Jenny,
I've worked with both Japanese students and Japanese teachers in the past. The teachers spend a great deal more time in planning than the typical American teacher, sometimes as much as two hours a day. At my school the teachers receive 45 minutes a day. The middle school, which is currently the district darlings b/c of their high test scores, gives its teachers 90 minutes a day.
And why is our planning time limited to 45 minutes? Our PE coaches also coach teams at the high school and middle schools, and our teachers' planning times occur during their students' PE time. Since our coaches are used elsewhere, there is a limited amount of time for them to spend on our campus.
Your last paragraph sums up my research interest! If only it all didn't give me such a headache...
JennyD wrote:
But one of the conclusions was that teaching is measured (for whatever reason) by outcomes.
Huh? Since when? Up until NCLB there wasn't any measure of outcome that couldn't be safely ignored. So what outcomes were being measured? Or at least what outcomes were being measured that meant anything?
Whereas other professions are not measured in only that way.
Wrong again. "Other" professions are measured exclusively by outcomes. Whatever processes are necessary to achieve the desired outcomes survive the winnowing process but all those processes are measured by the contribution they make to achieving acceptable outcomes. I'd be interested to know what professions it was determined were not measured exclusively by outcomes and in what way teaching is measured exclusively by outcomes.
Allen, not true. At least not for every profession.
Physicians who work in the ICU typically have worse "outcomes" than physicians who see small children as a primary pediatrician. If these doctors were judged solely on outcomes, the ICU docs would be fired.
What physicians have that teachers don't have is a clear knowledge of processes and procedures. They share these regularly in meetings, in conferences, etc. Teaching does not have the same kind of vocabulary and shared knowledge, at least not to the same extent.
Jenny,
This is a brilliant description of the biggest problem and one that teachers rightly contest, the focus solely on what happens at the end.
I have been chastised in comments about comparing teaching to other professions, like law and medicine because of complaints that teachers have little control over the inputs into their system.
Well doctors and lawyers have little control over the external inputs, but a great deal of control over the process once a client enters their door. Likewise, teachers have some control (not enough, I believe) over the process once kids enter the classroom. While the analogy is not perfect, if teachers want to make a difference, this is the place to begin--on process.
Right. But what doctors do (and teachers don't do) is share procedures so that the process is standardized to a large extent. For example, there are not a million different ways to perform a heart bypass. There may be a couple. But ALL heart surgeons share that knowledge of process and procedure. Sure, they may neeed an extra clamp, or an extra stitch to the get the job done. But they don't make it up as they go. They follow a script of sorts, a script designed and tested by other practitioners.
Teachers need to build and share that kind of knowledge.
Of course professionals are judged by outcomes. What else would they be judged by?
An ER doc, who has a higher mortality rate then a dermatologist, may or may not be good at what he does but making the comparison to the dermatologist won't tell you which it is. That's why the comparison isn't to dermatologists but to other ER docs.
If you want to know how good someone is at what they do you measure results. Those results have to be viewed within the appropriate frame of reference but that's just to avoid making worthless comparisons, i.e. ER doc to dermatologist, electrical engineer to railroad engineer.
You set up the metrics appropriate to the measurement of whatever quantity is central to the job and then you start measuring. The big-city, ER doc who has a 10% mortality rate looks pretty bad but until you have some notion of what the average is - if that's the appropriate measure - then you can tell whether he's a butcher or a miracle worker.
Even in areas of skill where objective outcomes are inherently problematical, figure-skating as an example, an objective measure is constructed out of subjective measures. How can you award the gold medal until you know who the best skater, by a generally agreed upon measure, is?
This isn't controversial stuff anywhere but the education profession and it's only controversial when applied to K-12, i.e. public school, teachers. Higher-ed professionals are measured by the glory, or money, they bring to their institution. One article in the "Journal of Applied Physics" might be worth five articles in unknown niche publications and you know there are people keeping track of that sort of thing. There are other budding, young professional who are ambitious and smart and looking for a chance to climb the academic ladder, right? They don't go up a rung due to time on the job but by how much they produce of whatever product the institution values, publications or grants.
But what's the critical quantity in public education? What determines how well or how poorly a teacher does their job? Now that's a controversial question, isn't it? Why should it be? Aren't there varying levels of talent and expertise among public school teachers? Of course there are. Yet the talent and the expertise isn't measured and even the notion of measuring them kicks off the most rabid sort of resistance.
If you want to ponder a question then ask yourself how you can encourage excellence when you don't have a measure of mediocrity?
Okay Allen, I'll bite. Here are two ER docs. The one who works at a hospital in Palm Springs loses 10% of the patients he sees. Another ER doc who works on Camden, NJ loses 35% of his patients.
Which is a better doctor? On what evidence would you make the claim?
first-year doctoral students ... make teaching more of a profession
Don't all teachers need some familiarity with the concept of professionalism? (not to be harsh...)
physicians worry about process first
As guided by a meaningful code of professional ethics: "First, do no harm." Don't all teachers need some familiarity with the concept of professional ethics...
measuring a doctor's skill might not be best done using outcomes
Value added assessment addresses this. It's the law here in Ohio. Even Allen grudgingly conceded the wisdom of Ohio's approach as adopted in Philadelphia. (Don't all teachers ...)
physicians dissect their failures in Morbidity and Mortality ...
Yes, in fact, the June 5, 1981 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report is a classic: http://aidshistory.nih.gov/docar...hive/
index.html
lead to better knowledge of how to get better outcomes
Alternatively, fix the profession's knowledge management processes and end the practice of ideologically motivated interpretations of soft data. Some suggestions:
Southern Ohio Medical Center's Passionate Pursuit of Organizational Excellence
Being Misread: A Lesson in Vigilance
What if Research Really Mattered?
I've worked with ... Japanese teachers ... more time in planning ... as much as two hours a day. At my school the teachers receive 45 minutes a day.
As mandated by a contract negotiated on behalf of and accepted by the teachers. TMAO's school adopted a memorandum of understanding to improve achievement; what's the deal at your school, Mike?
J
Doctors are judged by their results. Of course one has to take into account a doctor’s particular practice when evaluating his performance. You sound as if this hasn’t occurred to anybody else except to yourself.
And doctors do not all approach medicine in the same way. There are great variations in opinion on what works best on whom and when. Patients get second and third opinions. Patients can decline treatments or pick among several. Patients can get new doctors, sue doctors, recommend doctors. And doctors, despite being part of a professional organization with strict guidelines, requirements and scrutiny, are still individuals whose careers are mainly shaped by their particular choices and performances in the market place, not by collective bargaining and union-guarantees of job security, pay raises, and days off.
Professionals have more on the line in terms of education and responsibility. They have a lot to lose if they do not perform adequately. That is why they get paid more and tend to get more respect. What are teachers willing to put in and to risk for more pay and respect?
My point is not to trash teachers, or to say doctors always do the same thing. BUT...often doctors do similar things. Particularly for routine medical problems. Like hypertension. No doctor will suggest brain surgery for hypertension. But it might be medication, or exercise, or less salt.
Why is the practice of medicine so constrained to have such a limited number of good practices for hypertension? Because doctors have worked for decades together to find the best ways to treat hypertension, and to share that information with each other and with doctors in training.
You can get a second opinion for the treatment for hypertension, but it won't be brain surgery.
Sure doctors are worried about outcomes. That's why they would suggest treating you with a practice that is proven to work and that they have been trained to apply. But it's not the worry about outcomes the makes them good at what they do, it's the application of good practice.
Teaching does have the same kind of constrained use of researched and shared practices. What would teaching be like if it had grown up like medicine? If practice knowledge were as central to the work as outcome measures?
What would teaching be like if it had grown up like medicine?
Teachers would have relatively greater commitment to their students and less commitment to their bargaining unit. Teachers would pay malpractice premiums and textbook publishers would institute quality assurance measures to mitigate liability.
Regularization of medicine lead to the ousting of quacks. Hard data (temperature, pulse, mortality) and after action reviews (post mortems) permit greater rigor in medicine.
Just goes to show that "got sick and died" is harder to ignore than "fell behind non-US students between grades 4 and 8."
Hello, thought I'd throw in a few comments using a different profession as an example: Air Force Officer. But first...
Okay Allen, I'll bite. Here are two ER docs. The one who works at a hospital in Palm Springs loses 10% of the patients he sees. Another ER doc who works on Camden, NJ loses 35% of his patients. Which is a better doctor? On what evidence would you make the claim?
This is a logical fallacy (I think that's the right term). If you were in a car accident in Camden, NJ, you wouldn't have the option of "seeing" the ER doc in Palm Springs. You'd have the option of several ER docs in Camden, NJ. Thus, the question should be restated as: You have two ER docs with similar experience in St. Mercy Hospital, Camden, NJ. Dr. Bob has a 35% loss rate and Dr. Mike has a 30% loss rate. Which doctor is a better doctor? I'd say Dr. Mike.
Now on to Air Force Officer as a professional. I’ll give you data and let you make the call on whether or not they are professionals.
Air Force Officers annually have their performance reviewed. The areas in which they are rated include Job Performance, Leadership Skills, Professional Qualities, Organizational Skills, Judgment and Decisions, and Communication Skills. Also, three times a year the officer’s supervisor conducts a performance feedback in which the supervisor reviews the officer’s performance (at the 60-, 180-, and 270-day mark). Therefore any areas which need work, the officer has ample time to improve before the annual report becomes a matter of record.
Additionally, each officer is stratified against his/her peers at the unit they are currently assigned, as well as at higher organizational levels. For example, an officer might be #1 of 4 Captains at a Squadron run by a Lieutenant Colonel, #2 of 16 at a Group run by a Colonel, and #3 of 45 at a Wing run by a General. These stratifications are used for special educational & leadership opportunities as they come up. For example, the General may have four slots to a Masters degree program. The General would use the officers’ performance reviews along with his/her stratification of the officers to select candidates for the educational opportunities.
Officers are also required to complete certain educational milestones during their career if they hope to make the next rank. For example, in order for a Major to make Lieutenant Colonel, s/he must complete Air Command and Staff College. Same can be said for those wanting to make Colonel needing War College. Regardless, officers have a high-year of tenure based on what rank they are. For example, if a Captain is not selected for Major, s/he must separate from the Air Force. What’s more, for the last two years and for the foreseeable future, all Lieutenants are stratified against each other and their records are put before a board. Those not making the cut-line are given 120 days to separate from the Air Force. The number of Lieutenants who must separate depend upon their career field and numbers determined annually; for example, some career fields last year separated 40% of their Lieutenants!
"Yesterday the class discussed what would make teaching more of a profession."
I'll suggest that one thing that separates professions (doctor, lawyer, accountant, ...) from non-professions is the concept of "malpractice". Doctors and lawyers can get sued for malpractice if they botch things in certain ways. Software programmers can't/don't. Which is one thing that prevents programming from being a profession.
Until the *concept* of malpractice exists for K-12 teaching (and this doesn't mean that teachers must be sue-able, just that there are some criteria to point to and claim, "this person isn't doing their job"), I don't think it can/will be a profession.
There are, I think, other things, too, that would have to change for teaching to be a profession, but introducing the concept of malpractice seems like one.
-Mark Roulo
And why is the application of good practices in medicine so obviously the right thing to do as to not require explanation or even consideration? Because the importance of outcomes puts a premium on good practices and punishes bad practices. Good practices result in good outcomes, better practices in better outcomes. Outcomes are what drives the system and practices are a means to achieving the preferred outcomes.
But if outcomes aren't important then there's no reason to distinguish between good and bad practices. If it doesn't matter how good a doctor you are then why bother honing your skills? Why exchange information with other practitioners? You won't get anything of value from them about being a good doctor because "good doctor" has no meaning if your mortality rates aren't better then average and there's no way to tell what the average is if no one's counting.
Which brings us back to public education and how it differs from other professions, trades, crafts, passtimes, whatever.
The difference is that the central outcome for which the public education system ostensibly exists isn't measured, or at least it wasn't until fairly recently. And by "measured" I mean a measurement that has some meaning, that differentiates the good performers from the bad performers and on which substantive judgments are made, i.e. if you're good you get something of value for being good and if you're bad you get a different something, something that one would generally choose to avoid getting.
But that doesn't happen in public education. Good teacher or bad teacher, in a very real sense it doesn't make any difference. In that sort of environment what reason is there to be good? What reason is there to seek out the good practices and identify and avoid the bad practices? There is no reason and that's why it isn't done, why it will continue to not be done and that won't change until there is a clear, measurable outcome by which the professional is judged.
This whole argument is pretty insulting to teachers on many levels. In JenD’s thesis, she seems to be stating that teachers don’t have a process orientated approach to their profession, like doctors or maybe lawyers do. Here’s why JenD is wrong. First, we are talking about a population that is incredibly varied and the external forces that teachers must contend with often affect the teaching. Doctors that perform heart surgery are performing a single type of operation with limited variables. The heart is still a heart, and the operation will be similar in most cases, thus creating a better doctor through practice. A teacher has 170 different hearts, all with different operations that are needed for success. You can’t perform heart surgery on a patient that needs a kidney transplant, or a broken leg fixed. Jen’s argument is incorrectly assuming that there is an overall “best process” for teaching all students, with considerations such as student attitudes, learning modalities, home life, externalities, and legal issues (IEP’s, etc). Sure, teachers are taught practices that will help them become better teachers, but a concrete process for the profession is not practical. A heart is a heart for a doctor, but a 15 year old girl from Compton learning English is not an 18 year old boy from Moraga taking AP Calculus.
Jen is also assuming that we are not taught a process oriented method. That would also be incorrect. Organization, identification of learning modalities, process of lesson planning, lesson execution, assessment………….sounds pretty process orientated to me. We do have a common language (Blooms, standards, lesson methodology), and at our school with have time during the week to confer with colleagues regarding best practices.
It seems to me that people like Allen, those that have the illusion that all students are the same and thus can be taught in a systematic format, are rightly concerned about the product being produced from public education, but are not willing to point the finger at themselves as part of the problem. I’m hearing things like “teacher’s are not professional”, yet we deal with your children, politicians, the general public, and the law with more frequency than most professions, and with greater dedication and class for the amount we are paid. Then I hear “What are teachers willing to put in and to risk for more pay and respect”, as if we don’t risk everything by dedicating our lives to educating YOUR children. That includes constant threat of legal action (Special Ed, among other things), funding based on a government budget, and constant public scrutiny. What other risk do you want? And finally the ignorant, “Teachers worry more about their bargaining unit than the kids”, which is, quite frankly, the statement of a dumbshit that has never stepped foot in a real classroom.
When you, society, takes education seriously, then you will consider educators professionals. You don’t take education seriously, you take it for granted. You see education as a Right that should be taken advantage of, not a privilege that should be nurtured and valued. Unlike doctors or lawyers, we can’t simply turn away a client that we don’t feel comfortable dealing with. We have to take everyone, even those that don’t speak English, have a learning disability, or that have no home. If you really cared about Education, you would make every school a palace, you would give the teachers the power to eliminate those that refuse to learn, you would hire administrators that are leaders and role models, and finally, you would hold parents responsible for their children. Then, when you actually give teachers the right tools to work with (instead of giving the doctor a spoon to operate with, in a shack in Richmond, with nurses that don’t speak his language), you can start bouncing out all those that are not getting the job done. Then you will actually see Education as a priority, not something that is your Right to expect and critique.
And by the way, none of this would even be discussed if you really cared about the profession, not just the results. In actuality, most of you don’t give a shit about the profession, you just want to see the final product meet your standards, those standards that expect us to teach kids, but at the same time those standard that you refuse to model for them. When you honestly care about Education and teachers, and come out from behind the political rhetoric, you will see real results.
Iron Mike-
I recently asked our local Navy Junior ROTC Commander whether school board members were as prepared to discharge their oaths of office as military officers. (We both just smiled.)
You (and my neighbors) set a standard for professionalism that ought to be matched by educators. Would DODEA provide positive examples? Would educational malpractice qualify as a domestic threat?
Officer Oath: I, A.B., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Coach, I think we agree more than disagree in some aspects. You may be in a school where practitioners share lots of knowledge. Or you may be in a school where most teachers were and are well-educated in their work. That's not so in many places. See the link from EdWahoo, who realizes he does not have the skill or knowledge to write a lesson plan, but is asked to do one everyday. He's wondering why there isn't some shared knowledge about best lesson plans for multiplication in his school, or district, or somewhere. Why does he have to find these himself? Why don't the practitioners around him share this knowledge? How they improve their teaching practice if they don't?
Also, I disagree that doctors are dealing with single, alike problems. Every patient is as different as every student.
Also, I am going add to the post about psychologists. But surely psychology is close to teaching in that every patient is different. Yet psychologists now use common "scripts" to handle specific psychological needs. Sure, they tailor the script a little for each patient. But they don't create a new script for each patient.
JennyD wrote:
Why does he have to find these himself? Why don't the practitioners around him share this knowledge? How they improve their teaching practice if they don't?
OK, good questions.
Got any answers?
If "yes", then how do you propose to determine if your answers are correct, somewhat correct or completely off the mark? If "no", why not?
More importantly, do you dare ask questions that are taboo, knowing that taboo-breakers are as harshly dealt with in ed schools as in any other primitive tribe?
Also, my previous post answered those questions. Care to find fault with those answers or would even acknowledging my hypothesis be a "blue pill - red pill" sort of decision?
Iron Mike,
You also present a "logical fallacy" in your comparison of Camden ER docs. While true that an accident patient in Camden will not get to see a Palm Springs ER doc, neither with that patient get a chance to choose his doctor. if you are in an auto accident, you are generally transported to the nearest ER facility and you get the first doctor available. No preference.
Coach Brown,
I see your general point about having external factors that influence teaching. but, as Jenny pointed out, no two patients are alike for a doctor, even if they present with the same symptoms or problem. Taking Jenny's example of hypertension. Say an othewise healthy 40 year old woman presented with hypertension and a 65 year old obese African American man presented with hypertension. The range of treatmens is the same and indeed the doctor may proscribe the same treatment, but the doctor can choose aong the alternatives because he knows, from past history and informaation sharing that a given treatment will work. What Jenny and Ed Wahoo are asking for is that sharing of knowledge.
New medical treatments come on the scene everyday. Through trial, information sharing and retesting, treatments are refined. But no doctor keeps those treatments to himself because of the instituional and professional ethic of sharing successful treatments so other may benefit.
Teachers every day come up with new ways to teach any subject matter many of which are successful, but that knowledge is not shared, tested again and again on varying students, refined and shared again. That is what Jenny is suggesting.
She, I believe, and I are not ingnoring the variation among students, but I refuse to beleive that each and every student is not so different that they require a unique instructional method for each. A small number of methods will be needed and can be applied as necessary if there is a method to sharing the information across teachers.
Matt,
Point taken...
Eric,
You brought back memories...I've got that oath memorized because whenever I get promoted, I buy beer and cake for my unit and I recite my oath. I feel it is important for everyone to be reminded of why we're serving. (After all, the re-enlistment oath is similarly worded.)
Coach Brown,
If these folks here didn't take education seriously, they wouldn't be in Jenny's blog debating. (Yes, yes, I know you said "society.") Personally, I gave up on a teaching career (right before student teaching) because I couldn't see myself working with my classmates (in a year to be my colleagues) for the rest of my working years. The majority didn't seem to take the craft seriously, and were more concerned with getting a job in Anchorage (and not in the bush) because the Anchorage school district only required three years for tenure (this was a topic of discussion in multiple classes over the years).
(I ended up going back into the Air Force--I had gotten out after 8 years service--because the people I worked with in the service were smarter, more fun, more interested in education (!), and a hell of a lot more dedicated than 80% of my classmates in these education classes.)
Then when I started co-teaching (a one semester, once a week learning opportunity my university required), I fell in love with the idea of teaching the kids (I co-taught 5th grade), but whenever I was around the other teachers, I got disgusted. None of them wanted to talk about methods, and certainly none of them (except the teacher I worked for) wanted to stay late to develop lesson plans for the next day/week.
Of course, this could just have been a bad school or a bad group of teachers. However, how many potentially good teachers (trying to be modest here, but I think I had something to give the kids, hell I was a male who wanted to teach elementary school!) were turned away from teaching because of this? My God, my math methods class should have given me a hint. Practically none of my classmates knew what a prime number was! Contrast that with my first day of co-teaching (spring semester) the fifth grade: the kids were doing binary addition and subtraction!!!
Oh, and Coach, if dedicating your life to teaching OUR children is too much work for you, I've got an offer you can't refuse. How's 18 hour days, 7 days a week for 120 days straight sound? With the occassional mortar in-coming? Sorry, you won't get summers off, but you will get 30 days vacation a year (sorry, weekends count in that 30) if you can find the time to take them. If you're interested, check out: http://www.airforce.com/ 
Interesting ideas and dialogues. We linked this post yesterday.
What is missing here is the broad consensus that teaching can be called a profession, but that it should function like something else.
1. There is mass-produced turnover in many of our districts and all of our urban districts. What kind of job should someone take for 2 - 5 years and move on from? (that's not a profession)
2. Most of our work is performed for large institutions. There is (relatively) little independent teaching, few self-employed teachers.
3. Ancillary duties. There is no parallel for the wide range of non-teaching duties we are expected to perform in any professional field.
4. Labor-management relations.
5. Necessary educational attainment. In most states a bachelors is sufficient to teach.
6. Less than competent state boards.
7. No broadly accepted measures of success.
8. No system of establishing practices.
9. Pay levels????
10. History. We teachers have not left behind the idea that we are babysitters who can teach some reading too. That this is women's work. That no training is necessary.
Reality is, we are white collar, intellectual workers, who would fare better if our job more closely resembled a profession in several specific ways. But the word is worthless. Teaching matters. Not whether it is professional or not.
And once we agree that teaching does indeed matter, we can talk about changes to teachers condidtions that might improve teaching. Discussion of professionalism is a red herring
Eric wrote:
As mandated by a contract negotiated on behalf of and accepted by the teachers. TMAO's school adopted a memorandum of understanding to improve achievement; what's the deal at your school, Mike?
In Texas there are NO teacher's unions, so that big bad boogieman of the "reform" crowd doesn't exist. We do not have, by law, the right to collective bargaining, so there were no negotians by us or anyone representing us and we were not asked to vote on it.
Matt Johnston wrote:
Teachers every day come up with new ways to teach any subject matter many of which are successful, but that knowledge is not shared, tested again and again on varying students, refined and shared again. That is what Jenny is suggesting.
Yup. But that's not a suggestion, it's an observation. It's an observation I agree with but all it does is take the first step. Why does this phenomenon occur? Observation is usually followed by hypothesis and hypothesis by experimentation. What's Jenny's hypothesis? What's anyone's hypothesis?
Does anyone do research at an ed school that even approximates the scientific method?
Cripes, it's as if the entire profession was frozen at the moment of genesis when school districts and school boards and school superintendents all sprang, fully formed, into existance and any question that even hints at doubt about the sanctity and eternal nature of the smallest detail of the system is an excuse for a ritual cleansing by fire. Galileo'd recognize the situation.
Mike in Texas wrote:
In Texas there are NO teacher's unions, so that big bad boogieman of the "reform" crowd doesn't exist.
Lucky Texas. In other states that big bad boogieman regularly goes out on strike for higher wages and greater benefits when the big bad boogieman can take time out from stressing the importance of an education. A public school education.
We do not have, by law, the right to collective bargaining, so there were no negotiations by us or anyone representing us and we were not asked to vote on it.
You've got to appreciate the irony, and symmetry, of that complaint. You have exactly the same choice as a parent who's not too pleased with the education their kid is getting: pull up stakes and move. If it's good enough for them then why isn't it good enough for you?
And to visit an unchallenged assertion:
The teachers spend a great deal more time in planning than the typical American teacher, sometimes as much as two hours a day.
Really. You're observation? Thanks but that's hardly an unbiased source so let's take a closer look.
The teachers spend a great deal more time in planning than the typical American teacher...
Your observation supported by what other source? Any reason to believe that what you observed wasn't a special case? Any reason to believe you at all?
sometimes as much as two hours a day.
Sometimes? Which particular "sometimes" is that? Every day? Once a week? A year? On the Emperor's birthday?
And why two hours? Mandated by law? A tradition reaching back into antiquity? Pretty good idea? Why not one hour? Or three?
What do Japanese teachers do during those marathon preparation sessions?
That's a bunch of questions Mike. Why don't you just pick one or two to answer. K?
Great, thought-provoking post, Jenny. I've linked (twice actually) and provided some humble thoughts of my own. I'll probably even do a third one.
I think Chris Correa's post comes at one aspect of the question from an interesting perspective.
Commenting by HaloScan
