing problem-solving skills that
have been found to have a positive impact on student performance.
Generational Issues for Educators 39

Once teachers model the thinking process, asking questions that are similar in nature
to the following will help students improve their metacognitive abilities or how they think
about thinking as the questions encourage reflection:
• How would you describe the metacognitive strategies you used in this learning
situation?
• How did thinking as part of a team impact your completing of the assignment?
• In what other situations could this knowledge be applied?
• What were you thinking about as you were reading?
• What did you do when you or your group encountered a problem?
Other strategies that can be implemented to improve student thinking include:
• Ask students to clarify or give evidence to support their answers.
• Ask open-ended questions that have more than one answer.
• Sequence questions and tasks using a cognitive taxonomy.
• Model the thinking that is required.
• Implement activities that challenge previously held beliefs.
• Design lessons that engage students and require them to process information as
opposed to recall information.
• Allow for student-to student-interaction so students are more likely to take
educational risks.
Designing higher order questions is not an innate skill. Developing questions that are
scaffolded—beginning with recall and working up to analysis, synthesis, and creation—
requires careful planning. Collaborating with colleagues will provide support for teachers
as they strive to master questioning techniques that will encourage their students to engage
in thinking critically and with reason.

Summary
Classroom teachers frequently pose questions that require lower order thinking or
basic recall. Questions that are limited to asking students to recall information obstruct the
promotion of higher order, critical thinking that is necessary for students to be successful
in life. Careful planning of questions utilizing the various cognitive taxonomies will help
teachers to develop a wider range of questions that include recall of information as well
as require students to analyze, apply, and create. Teaching students how to think about
their thinking, or metacognition, can lead students to deeper understanding. Questions
are among the most powerful teaching tools, and when teachers increase their repertoire of
questioning techniques, the quality of instruction can be significantly improved.

References
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E, Pintrich, P. R.…Wittrock, M. C. (2001).
Taxonomy of learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (2nd ed., abridged).
Boston, MA: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.

Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of
educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York City, NY: Longmans, Green.

Byrne, G. (2011). Using Socratic circles to develop critical thinking skills. Practically Primary, 16(2), 13–15.

Caram, C. A., & Davis, P. B. (2005). Inviting student engagement with questioning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(1), 18–23.

Christenbury, L., & Kelly, P. (1983). Questioning: A path to critical thinking. Urbana IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and
Communication Skills and the National Council of Teachers of English. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext
/ED226372.pdf
40 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Cotton, K. (1988). Classroom questioning. Retrieved from https://www.learner.org/workshops/socialstudies/pdf/session6/6

.ClassroomQuestioning.pdf

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning. Journal of Developmental Education, 31(2), 32–33.

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2009). The art of asking essential questions. Tomales, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking. Retrieved from
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=essential%20questions%20
critical%20thinking

Fordham, N. W. (2006). Crafting questions that address comprehension strategies in content reading. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 49(5), 390–396.

Glaser, E. M. (1941). An experiment in the development of critical thinking. New York City, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. 

Gose, M. (2009). When Socratic dialogue is flagging: Questions and strategies for engaging students. College Teaching, 57(1), 45–49.

Gunn, T. M. (2008). The effects of questioning on text processing. Reading Psychology, 29(5), 405–442.

Hannel, I. (2009). Insufficient questioning. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(3), 65–69.

Hess, K. (2008). Exploring cognitive complexity and depth of knowledge. Dover, NH: National Center for Assessment. Retrieved
from http://www.nciea.org/publications-2/?keywords=Hess&x=0&y=0&action=search&current_page=1&items
_per=20&sort_by=name_last&sort_dir=ASC

Huitt, W. (1992). Problem solving and decision making: Consideration of individual differences using the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator. Journal of Psychological Type, 24, 33–44. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/prbsmbti
.html

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.’s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State
University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.html

Hummel, J., & Huitt, W. (1994, February). What you measure is what you get. GaASCD Newsletter: The Reporter, 10–11. Retrieved
from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/wymiwyg.html

Kängsepp, P. (2011). Impact of asking support questions on grades 4 and 7 students’ reading comprehension. Creative Education, 2(4),
381-387.

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1973). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals,
handbook II: Affective domain. New York City, NY: David McKay.

Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. Retrieved from 
http://www.unco.edu/cetl/sir/stating_outcome/documents/Krathwohl.pdf

Lewin, L. (2010). Teaching critical reading with questioning strategies. Educational Leadership, 67(6). Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar10/vol67/num06/Teaching-Critical-Reading-with
-Questioning-Strategies.aspx

Lewis, K. (2015). Developing questioning skills. Retrieved from https://inside.trinity.edu/sites/inside.trinity.edu/files/file

_attachments/6056/gravett-questioningskillswithattachment.pdf

Lorent Deegan, C. E. (2010). A case study of the impact of guided reading groups in second grade on comprehension improvement.
(Doctoral dissertation, Widener University). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED517734

Lundy, M. M. (2008). The nature of questioning moves used by exemplary teachers during reading instruction (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1366&context=etdest

Lutz, S., & Huitt, W. (2003). Information processing and memory: Theory and applications. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta,
GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/infoproc.pdf

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing
student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McCollister, K., & Sayler, M. (2010). Lift the ceiling: Increase rigor with critical thinking skills. Gifted Child Today, 33(1), 41–47.

Meyers, G. (2002). Whose inquiry is it anyway? Using student questions in the teaching of literature. Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English. Retrieved from http://www.studentachievement.org/wpcontent/uploads
/InquiryandtheLiteracryTextConstructingDiscintheEngClassroom_Holden.pdf

Nosich, G. M. (2009). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson Education
Generational Issues for Educators 41

Peterson, D. S., & Taylor, B. M. (2012). Using higher order questioning to accelerate students’ growth in reading. The Reading Teacher,
65(5), 295.

Question [Def. 1]. (2016). In Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us
/dictionary/english/question

Redfield, D. L., & Rousseau, E. W. (1981). A meta-analysis of experimental research on teacher questioning behaviour. Review of
Educational Research, 51, 237–245.

Saeed, T., Khan, S., Ahmed, A., Gul, R., Cassum, S., & Parpio, Y. (2012). Development of students’ critical thinking: The educators’
ability to use questioning skills in the baccalaureate programmes in nursing in Pakistan. Journal of the Pakistan Medical
Association, 63(3), 200–203. Retrieved from http://ecommons.aku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context
=pakistan_fhs_son

Tienken, C. H., Goldberg, S., & DiRocco, D. (2010). Questioning the questions. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for
Quick Review, 75(9), 28–32.

Tsai, P., Chen, S., Chang, H., & Chang, W. (2013). Effects of prompting critical reading of science news on seventh graders’ cognitive
achievement. International Journal of Environmental & Science, 8(1), 85–107. 

Walsh, J. A., & Sattes, B. D. (2010). Leading through quality questioning: Creating capacity, commitment, and community. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Webb, N. (1997). Research Monograph Number 6: Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments on mathematics and science
education. Washington, DC: CCSSO.
42 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

The Development of an Online,

Graduate Practicum Course
By Linda K. Lilienthal, Dennis Potthoff, and Kenneth E. Anderson

A s universities offer more programs completely online, requirements for teacher education
program accreditation with CAEP (formerly NCATE) are a consideration for online
courses, just as they are for face-to-face courses; however, particular challenges exist in creating
a quality online practicum that differ from those of creating face-to-face practicums with onsite
supervision. The researchers completed an action research study that addressed the development
of an online practicum course for the Curriculum and Instruction Graduate Program at their
university. To facilitate an online graduate practicum for inservice teachers, the researchers
revised the main assignment in the practicum course by adding a unit lesson plan assignment
with a template that included a pre-and-post assessment of P-12 students’ learning. Because
the Curriculum and Instruction Program is unique, with concentrations in many areas, the
unit lesson plan template was important for overall student guidance in multiple educational
concentration areas and grade levels. Another important component of the online graduate
practicum was a VoiceThread video of one of the unit lessons. The video provided a component
of online teaching supervision to the unit lesson plan assignment. Of the 14 students enrolled
in the spring 2017 course, 10 completed course evaluations. The average score was 4.65 on a
5-point scale, indicating that most students viewed the online practicum course favorably.

An increasing number of university courses and programs are now available online
both nationally and internationally. Contributing to this availability are changes associated
with wider access, as well as developments in communication and information technologies
(Conceicao, 2006). Additionally, one of the most salient reasons for the increase in online
course and program development is the professional growth opportunities that they
provide for students, especially for inservice teachers in isolated geographical areas (Frey,
2008). This is indicative of the situation in the researchers’ largely rural state.
As online courses and programs become increasingly available, concerns exist about
the quality of some of the online courses being offered. One type of online course about
which concern may be expressed is the graduate practicum field experience or internship
in education (Dotson & Bian, 2013; Frey, 2008; Perry, 2012). Simpson (2006) pointed
out that “despite the increasing inclusion of online course delivery in teacher education
programs, relatively little research has been done on the effectiveness [of ] facilitating the
practicum component of teacher education online” (as cited in Frey, 2008, p. 182). In
2017, this statement continues to be relevant. Little research exists on the development of
online graduate practicum courses, and what one can find is often not in the field of teacher
education.
The graduate practicum field experience is an integral part of teacher education
programs and is usually a summative assessment course that allows inservice teachers
Generational Issues for Educators 43

to apply what they have learned in their graduate program. Dotson and Bian (2013)
commented that the graduate practicum
is a crucial, culminating link between theory and practice. This complex activity
provides the means by which individuals may become critically conscious of
themselves as professionals, applying theory gained in coursework in the totality
of a real-life experience (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991).
(p. 52).
All three authors have taught the Master of Arts in Education (MAED) Curriculum
and Instruction (CI) Program practicum course at various stages of the online course
development at their university. Utilizing action research to study their own practice in
order to improve it (West, 2011), they began to revise the existing MAED: CI online
practicum course due to changes expected in the movement from accreditation by the
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education(NCATE) to the Council for
the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). In fact, the Blue Ribbon Panel on
Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning (NCATE, 2010,
November) recommended the use of action research that “focuses candidates and their
mentors on efforts to improve the quality of teaching and learning in their classrooms and
schools” (p. 11).
The authors collected data on an existing practicum lesson plan assignment with
accreditation purposes in mind. As a result of the limited data from this initial process,
they decided to improve the graduate practicum course by revising and changing the
assignments. Consequently, the research question became the following: How can we
revise and develop the Curriculum and Instruction Graduate Program online practicum
course to facilitate inservice teachers’ learning during the practicum experience?

Dr. Linda K. Lilienthal is an assistant professor of teacher education/literacy at the University

of Nebraska Kearney, where she is the Director of the Master of Education in Reading
program. She is a current member of Alpha Kappa Chapter in Nebraska State Organization.
[email protected]

Dr. Dennis Potthoff currently serves as Dean of the School of Education at Nevada State
College. Prior educational experiences include a decade of teaching middle and high school
students in Nebraska and Canada and stints of college level work at Wichita State University
and the University of Nebraska Kearney. [email protected]

Dr. Kenneth E. Anderson has extensive experience in P-12 education, where he worked as a
school psychologist, as a special education director, and as a superintendent of schools. He
served as Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Teacher Education at the
University of Nebraska at Kearney from 2012-2015. [email protected]
44 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

The purpose of this article is to explain the development of the online MAED: CI
Program practicum course, the summative unit assignment template (see Appendix),
and the VoiceThread video assignment used in the graduate practicum teacher education
course. The unit assignment developed from the original MAED: CI practicum lesson
plan assignment into a four-lesson unit assignment on a topic of the graduate student’s
choice. The unit assignment template assisted instructors with communicating course
requirements to graduate students and was designed to be applied across the multiple
subject concentration areas of the MAED: CI Program online practicum. As such, the
template could easily be used for P-12 unit and individual lesson planning by graduate
students in the online practicum course. The template also assisted instructors and
university program administrators with the collection of data to document the impact
of graduate level, advanced teacher candidate teaching on P-12 student learning, thus
providing evidence of P-12 student learning for the purpose of CAEP accreditation for
the university.

Related Research
The importance of practical field experiences, also referred to as internships or clinical
experiences, has long been recognized in educator-preparation programs (Dotson & Bian,
2013; Frey, 2008). In recent years, the relevance of these experiences has been confirmed.
At the same time, the criteria used to assess the quality of advanced teacher candidate
performance and the quality of programs have been reconceived. The importance of P-12
student learning has moved to the forefront. Two key events illustrated the centrality of
the practicum clinical experience and also elevated the importance given to P-12 student
learning.

The Blue Ribbon Panel

The Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student
Learning (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2010, November)
boldly declared that teacher preparation programs needed to be turned upside down. One
crucial recommendation proposed that educator preparation programs shift from focusing
on classroom lectures and course work to practical, hands-on experience. Ten design
principles for clinical preparation were set forth. The first three principles illustrated the
importance assigned to clinical experiences:
• Principle 1: (P-12) Student learning is the focus. P-12 student learning must serve
as the focal point for the design and implementation of clinically based teacher
preparation, and for the assessment of newly minted teachers and the programs that
have prepared them.
• Principle 2. Clinical preparation is integrated throughout every facet of teacher
education in a dynamic way. The core experience in teacher preparation is clinical
practice. Content and pedagogy are woven around clinical experiences throughout
preparation, in course work, in laboratory-based experiences, and in school-embedded
practice.
• Principle 3. A candidate’s progress and the elements of a preparation program are
continuously judged on the basis of data. Candidates’ practice must be directly linked
to . . . [P-12] students’ outcome data. (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher
Education, 2010, November, p. 5)
Generational Issues for Educators 45

The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation

On the heels of the Blue Ribbon Report, CAEP was born, effective July 1, 2013. On this
date, two former national-level accrediting bodies—NCATE and the Teacher Education
Accreditation Council (TEAC)—merged to form CAEP. As noted in the second iteration
of the CAEP Evidence Guide (CAEP, 2015, January), CAEP is the new sole accreditor for
Education Preparation Providers (EPPs). The CAEP Evidence Guide contains information
related to two main topics: (a) the use of data in educator preparation and accreditation,
as well as (b) protocols and instructions related to data quality, data collection, and data
analysis.
Like the Blue Ribbon Report, the first iteration of CAEP Standards (CAEP, 2013) was
replete with language that emphasized the critical importance of the clinical component
of educator preparation programs. The expectations set forth in Standards 2 and 5 were
particularly relevant. Standard 2 (Clinical Partnerships and Practice) mandated that
mutually beneficial school and university partnerships be forged and that the quality of
candidate performance be closely aligned with P-12 student performance. The importance
of the impact on P-12 learning was reiterated and further elaborated in Standard 4
(Program Impact). The enactment of new standards by national accrediting bodies, as well
as individual state requirements, further increased the importance of and need for a quality
graduate practicum experience in the online MAED: CI Teacher Education Program that
focuses on the advanced candidate’s impact on P-12 student learning.

Online Graduate Practicum Field Experiences

Although Frey (2008) pointed out that little research exists on how to create or
support an effective online field experience, researchers are beginning to consider better
ways to facilitate and develop such an experience. He conducted a study that was an
online-facilitated practicum with a project-based practicum design. Frey’s study provided
structured opportunities for teachers to apply course concepts in classroom settings. In
addition, Helfrich and Smith (2012) developed an online graduate reading program
with the focus of maintaining program rigor and meeting standards in the online format.
To monitor field experiences, they had graduate students record themselves working in
different scenarios and post the videos online. Students could then access and comment
on each other’s videos, and instructors could critique student work. Helfrich and Smith
also commented that critiquing students’ work via video eliminated both the need to travel
to various schools for student observations and the need to rely on field supervisors to
provide feedback. They reported that they were able to maintain International Reading
Association (now International Literacy Association) and NCATE standards through the
use of online video tools. Helfrich and Smith explained that
as part of their coursework, students are often required to submit lesson plans. We
can verify through these plans and their videotaped lessons that graduate students
are meeting such IRA [International Reading Association; now International
Literacy Association] standards as using appropriate and varied instructional
approaches, using a wide range of texts, using assessments appropriately, and
modeling the appropriate use of literacy strategies for teachers and other educators.
(Helfrich & Smith, 2012, p. 116)
Similarly, Perry (2012) conducted an investigation of the phenomenological experience
of both graduate students enrolled in an online clinical training program and their onsite
supervisors. An interesting aspect of his study was the assumption that the participants were
already experts in their own experience, and he wanted to discover if they considered their
46 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

online clinical training effective. The online clinical training program had both an online
component and a more traditional, in-person component. Interns met in person with their
onsite supervisors and online weekly with peers and the clinical training director. Graduate
students in Perry’s study believed their professional growth to be positive compared to
their peers in other programs, and onsite supervisors made similar conclusions. The onsite
supervisors, most of whom had supervised students in more traditional, face-to-face clinical
programs, found the online students to be at least as capable and well prepared as students
in the more traditional, face-to-face programs. Perry concluded from the study that “there
is no reason to be suspicious of online supervision. Indeed, the participants in this study
cited some real advantages to it” (2012, p. 65). He found that one of the main advantages to
an online practicum was the opportunity for students’ exposure to multicultural learning
contexts and more diverse participants.
In addition, Dotson and Bian (2013) studied their online graduate internship in
library science with the intent “to gather data to improve the program’s clinical experience,
the professional internship, specifically a distance learning facilitated internship” (p.
52). The goal of the study was to understand the perspectives of onsite supervisors of
students enrolled in an online-supported internship. Dotson and Bian reported that good
technology skills and communication skills on the part of both the intern and the onsite
supervisor contributed to a successful internship as part of the online graduate practicum
course. The researchers also found that “clarity of expectation from the university was the
only significant factor influencing success of the on-site internship” (p. 57).
Regardless of the program area, the above studies of graduate field experiences found
similar results: that online field experiences, practicums, and clinical internships were
considered to be successful by students, online instructors or supervisors, and onsite
supervisors. As summarized by Helfrich and Smith (2012), “It is possible to maintain
rigor with an online program” (p. 116).

Development of the MAED: CI Online Practicum Course and Unit Project Assignment
Template
The MAED: CI Program at the researchers’ university is a totally online program. It
was first offered online about 5 years ago when the teacher education department began
developing several online graduate programs to meet the needs of graduate students
seeking to continue their education but unable to attend face-to-face courses on campus.
An important issue related to the online graduate program is the delivery of a high quality
practicum experience. The initial online practicum course design was a preliminary design
drawn from face-to-face practicum requirements. It included two main assignments—an
analysis of the teaching context and a lesson plan. During the spring 2013 semester, the
researchers, who had all previously taught the practicum course, first reviewed the College
of Education NCATE common assessment plan for all advanced programs. The goal was
that, by the end of the 2013-2014 academic year, all advanced program faculty within the
NCATE unit would be doing the common assessments for their program.
The researchers then met to discuss course assignment revisions to improve student
learning and assist with the implementation of a common assessment for NCATE
accreditation. Instead of two distinct assignments regarding analysis of the teaching and
learning context and lesson planning the researchers combined the two assignments
into one larger unit assignment. The new unit assignment focused on developing
advanced teacher candidates’ critical thinking skills. It incorporated four lesson plans, a
description of the teaching and learning context as it impacted P-12 student instruction
Generational Issues for Educators 47

and learning, an analysis and use of P-12 student assessment data to design instruction
and instructional modifications, and a unit analysis and reflection on teaching and student
learning throughout the unit (Appendix). The unit assignment is the main assignment
for the online graduate practicum and was submitted to Taskstream, the data collection
program selected to gather student learning data for the NCATE common assessment and
for program accountability purposes.
During the 2013 fall semester, advanced teacher candidates were required to submit
their MAED: CI common assessment unit assignment to the Taskstream data collection
program for the first time. In order to facilitate communication and student understanding
of the new unit assignment, the researchers developed an assignment template (Appendix).
One of the difficulties with the MAED: CI practicum is that, in addition to the CI core
courses, graduate students have concentrations in a variety of areas, such as early childhood,
elementary education, reading and special education, English as a second language, and
instructional effectiveness, as well as secondary education concentrations that include
such diverse areas as math, English, business, speech, journalism, and various sciences.
Providing students from multiple concentration areas with a guiding template for the unit
assignment assisted them with organization and direction and contributed to the delivery
of a high quality practicum in the online program of study. The unit assignment required a
minimum of four quality lessons developed and taught by the advanced teacher candidates
following the unit template.

Discussion and Student Feedback on the Assignments, Assignment Template, and the
Online Course
The unit project assignment and assignment template have been required parts of the
practicum course for about 3 years. Advanced teacher candidate student-discussion-board
comments from the past few semesters referred to the usefulness of the unit assignment
and the template guide. For example, advanced teacher candidates from various content
areas and grade levels reported the value of the pre-and-post assessment for understanding
what their P-12 students already knew, what they needed to learn, and what needed to be
retaught. Some advanced teacher candidates commented that they planned to use the unit
template for all units they taught because it was like a check and balance system for them.
Others stated that they planned to share the template with their grade-level or subject
team and with other grade-level colleagues, department heads, or principals. Advanced
teacher candidates also reported the value of the reflection piece in the template for the
analysis of P-12 student learning and for their own teacher performance and professional
development. End-of-semester student course evaluation surveys and comments similarly
corroborated favorable feedback from advanced teacher candidates about the online
course and unit project template. For example, one student commented on a 2016 course
evaluation, “I like that you had templates for us to follow and detailed information on how
to complete the assignments,” indicating that the unit template was a helpful guide for this
student.
Although the researchers found little information concerning online graduate
practicum courses, these courses seem to follow one of two prevalent models evident in the
literature: supervision of advanced teacher candidates or interns provided totally online
by faculty instructors (Frey, 2008; Helfrich & Smith, 2012), as the MAED: CI Program
practicum course is designed; or supervision of advanced teacher candidates provided by
some combination of online and onsite supervision (Dotson & Bian, 2013; Perry, 2012).
48 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Based on the results of the MAED: CI online practicum course, including graduate
students’ comments from discussion boards and course evaluations, the researchers found
that they were able to support the online graduate practicum learning experience successfully
with a totally online supervision model, as did Frey (2008) and Helfrich and Smith
(2012). The researchers utilized available Blackboard technology to facilitate and support
a new unit project assignment that included an assignment template to communicate clear
assignment requirements to online students. As Frey noted, “Using project-based tasks to
integrate field experience into online courses and [to] support teachers in their professional
experimentation holds great promise” (2008, p. 201).
Accordingly, the online supervision model worked well for the researchers’ MAED: CI
program, as most of their students were in schools physically isolated from fellow students
because of geographical location. Possibilities for volunteer onsite supervisors were limited
for the same reason. The researchers’ recommendation is for continued implementation
and development of online graduate practicum courses so that all graduate students,
whatever their geographical location, have the opportunity to further their education and
their enhancement of P-12 student learning.

Future Recommendations: The VoiceThread Video Assignment

A future recommendation for the online supervision model within the researchers’
course was a new assignment initiated in spring 2017. This assignment included the
submission of a VoiceThread video (voicethread.com) of the advanced teaching candidate
delivering one of the lessons in the candidate’s unit assignment. Advanced teacher candidates
used a course wiki to sign up in their online Blackboard course for peer evaluations. This
ensured that each advanced teacher candidate had two peers evaluating his or her video.
Most advanced teacher candidates evaluated peers in their subject area, such as language
arts or English, or by grade level, such as preschool or high school, although some did not.
The student teaching videos were then submitted to the VoiceThread class group on
the VoiceThread Web site for peer evaluation. Students used an instructor-provided rubric
for the peer video evaluations. They posted a reflection on their own VoiceThread teaching
video to an online discussion board and provided feedback to at least two peers in the
discussion board forum. They also uploaded copies of the scored rubrics for each peer
evaluation.
There were 14 students in the online practicum course during the spring 2017
semester. Of those 14, 2 taught preschool; 5 taught kindergarten; 1 taught Grade 4; 1
taught elementary special education; 1 taught middle school math and social studies; 1
taught middle school English Language Arts; 1 taught high school life skills; 1 taught
high school English; and 1 was not currently teaching. Of the 14 students enrolled in the
course, 10 completed course evaluations. The course student evaluation average score was
4.65 on a 5 point scale, indicating that most students viewed the online practicum course
favorably. Two students made positive remarks about the instructor’s teaching on the
course student evaluation form, and a third student reported that “the primary assignment
was a good experience.” One student reported on the course student evaluation form that
both “Taskstream and VoiceThread are bad tools.” That was the only negative comment
made by students on the course student evaluation forms.
Thirteen of the 14 students enrolled responded favorably regarding the practicum
course, the unit assignment, and the video recording of their teaching. Comments from
students’ reflections included some of the following: they “enjoyed the process of creating
the unit”; they plan to “utilize data more to drive instruction”; several intend to “use more
Generational Issues for Educators 49

pre-assessments and post-assessments” to see their students’ growth; and “planning,

teaching, recording, and documenting” during the practicum was a useful process.
As instructors of the online practicum course, the authors found that the unit
template was a useful outline of assignment expectations regardless of the advanced
candidate’s teaching area. A Frequently Asked Questions folder was developed from
past course semester questions, and advanced teacher candidates also had access to an
ungraded discussion board forum where they could post any questions about the course or
assignments. These two resources resulted in fewer questions about the unit assignment,
but the VoiceThread component resulted in many questions from students because it was
a new assignment component for instructors as well as for students.
Students found the video teaching and peer evaluation experience valuable in many
ways. Three of 14 graduate students reported that they had never been videotaped while
teaching and that they learned much about themselves as teachers by watching the videos
and evaluating peers. Some teachers noticed things they did well and of which they were not
aware, and of course, they also noticed some things they could improve. Others mentioned
that they had gained some good ideas from watching their peers teach, such as classroom
management strategies, uses of technology, and varied ways to interact with students.
In regards to the research question, the authors consider the course student evaluations
and the above student comments to be indicative of a successfully revised and developed
Curriculum and Instruction Graduate Program online practicum course that facilitates
inservice teacher learning during the practicum.
Other possible online supervisions of a unit lesson could be completed through the use
of real-time webcams via Zoom or Skype or the submission of lesson video clips through
YouTube. This would allow the instructor to provide actual classroom teaching supervision
and detailed feedback of advanced teacher candidate classroom instruction. Similarly, peer
review of student unit assignment projects through Blackboard discussion boards with
assignments submitted as attachments could also be utilized as a means of providing peer
feedback for unit projects and teaching videos or video clips.

Conclusion
Graduate practicum students are usually inservice teachers who have several years of
experience in their content areas. As advanced teacher candidates, they are already experts
in their fields who are pursuing another degree or endorsement to continue to improve
their knowledge and skills. Providing graduate practicum students with a template for
their unit assignment project increases assignment clarity, communicates expectations, and
provides guidelines for the project, increasing advanced candidate learning and probability
for successful completion of the online practicum course. When completed, the unit
project is submitted to Taskstream to provide evidence of P-12 student learning for CAEP
program accountability purposes. It has presented no interface problems with Taskstream
because it is submitted as an attachment.
With the increasing availability of online university courses and programs, entire
programs are being moved online. Even at traditional face-to-face universities, some
programs are now offered only online, which is the case of the MAED: CI Program at
the researchers’ university. Moving teacher education graduate programs completely online
necessitates offering the graduate practicum as an online course. The fact that graduate
practicum courses are being effectively taught as online courses underscores Perry’s (2012)
comment that “the discussion of whether online supervisions can be effective is really a
conversation about competing cultures” (p. 68), the culture of those who are comfortable
50 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

with technology and aware of its capability for teaching and learning, and the culture of
those who are not as comfortable with technology. With the movement of more programs
and courses online, opportunities exist to embrace online graduate practicum course
development and instruction that will facilitate student learning (Lilienthal, 2014). The
new generations are increasingly tech savvy, and teaching and learning need to adapt to new
ways of offering courses and programs.

References
Conceicao, S. (2006). Faculty lived experiences in the online environment. Adult Education Quarterly, 56(1), 26–45.

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2013). CAEP standards. Retrieved from http://www.caepnet.org/standards
/introduction

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2014, February). CAEP evidence guide. Retrieved from http://www.caepnet
.org/accreditation/caep-accreditation/caep-accreditation-resources

Dotson, K. B., & Bian, H. (2013). Supervision on site: A critical factor in the online facilitated internship. The Quarterly Review of
Distance Education, 14(2), 51–62.

Frey, T. (2008). Determining the impact of online practicum facilitation for in-service teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher
Education, 16(2), 181–210.

Helfrich, S. R., & Smith, W. E. (2012). Moving a graduate reading program online while continuing to maintain program rigor
and meet standards. In L. Martin, M. Boggs, S. Szabo, & T. Morrison (Eds.), Joy of Teaching Literacy (pp. 105–119).
Commerce, TX: Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers.

Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2010). Teaching online: A practical guide. New York City, NY: Routledge.

Lilienthal, L. K. (2014). Moving the university reading clinic to an online setting. In S. Szabo, L. Haas, & S. Vasinda (Eds.), Exploring
the World of Literacy: Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers Yearbook, Vol. 36 (pp. 179–194). Commerce, TX:
Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2010, November). Report of the blue ribbon panel on clinical preparation
and partnerships for improved student learning: Transforming teacher education through clinical practice—a national strategy to
prepare effective teachers. Retrieved from http://www.ncate.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zzeiB1OoqPk%3d&tabid=715

Perry, C. W. (2012). Constructing professional identity in an online graduate clinical training program: Possibilities for online
supervision. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 31(3), 53–67.

West, C. (2011). Action research as a professional development activity. Arts Education Policy Review, 112, 89–94. doi:10.1080/1063
2913.2011.546697
Generational Issues for Educators 51

Appendix
MAED: CI Program
TE 816A: Practicum in Education
Case Study of a Unit Common Assessment Template
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3. 4.1)
Unit Plan Topic: (To be determined by each advanced teaching candidate)

Unit Plan Grade Level:

Unit Plan should include the following components:

1. Identify the unit objectives for the P-12 students (3 to 4 unit objectives and 3 to 4
objectives per lesson) aligned with state or common core standards:
a. Aligned with appropriate standards, school improvement goals, IEP goal, etc.
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4)
b. Developmentally appropriate for unit and individual lessons
(CAEP STANDARD 1.1)
c. Individual lesson standards and objectives are aligned and are appropriate for the
lesson.
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4)

For example, identify three to four Unit Objectives. Then plan to develop four lessons.
Decide which of the four lessons will address which unit objectives.

2. Context: Thoroughly describe the classroom context as it affects your lesson planning
(number of students, diversity of students, students who are ELL students, special needs
students, descriptions of special programs in the school or district, etc.).
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.1, 1.4, 2.3)

3. Unit Assessment Strategies:

a. Include pre-assessment, formative assessment, and post-assessment.
b. Consider whether you will use both formal and/or informal assessment strategies.
c. Remember that assessment should be consistent with objectives, teaching
methodology, and should be developmentally appropriate.
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.2, 1.3, 1.4)
Each lesson should include some form of pre-assessment, formative assessment, and
post-assessment. Identify the assessment used for each category in each lesson as it
occurs.

Provide evidence and an analysis of unit assessment data to determine success of all P-12
students, such as a table comparing students’ pre-assessment and post-assessment score
results as provided below:
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.2, 2.3, 4.1)
52 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Pre-assessment Score Post-assessment score +Gain/-Loss

Student 1
Student 2

Replicate the number of rows as needed for the number of the students participating in
the classroom unit. (For qualitative measures, such as a checklist, provide the number of
completed checklist items for the pre-assessment and post-assessment instead of a test
score.)

In paragraph form, double-spaced, provide a detailed explanation and analysis of the

results shown above in the pre-and-post matrix.

4. Instructional Procedures and Activities: Consider all of the following for the
instructional procedures and activities identified in each lesson on the matrix:
a. Activities are linked to objectives.
b. There is active involvement or hands-on learning of students.
c. There is a variety of instructional strategies or methods.
d. There are questions that promote higher level thinking.
e. Differentiations for special needs and cultural considerations are identified by
student need.
f. Instructional procedures and activities are based on or adjusted according to unit
pre-assessment data and lesson pre-assessment and formative assessment data.

5. Needed Materials, Resources, and Technology are identified for each lesson:
a. Materials and resources are appropriate for the learning objectives.
b. Appropriate use of technology is included when possible and appropriate to
enhance the learning of all students.
c. There is effective management of materials and time.
(CAEP STANDARD 1.5)

6. Final Unit Analysis and Reflection: Address each of the following items in your unit
analysis and reflection:
a. Provide a thorough self-analysis of your teaching performance after the unit is
taught. What went well, what did not go as well, what would you do differently the
next time you teach this unit, etc.?
b. Were there any instances where you were monitoring P-12 student learning and you
adjusted your teaching or the lesson plan as a result?
c. What recommendations do you have to promote future student learning? For
example, are there any areas of the lessons or unit that may need to be retaught or
reviewed to improve P-12 student learning?
d. What recommendations do you have to promote the future learning of students?
and
e. What plans do you have to continue your own teacher professional development?
(CAEP STANDARDS 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4. 1.5, 2.3, 4.1)
Generational Issues for Educators 53

Cool Tools for School: Twenty-

First-Century Tools for Student
Engagement
By Kyoko Johns, Jennifer Troncale, Christi Trucks, Christie Calhoun,
and Michael Alvidrez

T he authors discuss the benefits of student engagement and provide useful tips for using
four specific apps or programs to boost student engagement in the elementary classroom.
Fakebook, Google Classroom, Educreations, and Seesaw are free programs or apps that support
students with various learning styles and help keep them actively participating in the learning
process.

Introduction
Why is student engagement such a daunting issue for many teachers? Furthermore,
what can be done about it? In this article, we first focus on the benefits of keeping students
engaged in learning. After this brief but beneficial information is provided, our focus shifts
to sharing four specific digital tools that can be easily incorporated into the elementary
classroom to engage students in the processes of active and meaningful learning, while
taking advantage of the digital platforms students use in their daily interactions.

Engagement as Key to Classroom Management

Engaging students in learning is a motivational tool for effective classroom teachers.
“Motivation and active learning work together synergistically, and as they interact, they
contribute incrementally to increase engagement” (Barkley, 2010, p. 7). Motivation is why
people do the things they do. Students are able to be motivated based on the activities
conducted in the classroom and how the teacher presents the activities (Good & Brophy,
2008).
Of course, motivating children to learn can be a difficult task, as children often reach
an age where they begin to disengage from school-related tasks and learning experiences
(Turner, Christensen, Kackar-Cam, Trucano, & Fulmer, 2014). Despite the difficulty in
keeping students motivated to learn, educators have found that students who are engaged
feel more connected to the teacher and to the lesson, thus increasing their achievement
scores (Reyes, Brackett, Rivers, White, & Salovey, 2012). In addition to increasing student
achievement, student engagement also helps transform student thinking within the context
of learning. Engaging students in active learning requires them to think more deeply about
a concept, skill, or topic (Newmann, 1992).
An engaged classroom can be accomplished with a little planning and consideration
of the following principles: (a) teachers should strive to create a learning atmosphere in
which the goals and educational purposes are clearly articulated to students; (b) children
54 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

should be allowed opportunities for choice; (c) learning activities should be well-planned
and meaningful; (d) children should be provided prompt, clear feedback; and (e) children
should be provided multiple opportunities for collaboration (Newmann, 1992; Turner et
al., 2014). These considerations are simply a starting point for teachers, but they can be
addressed with the digital tools presented in this article.
In twenty-first-century classrooms, teachers often struggle to compete with handheld
devices, gaming systems, social media, and other entertainment distractions. Keeping
students actively engaged in learning can be challenging. Although incorporating
engagement techniques to keep students active in the learning experience may take extra

Dr. Kyoko Johns, an associate professor of mathematics education, teaches elementary

mathematics methods at the credential level and supervises practicum teachers at Jacksonville
State University in Jacksonville, Alabama. Her areas of interest include examining students’
thinking processes when solving mathematical problems, investigating social and cultural
effects on mathematics education, and exploring ways to incorporate technology in the
classroom. She is a member of Alpha Iota Chapter in Alabama State Organization.
[email protected]

Dr. Jennifer M. Troncale is Assistant Professor of Elementary Education in the Department of

Curriculum and Instruction at Jacksonville State University. She received her BS, MA, EdS,
and PhD in early childhood and elementary education from the University of Alabama. Dr.
Troncale teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses for pre- and inservice educators in
elementary education. Her teaching interests include integrating STEM into practice, using
digital tools to enhance science lessons, providing active learning opportunities to promote
student engagement, and fostering meaningful discourse in the classroom. [email protected]

Dr. Christi Trucks is Assistant Professor in the Curriculum and Instruction Department at
Jacksonville State University. Dr. Trucks teaches Early Literacy in the Early Childhood Block
and graduate level technology and reading classes. She also serves as the Early Childhood
Program Chair and Coordinator of Practicum Experiences for the Early Childhood Block.
Her teaching interests include integrating literacy and technology in the content areas. She
is a two-time graduate of the University of Alabama, earning both her bachelor’s degree
in early childhood and elementary education and her PhD in instructional leadership and
technology. She also has a master’s degree in early childhood education from the University
of Alabama at Birmingham. [email protected]

Christie Calhoun is an instructor in language and literacy courses for undergraduate and
graduate studies in elementary education at Jacksonville State University. Calhoun is a three-
time graduate of Jacksonville State University, earning her bachelor’s degree, master’s degree,
and educational specialist degree, all in the field of elementary education. She is currently
working on completing the requirements to receive her doctorate of education from the
University of Alabama. [email protected]

Dr. Michael Alvidrez is Assistant Professor of Elementary Education in the Department

of Curriculum and Instruction at Jacksonville State University. He received his BA in
elementary education from Arizona State University, and his MA and PhD in Curriculum
and Instruction from New Mexico State University. Dr. Alvidrez teaches both undergraduate
and graduate courses for pre- and inservice educators in elementary education. His teaching
interests include assessment in the elementary classroom, digital tools and writing, and
helping students develop an in-depth knowledge of mathematics. He also studies how
classroom engagement can help all students in the classroom succeed. [email protected]
Generational Issues for Educators 55

planning and preparation, doing so is an essential component of classroom management.

In the remainder of this article, we introduce four twenty-first-century tools that can be
easily incorporated into instruction to engage learners in daily classroom experiences.

Four Technology Tools to Promote Student Engagement

Fakebook: Classtools.net. Social media are effective tools for enhancing instruction.
Given the wide range of possibilities involved in using different applications and Web
sites, social media provide educators with the opportunity to design a student-active
approach to learning (Poore, 2013). Students are ensured of discussion, collaboration,
critical thinking, and creativity when offered assignments that rely on social media for
completion (McMeans, 2015). They are able to take a familiar setting with which they are
comfortable—such as Facebook or Twitter—and create a platform for learning (Abe &
Jordan, 2013). A primary concern among educators regarding social media relates to the
multitude of privacy issues that ensue and thus prevent their use in the classroom (Poore,
2013). Classtools.net, however, allows educators to use tools modeled after social media
applications safely with students.
Classtools.net is a free Web site that allows users to create personalized versions of
many different social and news-based tools. Users can opt to write their own breaking news
alert, newspaper headline, Twitter feed, word generators, or diagram and puzzle templates.
Fakebook is also a tool available on Classtools.net. A replica of Facebook, Fakebook allows
the user to create a character, show relationships with others, add images or videos, and
create timelines with posts and comments. Fakebook page design can be an individual or
collaborative project that emphasizes deep investigation of a subject.
Due to the popularity of Facebook, children of all ages are familiar with the format of
the application. Fakebook allows students to design a social media profile safely. Students
can develop a profile for a book character or historical figure. Just as with Facebook, they
can upload images, answer demographic questions, and note important dates. As students
continue to develop the Fakebook page, they can include a list of friends and add comments
from others on the Fakebook page they are creating.
Fakebook is a simple tool to use. For Facebook users, the experience will seem as though
they are on that site. For younger students or non-Facebook users, the software is very
simple to learn. A tutorial is available on the Web site with guiding notes and directions
in each section. Once a student completes the design of a Fakebook page, the teacher can
easily assess the young person’s demonstration of knowledge of the character or historical
figure and ability to show connections with others.
As with other means of social media, Fakebook is a cost-efficient and effective tool that
can be used in the classroom to develop intellectual skills (Abe & Jordan, 2013). Fakebook
also provides students an opportunity to engage in interactions that are necessary in the
technology-driven world both now and in the future (McMeans, 2015). It uses the basics
of Facebook to promote learning. Fakebook proves to be an effective, engaging, and safe
tool that offers an alternative approach to instruction, presentation, and assessment in any
classroom.
Google Classroom. With more technology coming into classrooms, teachers now
need to find new and different ways of integrating this tool into the curriculum. One such
innovative tool that is quickly growing in popularity is Google Classroom. This platform
allows teachers to use technology to help maximize student learning as well as to manage
their classrooms efficiently. Along with Google Classroom, one of the most powerful tools
available is the G suite, formerly known as Google Apps, which includes a word processor
 56 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

and presentation tool. Google is one of many tools that teachers have available to them in
the classroom.
Google Classroom is an interactive platform that teachers can utilize to help manage
how their classroom is run. Teachers can flip their classroom, a strategy in which the students
are creating, exploring, and helping to drive their instruction. As Cummings (2016) noted,
Google Classroom is a “Web 2.0 technology than can be used to ‘flip’ the online classroom
by creating asynchronous workshops in social environments where immediacy and social
presence can be maximized” (p. 81). By using Google Classroom, teachers can empower
their students to be learners and take ownership of their learning.
Google Classroom and the apps that it contains address many of the goals for
education promoted by International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) to
help transform teaching and learning utilizing
technology as a tool. In the twenty-first-century
Teachers no longer classroom, educators want students to be able to
need to compete create, collaborate, gain and share information,
and think critically (Crane, 2008). Students
with the digital tools using the various apps in the suite can maximize
their learning in the classroom as well as stay
of the current age. engaged throughout the school day. Even using
Instead, the tools just the word processing app can begin to help
students address twenty-first-century learning in
can be used the classroom. Many classroom engagement and
to enhance instruction motivation issues stem from students being bored
or unmotivated. As noted earlier, when utilized
and promote learning. correctly, technology can help in both engagement
and classroom behavior issues.
Educreations. Today’s students must use a variety of technologies to construct
knowledge and produce creative artifacts to demonstrate their learning (ISTE, 2016). The
implementation of technology as a constructivist tool supports students in collaborating,
processing information, and creating representations of conceptual knowledge ( Jonassen,
Peck, & Wilson, 1999). In today’s digital age, it’s essential that classroom teachers remain
relevant while providing students opportunities for active involvement in the learning
environment. In order to accomplish this goal, educators can use interactive whiteboards
and screencasting tools to empower students to take ownership of their learning through
shared, project-based learning tasks.
Educreations (https://www.educreations.com/) is an app that serves as an interactive
whiteboard and screencasting tool through which users can add videos, voice-overs, images,
and annotations to instructional presentations in an effort to explain a concept or idea. The
virtual whiteboard includes a variety of ink colors for students to draw or annotate. The app
is easy to use and allows both teachers and students to create videos, craft presentations,
and illustrate ideas. Educreations is commonly used by teachers to create lessons in a
flipped classroom environment or for the purpose of distance learning. Furthermore, while
Educreations is beneficial to teachers seeking a tool that facilitates teaching and learning,
it also allows learners to develop strategies for creating and demonstrating competency in
their learning targets.
With a growing emphasis on performance-based assessment, digital tools are needed
to ensure students are provided with opportunities for explaining their knowledge and
ideas in a variety of ways. Educreations is an effective tool for all subjects. In the science
Generational Issues for Educators 57

classroom, students can use the Educreations app to create a video explaining the steps
of a science experiment and then explain their conclusions based on the results from the
experiment. In the math classroom, students can use the Educreations app to create a video
explaining the steps they took to solve a problem. In the language arts classroom, students
can use the Educreations app to create a digital story using pictures, videos, and narrations
that demonstrate their thinking in a creative way.
Educreations offers a Basic Edition free plan that includes 50MB of cloud storage
space for one’s lessons. Educreations Pro allows teachers to create a class that students
can join within the app. Lessons sync automatically between the teacher’s and students’
iPads, so it is easy for students to view teacher instruction and for teachers to monitor the
students’ work while providing feedback. Unfortunately, at this time, students are not able
to share their work with classmates within the environment of an Educreations class—a
capacity that would also energize learning. Educreations is compatible with iOS 7 and
works only on the iPad. Other screencasting tools and whiteboard apps include Explain
Everything (https://explaineverything.com/ and Show Me (http://www.showme.com/).
Seesaw: The learning journal. Seesaw (https://web.seesaw.me/) is a student-driven
digital portfolio that provides a secure and private place to keep students’ assignments and
projects that can be shared with parents. Students can upload photos, videos, drawings,
text, PDFs, and links to show their learning.
A teacher can create digital portfolios for students by following simple steps. First, a
teacher creates his or her own Seesaw account. Then he or she creates a class, adds students,
and configures class settings. The teacher decides who is able to view student work, such as
classmates and parents, and whether to allow them to “like” or comment on other’s posts.
Seesaw Web site provides resources for teachers to set up their first class. Getting Started
Calendar, Checklist, Seesaw Student Challenge, and Parent Introduction Presentation and
Letter are several resources available for teachers.
Seesaw Student Challenge is an introductory lesson plan to allow students to learn the
basics of a digital journal, handling devices, signing in, taking pictures, recording a video,
using drawing tools, and giving feedback to classmates. Utilizing Seesaw engages students
and helps them take ownership in their learning. By downloading Seesaw’s Parent App for
iOS or Android devices, or by using the Web to view learning artifacts, parents can view
only their own child’s portfolio and classroom items that a teacher posts to “Everyone.”
Seesaw thus provides a simple and quick way for a teacher to communicate and update each
student’s progress with his or her parents. This app also allows parents to give feedback on
their child’s artifacts. Seesaw digital portfolio is an easy way to inform parents of classroom
activities and provide more opportunities to participate in their child’s education.

Conclusion
Student engagement is essential to student learning. Keeping students engaged in
learning helps them feel more connected to the learning and the teacher. Fostering these
connections allows teachers to keep students motivated to learn. As a result, when students
remain engaged, they are required to access deeper, more critical thinking skills, which,
in turn, increases achievement. Teachers no longer need to compete with the digital tools
of the current age. Instead, the tools can be used to enhance instruction and promote
learning. Incorporating twenty-first-century tools into daily classroom activities helps
teachers engage students and monitor their learning and behavior. The online programs
and apps included in this article can be utilized in any classroom to provide benefits in
engagement, management, and skill-building.
58 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

References
Abe, P., & Jordan, N. (2013). Integrating social media into the classroom curriculum. About Campus, 16(1), 16–20.

Barkley, E. F. (2010). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Crane, B. (2008). Google in the classroom: More than just research. Information Searcher, 17(3), 16–24.

Cummings, L. (2016). Flipping the online classroom with Web 2.0. Business & Professional Communication Quarterly, 79(1), 81–101.
doi:10.1177/2329490615602250mings

Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (2008). Looking in classrooms. Boston, MA: Pearson.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016, July 6). Standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org
/standards/standards/for-students

Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Merrill.

McMeans, A. (2015). Incorporating social media in the classroom. Education, 135(3), 289–290.

Newmann, F. M. (Ed.). (1992). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. New York City, NY: Teachers
College Press.

Poore, M., (2013). Using social media in the classroom: A best practice guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and
academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712.

Turner, J. C., Christensen, A., Kackar-Cam, H. Z., Trucano, M., & Fulmer, S. M. (2014). Enhancing students’ engagement: Report of
a 3-year intervention with middle school teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 51(6), 1195–1226.
Generational Issues for Educators 59

Dues Adjustments: A Study

By Phyllis A. Hickey, Nita Scott, Theresa Waller, Carolyn Pittman,
Kara Hamann, and Judith R. Merz

T his article provides an overview of a comprehensive study completed by DKG administrators

and others regarding factors involved in considering dues adjustments for member countries.
The study was shared with the international administrative board during their deliberations in
late 2016 and provides insight into the myriad considerations and factors involved.

One of the strengths of DKG is its involvement of women from 17 countries, reflecting
varied cultures and lifestyles. That same strength, however, can pose problems when one
considers fiscal matters such as dues and the notion of equity.
In recognition of varying cultures and economies, International Standing Rule 4.13
indicates that the DKG administrative board may make any adjustments in dues and
other required payments for chapters or state organizations impacted by major political
upheavals, severe natural disasters, or penalty exchanges between the monetary units
of member countries and the United States dollar. Although the administrative board
did attempt a definition of such triggers for adjustments in 2011, the concept proved
unworkable as details were researched and the complexity unearthed.

Defining the Issues

Ten currencies exist in the 17 countries that make up DKG:
1. Icelandic Krona
2. Canadian Dollar
3. Mexican Peso
4. Euro
5. Norwegian Kroner
6. British Pound
7. Swedish Krona
8. Guatemalan Quetzal
9. Japanese Yen
10. Costa Rican Colon
The administrative board considered a wide variety of factors (Table 1) involved in
comparing the fiscal and economic situation of each member country to that of the United
States:
• Historical data indicating the fluctuation in the exchange rate over a period of 2 years.
This particularly demonstrated the difficulty of determining a specific period for
consideration of “penalty exchange rates.”
• The average exchange rate of each currency to the U.S. dollar over a 6-month period
(May 2016 to October 2016). Again, specific choice of a period for comparison would
impact the data.
Table 1
Comparison of Factors
60

Value DKG Average Average Rate of Inflation Gallon of Dozen Eggs Gallon Levi
to US Dues Teacher salary In % Milk of Gas Jeans
Dollar (15 years)
2013 2014 2015
US Dollar 1 USD $40 $46,130 1.47 1.62 .12 $3.28 $2.59 $2.32 $41.37
Icelandic Krona 119.35 4,559.60 $26,991 3.88 2.05 1.63 $4.71 $5.29 $6.42 $155.49
ISK ISK
Canadian Dollar 1.32 53.62 $56, 349 1.24 1.47 1.61 $6.05 $2.29 US $3.00 $46.54
CAD CAD
Mexican Peso 18.75 760,07 $19,590 3.81 4.02 2.72 $3.01 $1.34 $2.75 $37.93
MXN MXN
Euro .896 EU 36.42 EU
The Netherlands $52,292 .64 .98 2.53 $3.75 $2.32 $6.31 $89.37
Estonia $12,306 2.79 -.10 -.49 $2.32 $1.28 $4.40 $75.06
Norwegian 8.3 NOK 330.94 $37,585 2.13 2.03 2.17 $7.24 $3.98 $6.44 $101.71
Kroner NOK
British Pound .75 GBP 32.86 $44,269 3.00 2.4 1.0 $4.09 $3.16 $4.99 $68.99
GBP
Swedish Krona 8.44 SEK 360.85 $34,387 -.04 -.18 1.63 $4.44 $4.30 $5.70 $96.03
SEK
Guatemalan 7.56 306.16 $30,000 4.34 3.78 6.22 $5.51 $1.82 $2.79 $51.50
Quetzal GTQ GTQ
Japanese Yen 104.11 4,190,32 $45,741 .10 2.36 1.62 $6.76 $2.20 $4.70 $71.86
JPY JPY
Costa Rican 544.81 22,386.4 $12,000 5.2 4.5 0.8 $4.88 $2.93 $3.99 $60.26
Colon CRC CRC
The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators
Generational Issues for Educators 61

• Translation of DKG $40 international dues to the nation’s currency.

• The average salary of a teacher in the nation under study compared to the average
U.S. salary.
• The cost of various “staples”—a gallon of milk, dozen eggs, gallon of gas, pair of
jeans—in the nation under study compared to the average cost of those staples in the
United States.
• The average rate of inflation in each country for each year, 2013-2015.
Further consideration included comparing the cost of living in member countries to
that of the United States (Table 2). These data further confound the issue of equity in dues
and other assessments.

Table 2
Cost of Living for Member Countries Compared to United States

Cost of Living
Member Country Compared to United
States
Canada 7.73% lower
Costa Rica 22.62% lower
Canada 7.73% lower
El Salvador 40.02% lower
Estonia 31.58% lower
Finland .77 % higher
Germany 8.69 % lower
Guatemala 41.34% lower
Iceland 46.14% higher
Japan 23.97% higher
Mexico 55.82% lower
Netherlands .42% lower
Norway 46.36% higher
Panama 26.94% lower
Puerto Rico 9.54% lower
Sweden 1.86% higher
United Kingdom 8.69% lower

In looking at the data above, the administrative board members also noted the
variations that can occur within a member country. For example, salaries, costs of staples,
and overall cost of living vary widely from state to state within the United States. Adding
analysis of all the myriad factors involved in locale within a state organization—whether
it be within the United States or within any member country—would further complicate
efforts to achieve equity.
62 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

About the Authors:

Phyllis A. Hickey is the Business Services Administrator at DKG headquarters in Austin, TX,

Nita Scott is the Membership Services Administrator at DKG headquarters in Austin, TX.

Theresa Waller is Financial Supervisor at DKG headquarters in Austin, TX.

Kara Hamann is a CPA who works with the Business Services Department at DKG headquarters in Austin,
TX.

Carolyn Pittman is DKG International President, 2016-2018.

Judith R. Merz is DKG Interim Executive Director and editor of the Bulletin.

Resources
Currency Conversion

www.oanda.com/currency/converter/

www.xe.com/currencycharts/?fromUSD&to=
[Note: insert country name in url; site provides multiple charts for the researched countries indicating 1-year and 5-year
data and trends]

www.xe.com/currencytables/?from=USD&date-2016-05-16 [current and historical rates charts]

www.oanda.com/solutions-for-business/historical-rates/main.html

Cost of Living

www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/rankiings_by_country.jsp

www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country¬_result.jsp?country=
[Note: insert country name in url; site provides multiple charts for the 17 researched countries]

Salaries and Inflation Data

http://worldoftefl.com/teaching-english-in-guatemala/

www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state/

www.costaricatesol.com/tefl-costa-rica-blog/how-much-money-can-i-make-teaching English-in-costa-rica-61

www.inflation.eu/inflation-rates/

www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/colaseries.html
Generational Issues for Educators 63

Bulletin Submission Guidelines

Submissions from members will be accepted for review provided that:
• The submission is not being considered concurrently in whole or substantial part by another publisher.
• The Bulletin has exclusive option of possible publication for a period of 6 months following receipt of
the submission.
• The author assumes responsibility for publication clearance in the event the submission was presented
at a professional meeting or is the direct product of a project financed by a funding agency.
• Authors are responsible for accurately citing all quoted and bibliographic materials and for obtaining
permission from the original source for quotations in excess of 150 words or for tables or figures
reproduced from published works.
• Co-authors are permitted. At least one author must be a Delta Kappa Gamma member.

Manuscript Preparation
• Although there is a suggested theme for each issue of the Journal, manuscripts on all topics are
welcome. The Collegial Exchange is not theme-based.
• Manuscripts should be focused, well organized, effectively developed, concise, and appropriate for
Bulletin readers. The style should be direct, clear, readable, and free from gender, political, patriotic, or
religious bias. Topic headings should be inserted where appropriate.
• Please see Submission Grid on the following page for specific requirements of the types of manuscripts
appropriate for publication.
• Use Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, current edition, for manuscript
preparation. Visit the APA Style website at www.apastyle.org.
• Double space the entire manuscript, including quotations, references, and tables. Print should be clear,
dark, and legible. Pages must be numbered.
• References should refer only to materials cited within the text. Nonretrievable material, such as papers,
reports of limited circulation, unpublished works, and personal communications, should be restricted
to works absolutely essential to the manuscript.
• Abbreviations should be explained at their first appearance in the text. Educational jargon (e.g.,
preservice, K–10, etc.) should be defined as it occurs in the text.
• Place tables and figures on separate pages at the end of the manuscript. Use Arabic numerals and
indicate approximate placement in the text.
• Photos, graphics, charts, etc. that may enhance the presentation of the manuscript may be included.
Contact the editorial staff ([email protected]) for information regarding the use of photos.

Submission
• One submission per author per issue.
• Submit electronically, in Microsoft Word format, to [email protected]. Do not submit PDF files. For a
manuscript, include definitive abstract, photo of author(s) [see below], and biographical information.
Biographical information must include author(s) name(s), occupational position(s), Society and
professional affiliations (list offices held), address(es), phone number(s) and e-mail address(es).
• Electronic/digital photo files must be saved in JPG or TIFF format and must be a minimum of 1.5”
x 1.5” with a 300 dpi resolution. For photos submitted to enhance text, include caption/identification
information.
• For poems and graphic arts, submit name, address, and chapter affiliation. A photograph is not
required.
• All submissions will be acknowledged and assigned a review number within 2 weeks. Contact the
editor at [email protected] if you do not receive timely acknowledgement of your submission.

Publication of Submissions
• The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International and the editorial staff assume no responsibility for
statements made or opinions expressed by contributors in The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin.
• All published materials are copyrighted by The Delta Kappa Gamma Society International and may
not be reproduced in whole or in part without written permission.
• The editorial staff reserves the right to make changes of a nonsubstantive nature.
• Published authors will receive five complimentary copies of the Bulletin in which their article appears.
For evaluation rubrics, please go to the Bulletin page in the Library at www.dkg.org .
64 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators

Bulletin Submission Grid

Publication Submission Type and Description Word Length Requirements
Journal Action/Classroom Research: Organized, systematic, and reflective 1,500-4,000 Abstract;
analysis of classroom practice with implications for future practice documentation;
in teaching and learning. bio; photo
Journal Qualitative/Quantitative/Mixed Methods Research: Essentially 1,500-4,000 Abstract;
narrative with nonstatistical approaches and a focus on how documentation;
individuals and groups view and understand the world and bio; photo
construct meanings from their experiences (Qual)/Gathers and
analyzes measurable data to support or refute a hypothesis or theory
through numbers and statistics (Quan)/Utilizes both qualitative
and quantitative data to explore a research question (Mixed).
Journal Position Paper/Viewpoint: Defines an issue; asserts clear and 1,000-1,500 Abstract;
unequivocal position on that issue, provides data and references that documentation;
inform that position, and argues directly in its favor. bio; photo
Journal Review of Literature: Presents supporting and nonsupporting 1,500-3,000 Abstract;
evidence to clarify a topic and/or problem of interest and value documentation;
to educators; synthesizes and critiques the literature; draws bio; photo
conclusions; mentions procedures for selecting and reviewing
literature; may include narrative review, best evidence synthesis, or
meta-analysis.
Journal Program Description: Provides an overview and details of a single 1,500-2,000 Abstract;
program in an educational setting. Goals, resources, and outcomes documentation;
are included. No marketing or promotion of a program is allowed. bio; photo
Journal Book/Technology Review: Combines summary and personal 400-700 Introduction;
critique of a book, Web site, or app on an educational topic or with documentation;
educational relevance. bio; photo
Collegial Classroom Practice/Program: Describes practice or initiative used 700-1,200 Bio; photo
Exchange in a classroom to advance educational excellence
Collegial DKG Chapter/State Organization Practice/Program: Describes 700-1,200 Bio; photo
Exchange a practice or initiative used by a chapter or state organization to
advance the purposes of DKG
Collegial Viewpoint on Current Issue: Defines and addresses an issue related 700-1,200 Bio; photo
Exchange to education, women, children, or DKG
Collegial Personal Reflection or Anecdote: Shares a personal experience that 500-700 Bio; photo
Exchange provides insight to the human condition, particularly related to
educators and women
Collegial Inspirational Piece: Provides transcript of speech delivered at 700-1,200 Bio; photo
Exchange chapter, state, regional, or international events
Collegial Bio and/or Interview: Shares the story or thoughts of a key woman 700-1,200 Bio; photo
Exchange educator or leader in education, women’s issues, or children’s issues
Collegial Book Review: Combines a summary and personal critique of 400-700 Bio; photo
Exchange a textbook, resource, or book (fiction or nonfiction) related to
education or to women and children
Collegial Technology Review: Combines a summary and personal critique 400-700 Bio; photo
Exchange of an educational application, program, or piece of hardware that is
useful in the classroom or that is useful in the life of an educator
Journal or Letter to the Editor: Responds to items previously published in the 200-300 Author’s name;
Collegial Bulletin chapter/state
Exchange
Journal or Poetry/Creative Work: Original expressions in any creative format NA Bio; photo
Collegial
Exchange

Note: More detailed explanations of each category may be found on the Editorial Board page at www.dkg.org.