Critical Question Blog

What Do All Students Need from All Teachers?

2012-03-12T19:18:00.000-07:00

In this Educational Leadership article entitled,Teach Up for Excellence,differentiation guru Carol Ann Tomlinson (University of Virginia) and EDEquityfounder Edwin Lou Javius note that until quite recently, U.S. schools werelegally segregated and unequal based on race. Today, there is still significantracial and economic separation within schools. “The logic behind separatingstudents by what educators perceive to be their ability is that it enablesteachers to provide students with the kind of instruction they need,” sayTomlinson and Javius. “All too often, however, students in lower-levelclassrooms receive a level of education that ensures they will remain at thetail end of the learning spectrum.”

The deepest woundsthat schools inflict on students, they continue, “are wounds of underestimation.We underestimate students when they come to us with skills and experiences thatdiffer from the ones we expected and we conclude they’re incapable of complexwork. We underestimate students when they fall short of expectations becausethey don’t understand the school game and we determine that they lackmotivation. We underestimate them when we allow them to shrink silently intothe background of the action in the classroom. We underestimate them, too, whenwe assume they’re doing well in school because they earn high grades, and wepraise them for reaching a performance level that required no risk orstruggle.”

This is a shame, theysay, because low-achieving students flourish when they’re exposed to high-levelinstruction. We know the human brain is “incredibly malleable, and thatindividuals can nearly always outperform our expectations of them… Virtuallyall students would benefit from the kind of curriculum and instruction we haveoften reserved for advanced learners – that is, curriculum and instructiondesigned to engage students, with a focus on meaning making, problem solving,logical thinking, and transfer of learning.”

These convictionsbring Tomlinson and Javius to seven principles for “teaching up” – that is,creating classrooms that give all students access to high achievement:

• Accept that humandifferences are normal and desirable. “Each person has something of valueto contribute to the group, and the group is diminished without thatcontribution,” say Tomlinson and Javius. “Teachers who teach up create acommunity of learners in which everyone works together to benefit bothindividuals and the group.”

• Develop a growthmindset. This means “doggedly challenging the preconception that highability dwells largely in more privileged students,” say the authors. “Thegreatest barrier to learning is often not what the student knows, but what theteacher expects of the student.” Growth-mindset teachers emphasize hard work,set clear learning goals, and provide support and feedback along the way.

• Work tounderstand students’ cultures, interests, needs, and perspectives.“Teaching any student well means striving to understand how that studentapproaches learning and creating an environment that is respectful of andresponsive to what each student brings to the classroom,” say Tomlinson andJavius.

• Create a base ofrigorous learning opportunities. This includes discipline-specificknowledge and skill expectations, connections with students’ lives,collaboration with peers, looking at different perspectives, and havingstudents create authentic products for real audiences.

• Understandstudents’ varied entry-points and curriculum speed. “Teachers who teach upunderstand that some students may feel racially and culturally isolated intheir classes,” say Tomlinson and Javius. “Therefore, they find multiple waysfor students to display their insights for the group. These teachers understandthat every student needs ‘peacock’ moments of success so classmates accept themas intellectual contributors.”

• Create flexibleclassroom routines and procedures. The trick is to draw on classroomassessments, formal and informal, to accommodate the inevitable range ofstudent needs. “Teachers who teach up carefully select times when the classworks as a whole, when students work independently, and when students work ingroups,” say Tomlinson and Javius. “They teach their students when and how tohelp one another as well as how to guide their own work effectively.”

• Be an analyticalpractitioner. Effective teachers are students of their students. “Theyempower students to teach them, as teachers, what makes students mostsuccessful,” say the authors.

REFERENCE

“TeachUp for Excellence” by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Edwin Lou Javius in Educational Leadership, February 2012(Vol. 69, #5, p. 28-33), http://www.ascd.org.

Blog written by:

KimMarshall, consultant

http://www.marshallmemo.com/

What is Social Emotional Learning for Academic Success?

2012-01-31T11:58:00.000-08:00

pdf

“Focusingon academics while struggling with trauma is like trying to play chess in ahurricane” (Wolpow, Johnson, Hertel, and Kincaid, 2011). Students in theclassroom today are coming to school with more and more complex needs. The dropout rate continues to be a major concern in communities across the nation. Onein five students are living in conditions that expose them to trauma that has adirect impact on their probability of graduating from high school. Researchshows that trauma has a significant impact on brain development and it is nowknown that survival trumps new learning. How do we find time in our high stakesassessment focused classrooms to meet the social emotional needs of ourstudents? We must find the time because social emotional learning is theprimary marker for academic success and graduation.

ComplexTrauma has a dramatic impact on the academic success of students. Thedefinition of Complex Trauma can best be described as the experience ofmultiple or chronic/prolonged, developmentally adverse traumatic events, mostoften of a personal nature (sexual or physical abuse, family violence, war,community violence) and early life onset (WSU Area Health Education Center,2007). With ever-shrinking funding for early childhood agencies, schools arefaced with the challenge of meeting the increasing diverse needs of students.Only one in ten children with a diagnosed mental health disorder ever gettreatment. Only 50% of CPS referrals are investigated while less than 1/3 ofthose referrals receive any services. Meanwhile, all of these students arecoming to school each day.

Severalstudies have taken place over the past several years that provide some veryshocking information. In a study of middle school students in Philadelphia,Johns Hopkins University (2009) found a direct correlation of the following:

Ifa student is:

Failing math or reading
Developing an attendance problem
Developing a behavior problem

Then:

That student has only a 25% chance of graduating from high school.

Thisis an alarming statistic! From this study, if we know this about our kids at anearly age, we must do something different so that we can change their path inorder to help them be successful. In a similar study, Washington StateUniversity Area Health Education Center did an Incidence and Prevalence Studyin 2010. Classroom teachers were surveyed on a random sampling of 2100 studentsin ten elementary schools around Spokane County. Five schools were Title Ischools while five schools were not. In this study, it was discovered that onein 5 students have been exposed to Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE’s). Thattranslates to a conservative figure of 15,000 students in Spokane County. Thestudy showed that there was a direct correlation in the number of ACE’s and theincreased risk of academic failure, severe attendance problems, severe behaviorproblems, and frequent health problems. Nationally, there are roughly 30% ofchildren who experience complex trauma. In poverty areas, this exceeds 50%.Interestingly, our state’s drop out rate hovers at about 30% or 309,000students per year.

Theimpact of complex trauma on brain development is significant. Researchers usedto believe that the brain only developed until about age three. However, newresearch has shown that the brain continues to develop into young adulthood andthat it depends on rich relationships and mastery of emotional responses. Whenchildren experience trauma, their brain often can only function at the verybasic level of fight or flight. There is often a lack of ability to get to thereasoning or emotions part of the brain. Therefore, their ability to learnbecomes hindered by the trauma that has taken over their brain functions.Persistent stress is epidemic in children and places brain development at risk.This can be as high as 30% in the general population and 85% in marginalizedpopulations. If we address this in early childhood and K-12 systems, we have abetter chance of improving childhood development and system success. Manystudents who have survived these early experiences and become resilient, pointto teachers as being the reason for their success (Blodget, Harrington, et al,2010).

Inour high-stakes academic world, schools have been pressed to show results. Thispressure has often come at the expense of addressing the social emotional needsof children. It is too often stated by teachers that they don’t feel they have timeto spend on relationships anymore because there are too many academic demands.Dealing with the social emotional needs of students can often be viewed as“something else on the plate”. I firmly believe that social emotional learningIS the plate on which everything else should be placed. In the absence of afirm foundation in social emotional learning and relationships, academicsuccess becomes an unattainable goal. The role of social emotional learning hasa big impact on the focus of high-stakes testing. We may not be able to controlhow we feel, but we can learn to choose how we act. In his book, Mark Katz(1997) states,

Looking through thetrauma-sensitive lens… Not realizing that children exposed to inescapable,overwhelming stress may act out their pain, that they may misbehave, not listento us, or seek our attention in all the wrong ways, can lead us to punish thesechildren for their misbehavior… if only we knew what happened last night, orthis morning before she got to school, we would be shielding the same childwe’re now reprimanding.

Resiliencymust be the goal for our many students who are functioning in a world oftrauma. Resiliency buffers the effects of trauma. As educators, we must shiftour thinking from “what is wrong” to “what is right” with a child. This is ashift from a deficit model to a strength model. Teachers must find ways toalways empower students and never dis-empower them. We must educate ourchildren with unconditional, positive regard in a safe and caring environment.All students deserve an environment where high expectations are coupled withhigh support and where consistent routines are the norm. It is our imperativethat we help calm the hurricane in order to guide our students to success.

IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER

Keep the focus on the educational mission
Build meaningful relationships

Foundation to support learning and mastery
Engagement to parents

Create safety and predictability
Promote skill development from where students are
Accountability as an essential survival skill
Meaning-making (reasoning and problem-solving)
Development of universal trauma sensitive social emotional learning standards

References:

Anda and Felitti: AdverseChildhood Experiences Study (1995 to Present)

Blodgett,Harrington, et al. (2010). ACEs and theirConsequences in Spokane Elementary Schools (unpublished). WSU Area HealthEducation Center, Spokane, WA.

Johns Hopkins study of Middle School Childrenin Philadelphia (9/09)

Katz, M. (1997), On Playing A Poor HandWell. WW Norton and Company.

Wolpow,Johnson, Hertel, and Kincaid (2009). TheHeart of Teaching and Learning: Compassion, Resiliency, and Academic Success. WashingtonState Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Blog written by:

KevinPeterson, Principal

MidwayElementary School

MeadSchool District

kevin.peterson@mead354.org

What about Student Learning Communities?

2012-01-10T09:31:00.000-08:00

pdf version

Professional learning communities (PLCs) are the topic of many conversations within education: the culture that is imperative for success, the goals we choose to focus on, the protocols we should follow, the structure that must be in place, and the realities that we face. There is an abundance of research I have read to support how PLCs are necessary in improving students’ learning. I myself belong to an amazing PLC (as well as many micro PLCs within my PLC). But my thoughts lately have been on how to take the characteristics of successful PLCs and apply them within the walls of the classroom for students.

How do you create a student learning community? And by that I don’t mean by way of just classroom management, nor do I mean learning time that is strategically organized by the teacher. These are just general necessities within a learning environment. I am now in search of the next level of a learning environment; a classroom atmosphere that will support 21st century learning. The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2011) advocates for a learning environment that encompasses the learning and innovation and life and career skills demonstrated in the Framework for 21st Century Learning. So I constantly ask myself, what are the essential characteristics of a student learning community that would be needed to foster these types of skills?

This Framework is frequently on my mind as my teaching partner, Ann, and I strategically implement new strategies, ideas, and content discovered through our collaborative efforts within our PLCs. As Ann and I heavily value personalized learning and individual learning goals for our students, we send the message everyday to them that “we are in this together.” Ann and I strategically plan learning endeavors that will grasp our students’ attention, establish essential questions that will provoke critical thinking, and collaborate with students to identify individual goals and continuously monitor their progress. Thus, we are finding five “must-haves” within our productive student learning community, as they seem to have a direct positive impact on student progress. These “must-haves” also seem to be facilitating an environment that allows us to naturally integrate in the 21st century skills as we discover ways to do so.

Five Components for Student Learning Communities

Respect: Students should learn to appreciate the diversity within their learning community.

Ann’s and my overarching goal is meeting students where they are and addressing their individual needs by way of their learning styles and multiple intelligences (Gardner, 2011). Students learn to appreciate each other as learners through the discussions and celebrations of our unique abilities, characteristics, and personalities. Overall, students have the understanding that we may all be in different places with a specific target or goal, but we benefit by working together, sharing knowledge and expertise, and conversing throughout each day.

Retention: Students should understand that true learning is when you can retrieve the information.

You should be able to pull knowledge out of long-term memory and apply it in new situations, make connections to previously learned knowledge, and continue to build upon one’s personal schema. So the mantra in our multiage classroom is “learning is remembering.” We use Marilee Sprenger’s 7 Steps of Memory—reach, reflect, recode, reinforce, rehearse, review, and retrieve—with our students so they can understand the structure of learning (2005). We now even use two of the steps (recoding and reflecting) as thinking strategies, which coexist with metacognition, visualizing, determining importance, synthesizing, etc. With the understanding of retention, students have a daily purpose which is no longer to “sit and get” but rather “go out and gather.”

Responsibility: Students should learn to be advocates for their own learning.

Learning is a huge responsibility and requires a “Backpack of Strategies,” or various life skills. Within our classroom the teachers are not a student’s first resource. We encourage students to be problem solvers and find a solution that fits their needs. Our purpose is for students to become efficient in setting goals, monitoring progress, managing their time, and contributing to the student learning community. We want them to understand and experience that learning is an ongoing process, rather than a disjointed set of tasks.

Resources: Students should learn what resources best fit their needs as learners.

To empower learners is to provide them access to a variety of tools and resources. Students must learn what specific tools they have at their fingertips, and they must be taught how to use the resources effectively. However, tools are meant to be utilized, not sit on a shelf or table. They need to discover how to choose a tool that will best fit them as a learner, as well as help them accomplish their task or project. Exposure to various resources allows learners the ability to dissect and devour their goals in order to obtain success.

Reality: Students should be made aware of the skills they will need as they move forward into the 21st century.

Technological tools, media, and communication should be a part of students’ daily lives. Students should be exposed to the skills they will need in their future. Their real-world success depends heavily on their educational experience. Students also need to understand the reality of how our moment to moment choices can directly or indirectly affect ourselves and other people. When we are mindful we can approach each moment successfully, but making poor choices affects the common student learning community goals and the personal growth of the individual.

I have witnessed these components to be beneficial and aid in the success of each and every student within our classroom. Through offering one another respect we can encourage each other’s growth. Thus, supporting the overarching objective of the community to retain information, whether it is regarding content-based knowledge or the use of specific strategies, in order to build our knowledge base and collectively grow. While on the journey for retention, each individual in the classroom must recognize their personal responsibility to the learning community and themselves. They must understand that our choices can positively or negatively affect others, but the choice is always our own. As students work towards meeting their goals, they must be aware of the resources around them and take every opportunity to self-sufficiently utilize them, yet share them with others within the community. And finally, students must be mindful of the reality they are facing within the world today and feel a sense of urgency to collaborate, work, and create within a diverse community.

Overall, they need to believe in and act upon the message, “We are in this together.”

REFERENCES

Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Book Groups.

Sprenger, M. (2005). How to teach so students remember. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Post written by Celina Brennan, a 3/4/5 multiage teacher at Salnave Elementary School in the Cheney Public Schools district and recipient of Washington State ASCD’s 2011 Outstanding Young Educator Award. She is a district leader in literacy and has opened her classroom to educators as a model of differentiated instruction that meets the social, emotional, and academic needs of all learners. Connect with Brennan on the ASCD EDge® social network and on her blog, written with her teaching partner Ann Ottmar.

How Can Secondary Schools Respond Effectively to Our Students that “Get It” and those that “Don’t Get It” During Challenging Times?

2011-11-03T07:18:00.000-07:00

Printable Copy

Aseducational leaders we want ALL students to leave our institutions having maximizedtheir potential to be successful in the future. Particularly in these challenging times we must find ways to leverageour available resources to the fullest extent in order to bolster studentlearning. In the current era ofincreasing public expectations, political uncertainty, shrinking budgets and increasingworkloads that impact all stakeholders, a growing number of secondary schoolsare taking the proactive step to implement a new student intervention modeldeveloped specifically to meet our current challenges with courage and hope forthe future without impacting educational budgets.

Thisemerging, systematic, customized, data-driven remediation model has shownpromise for improving learning results among a wide spectrum of the studentpopulation. The program has beenlaunched in a number of public secondary schools under various “brand names”. The more common identifiers are CORE/FLEX,CORE/Choice and The Choice Program. Thecornerstone of this style of intervention is the opportunity to earn access to unstructuredtime as a motivator for students to work toward proficient academic performance. In most schools this segment of time is knownas the “Choice Session”. This istypically a 20 to 25 minute segment of time placed after second period, appearingon the bell schedule between three and five days per week depending on theschool.

Schoolsimplementing the Choice Program collect data on student performance atthree-week intervals and use this information to support students in a varietyof ways. Students with one or more “D”or “F” grades are assigned to mandatory remediation often called “CORE”. Students performing at or above standard (all“A”, “B” and “C” grades) have earned the privilege to decide how they will useeach Choice Session. These students aresaid to have “FLEX” or “Choice” Status. At the end of each three-week period student achievement is evaluatedagain and students are reassigned to CORE or Choice based on their current individualacademic standing.

Staffin Choice Program buildings must be assigned clearly defined roles andresponsibilities in order to support the overall intervention structure and meetindividual student needs. Certificatedstaff members are responsible for maintaining accurate information on studentprogress, posting grades in a timely manner at transitions between data cyclesand assisting students attending the various support and enrichmentsessions. Classified staff members managethe collection and organization of data while encouraging staff to meet variousdeadlines. Administrators use studentperformance data to assign students to CORE classes with intentionality,monitor areas of campus open to Choice Students and balance equity of theprogram among certificated teachers.

Typically,students are assigned to a CORE teacher with whom the student has earned abelow standard grade (or at least a teacher that instructs the same subject). Mandatory attendance is taken and monitored byone of several electronic information support systems used by most schoolstoday. CORE teachers offer targetedassistance to move students toward meeting standards. Students have the opportunity to make upmissing work, receive additional instruction, to preview upcoming lessons, to discussrecent discipline/attendance missteps, to participate in one on one counselingsessions and monitor academic progress. Thespecific strategies used on a daily basis are applied at the discretion of the supervisingstaff member in order to better meet the needs of the group. The directive nature of CORE helps avoid the difficultyof accessing struggling students outside the normal school day.

Studentsearning grades at or above 70% in all classes have earned Choice Status. Individuals in this category have theopportunity to decide how they will use Choice Sessions to benefit theirlearning. Choice Students have a varietyof options available to them designed to support enrichment; such as computerlabs, open library, AP seminars, content-specific learning labs, careerexploration, post high school program investigation and guided study halls. Students may also utilize common areas of thecampus to study, socialize and relax. Students must remain on campus and stay in the session they choose forthe entire enrichment period. Attendancefor Choice Sessions is taken via sign in sheets in all locations with theexception of the school commons. Withsignificant numbers of students motivated to earn Choice Status, it allows COREsupport groups to be small and manageable in size.

Manyschools today struggle with assisting cohorts of students that have challengesbeyond typical adolescent deficiencies in maturity, organizational skills orwork ethic that result in one or two grades below standard. When a student is experiencing limitedperformance across a wide range of classes, more significant intervention isrequired. In the Choice Program the ideaof Permanent CORE groups has evolved to facilitate improvement with these moretroubled students. In Permanent COREgroups, students are assigned to a particular teacher voluntarily. Students served by this type of affiliationstay with their teacher regardless of changes in achievement status as the academicyear unfolds. The perception being thatstudents experiencing significant “outside of school” challenges contributingto multiple failing grades need the one on one relationship and interpersonal consistencyoffered in this alternative setting. Inmost cases, teachers working with a Permanent CORE group have also volunteeredfor the position and find meeting this type of challenge rewarding.

Mostaspects of the Choice Program are tangible and measurable to allstakeholders. Choice-Style intervention programscan be described in words. Program goalscan be articulated. Various types ofinterventions can be outlined. However,it is difficult to communicate in written form how dynamic and adaptable ChoiceStyle response to intervention is when applied intentionally and professionally. In each new school where it is adopted theprogram takes on a certain “life” as the data-driven nature of the process allowsfor targeted modification to be implemented to impact students at regularintervals over the entire academic year. Institutions can review local capabilities and challenges to develop facetsof Choice Intervention playing to their strengths and mitigating weaknesses. The Choice Model is a relatively simple andelegant foundation upon which schools may find ways to weave new supportstructures designed to reach individual students, assist them in reaching theirpotential, and reduce the impact of past challenges on current learning.

Inschools piloting the Choice Model significant gains have been made in reducing “D”and “F” grades. Discipline referrals havetypically trended lower. Schools haveseen improved results with regard to the number of students taking and passingAP National Board Exams and the vast majority of stakeholders seem pleased withthe program conceptually, logistically and in terms of overall performance.

Choice-Styleintervention is not an instant fix for the significant and varied challengesfaced by public education today. However, institutions looking for a systematic, data-driven andadaptable response to intervention that meets the needs of both the highlycapable and the progressing learner without additional program costs, may findthe Choice Program to be of value. Inchallenging times we must not forget that our students need our support andenrichment more than ever. We must offerhope for today in order to meet the challenges of tomorrow.

TodWitzel is a Social Studies instructor at Enumclaw High Schoolwith over 20 years of teaching experience. Tod has recently authored a teacher field guide directed at assistingstaff in working through the process of developing, implementing and refining aChoice-Style intervention model in a secondary school for the first time. Parties interested in further information maycontact the author directly via email at: studentsmaketherightchoice@comcast.net

Is Engagement of the Whole Child a Sustainable Educational Practice?

2011-10-20T13:22:00.000-07:00

Printable Copy

Educating the whole child is undeniably important in producing healthy,safe, engaged, supported, and challenged students who become productivecitizens in our society. However, severecuts to school funding have forced many districts to make difficult choices inwhich programs to support. Often times,programs that support the development of the whole child are sacrificed inorder to maintain the continuation of support for the core academic curriculum. With diminished funding to school programs,can the practice of “engagement” of the whole child remain a sustainableeducational practice?

Wiggins (1993) stated, “Education involves working with the wholechild. Students can get excited by what the world offers, by what types ofactivities they are provided in school.” (p. 69) Rather than just presenting information andexpecting that it will be absorbed, the astute educator understands how tomotivate the learner to work hard. Increased motivation occurs when students see the connection of their learningto the broader community.

Activities that engage the whole child often take students out of theschool building to experience real world learning or invite experts into theclassroom to impart their knowledge onto the students. These formats may be too costly to sustain aseducational strategies. Shrewd educatorslook at their own instructional practice for ways students can engage withothers, challenge their intellect, contribute service to their communities, andencompass participation in extra-curricular activities.

Classrooms with a sense of high energy seemingly support engagement ofthe whole child. Many educators haverestructured their teaching practice to ensure students opportunities to workwith their classmates in cooperative learning structures. “Students find working with classmates to befar more engaging than individual effort.” (Danielson, 2009, p. 38) Also, providing students with an audience oftheir peers as they present their class work often brings out their best performance. Students care deeply about the opinions oftheir peers. Students are also driven byan innate curiosity about the world in which they live. Educators utilizing inquiry-based learningchallenge their student’s intellect to understand incongruous events, solveproblems, or understand anomalies. Skilled educators are adept at crafting their lessons to ensure alllevels of intellect are challenged throughout the curriculum. Students in high energy classrooms areengaged through creative and careful lesson planning and opportunities tocollaborate with their peers.

Students participating in volunteer projects, internships, or servicelearning see themselves as contributing members of the community. Collecting donations for local charities,becoming pen-pals with deployed soldiers or the elderly in convalescent homes,establishing an ink cartridge recycle program or helping at a local shelter area few examples of sustainable student learning connected to the broadercommunity. Students engaged in theseactivities are intrinsically motivated to help others’. They see firsthand how their efforts atschool benefit local organizations, individuals or groups of people.

Providing students with opportunities to engage in extra-curricularactivities is an effective way to engage the whole child. Some students participate in sports and finearts activities after school. However,the cost of participating in these activities is prohibitive to otherstudents. Many schools find ways toprovide extra-curricular activities at their schools through the use ofcommunity and parent volunteers, donations, and grant proposals. Working with local colleges and universitiescan provide a win-win benefit for pre-service teachers and local schools. Schools that are not able to tap into localresources look among their own talent pool to provide instruction. School schedules purposely include enrichmentclasses during the school day. Classroomteachers, instructional assistants, and other school staff share their talentsand hobbies with various groups of students. Within the school or out in thecommunity, many adults are eager to share their resources, skills and expertisewith students to support the development of the whole child.

Developing healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged studentsis paramount in producing citizens that contribute positively to oursociety. As each component of the wholechild works in tandem, “engagement” is the area that motivates students tolearn. Understanding the importance ofsustaining engagement of the whole child, classroom teachers are re-designingtheir instruction, schools encourage students to provide service to theircommunities, and school staffs take it upon themselves to createextra-curricular opportunities. As schooldistricts work within the constraints of reduced funding, schools are findinginnovative ways to educate the whole child.

Danielson, C. (2009). TalkAbout Teaching! Leading Professional Conversations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Wiggins, G. P. (1993). AssessingStudent Performance: Exploring the Purpose and Limits

Testing. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Karen Johnson, Principal

Evergreen Forest Elementary School

North Thurston Public Schools

kjohnson4@nthurston.k12.wa.us

How can we be more like Bob?

2011-10-11T07:11:00.000-07:00

I had the opportunity lately to travel back to Washington,DC as part of ASCD’s legislative committee. Our sixteen-member committee spent a day on the Hill, meeting withrepresentatives from the Department of Education, Democrat and Republican aidesfrom the House Education and Workforce Committee and the Senate Health,Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. This was a day for us to hear their perspectives in prepared remarks, followedby open question and answer sessions. Thenext day involved an intense committee work session alone at headquarters,where we debrief what we heard, and begin the crafting of ASCD’s legislativeagenda to be revealed in the spring.

In recent years, thefocus has been on reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act,(ESEA), nicknamed No Child Left Behind in 2001, and is now four yearsoverdue. This year, the majority partyis different in each chamber, and the committee chairs have differentapproaches to reauthorization. TheSenate chair wants full-scale reauthorization, and the House chair ispreferring to address one aspect at a time. As we listened to our speakers, it became readily apparent that therewas far more similarities than differences in what all of the sides wanted tofix about the law. Supporting careerand college readiness standards, (including the Common Core), makingaccountability more flexible and less punitive, and addressing teachereffectiveness rather than teacher licensure were clear themes.

On this particular September day, President Obama held apress conference announcing the Department of Education’s waiver plan. In it, he stated, “Our kids only get one shotat a decent education. They cannot afford to wait any longer. So, given thatCongress cannot act, I am acting”. Thiswas a ‘throw down’ to Congress – which made the rest of the day quiteelectric. Although the Department, and House,and Senate committees had far more in common than different about thereauthorization, they appeared to be at a stalemate – again.

As the day ended, we remarked about the apparent lack ofcollaboration and dialogue amongst the lawmakers, and discussed nuances ofpolicy. We walked out of the Houseoffice building, and into a charter bus to take us back to the hotel. It was there that our day changed.

Bob was a large man that appeared to be in his late sixtiesor early seventies. His hands weregripping the wheel while he waited for us to board – but his body was dancingto the Isley Brothers. As wepessimistically boarded that simple bus, we were immediately engaged byBob. Soon, we were singing and dancingin our seats, and enjoying the moment. Shortly after departing though, our bus began to experiencedifficulties. We could go a few blocks,or maybe a mile, only to break down again. Even through this hardship, the music was playing, and Bob was presentin the moment. His radio calls back to hisheadquarters were like stand-up comedy, and he had a way of keeping us calm andenlisting us as co-problem solvers.

What is the lesson? It is easy to get lost in the complexities of education. What is the algorithm used to calculate safe harbor? Must we defer to supplemental educational serviceproviders as a mandatory intervention, or is it a promotion of untested privatebusiness with public dollars? A growthmodel is a better way to gauge student achievement, but what are the detailsand nuances of a potential model and is it fair? Who is in power in DC, who is running forre-election, and how does that influence decision-making? But, despite the ‘noise’ of all of these issues,the real question we need to focus upon, is how can we help our students (andourselves) be more like Bob? How canthey find a role in society in which they can find joy? How can they be of service, no matter theirprofession, to their fellow man or woman? How can our education system keep its focus on what is important and noton distractions? How can we attend to the needs of the whole child with awell-rounded, high quality education?

I can assure you, that the following day was highlyinfluenced by Bob. When you see theagenda this spring, you will likely see words such as ‘citizenship’ and‘statesmanship’. By this, we don’tnecessarily mean the study of governments, but what it means to take care ofone another, show compassion, to find joy in our contributions, and to truly reason together to make our country abetter place for everyone. Reauthorization of ESEA is critical to us on a dailybasis, but I challenge you, as I am challenged, to try to remember Bob – andwhat our mission is all about.

Dr. Becky Cooke

Superintendent

Deer Park School District

Becky.cooke@dpsdmail.org

Where are the Instructions?

2011-08-23T14:15:00.000-07:00

"I never teach my pupils, I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn," Albert Einstein.

One night in early May, my 21-year-old son John and I began work on a website using an open-source software called Word Press to promote my new book Navigating the New Pedagogy: Six Principles that Transform Teaching. I had consulted with a few web design specialists about pricing, but I opted instead to try and design a site myself so that I could make modifications when I pleased.

Within a matter of minutes that evening, I had opened an account with Host Monster, secured a domain name, and downloaded Word Press to their server. When I opened Word Press, though, despite its claim of being user friendly, I was confused.

“Where are the instructions?” I asked aloud. I have experience using Blackboard for online teaching; it just came with extensive training.

Some rights reserved by e-magic

“Let me take over for a while,” John responded, and he scooted his chair before my PC. With John in the lead, Word Press slowly revealed itself. He’d add one feature. Delete it if it didn’t work. When John had a question, he framed a word search on Google and usually found a document that answered it. My turn came to take over. Through a process of trial and error, we worked together to have a simple, multi-page website posted by 1 a.m.

Where are the instructions for today’s technology? My iPod didn’t come with any; neither did my new iPad. For our students, their technology world (so central to their lives) is largely instruction-less. Today’s youth experiment and tinker with cell phones, video games or their Facebook pages until they construct their own understanding of how it functions. When stumped, they may turn to a friend. Nonetheless, they are typically engaged throughout the process.

In contrast, our schools are places that often come with instructions; knowledge is dispensed. Students are often told math concepts rather than discovering these ideas for themselves. Science lectures deliver concepts; experiments reinforce rather than enlighten. Students are given traits of quality writing instead of analyzing authors’ styles to discover the techniques for themselves. Our schools often fail to engage students in the thinking/problem-solving skills that they do so well.

In my time conducting professional development for Spokane Public Schools, I have had the good fortune to observe many of the best and brightest teachers in our district. To a fault, each of these teachers used analytical/exploratory strategies whenever possible in their classrooms. In my book, I refer to this as “Turning Bloom’s on Its Head.” In this strategy, teachers create activities – often collaborative ones – where students need to analyze and evaluate then synthesize what they learn into meaningful knowledge and comprehension. In other words, they use higher level thinking skills to create understanding. Since the traditional method of teaching is to use lower level thinking skills in order to access the higher level ones, these strategies are essentially “Turning Blooms on Its Head.” This is exactly what students do in their daily lives.

Colleague John O’Dell uses these strategies regularly in the high school social studies activities he assigns. When he taught the concept of political action committees (PACs), for example, he opted to build student understanding using a discovery activity. Rather than explain the power of PACs, he had students research politicians’ campaign contributors for the largest donors, investigate them, and compare and contrast the donors’ interests with the politicians’ voting records. Students then had to draw conclusion about how campaign money impacts the political system. In other words, students used higher level thinking skills to build comprehension of this important concept. Students also built a deeper understanding than had they just read the information in a text book.

“This kind of instruction is real. It’s engaging,” O’Dell explained. “When I do these activities, I validate students’ ability to think. Kids like to feel smart and do activities that are meaningful. We need kids who can think about information and make sense of it.”

One Spokane Public Schools middle-school science activity quantified how powerful this instructional method can be. One set of classrooms taught the physics concepts of falling objects using the traditional method: read the text and do a few activities. A second set of classrooms employed hands-on experiments using coffee filters and balls dropped below motion sensors; students had to create a hypothesis, test it using this science apparatus, and then revise it if necessary after conducting their experiments. In other words, students had to construct their own understanding using their skills of analysis and synthesis. On district assessments measuring the concept of falling objects, classrooms that used these constructivist strategies scored on an average 25-percent higher than those that used traditional teaching methods.

If we are having trouble engaging students in our schools, it may be because we are not playing to their strengths. Teachers are lecturing or demonstrating to students who often have experience figuring things out for themselves. By turning traditional teaching on its head, we not only engage students in constructing their own understanding, we get them engaged in school as well.

Jeff Halstead, educational trainer, staff developer, and writer
National Board-certified English teacher
Ferris High School
Spokane Public Schools
JeffreyHa@spokaneschools.org

Halstead’s new book New Pedagogy: Six Principles that Transform Teaching is available through major online booksellers. He will present a workshop entitled “Empowering Students through Transparent Assessment Practices” at the October WSASCD/OSPI conference. Visit his website at The New Pedagogy.com.

Could a Single Word or Phrase Provide Encouragement Right When it is Needed Most?

2011-06-07T08:32:00.000-07:00

Some rights reserved by swimparallel

“Never, Never, Never Give Up…” I have purchased this sign for many people over the past several years. I have also seen this sign in a few classrooms around our school district. As a teacher, coach, principal and superintendent (and father) I have known of the importance of helping others see their potential and even beyond. I get my energy and enthusiasm from supporting others. I am not used to being the recipient of this support. A couple weeks ago, however, I received it.

Running a marathon is a humbling experience. It's 26.2 miles and several hours....so much time to think. There are moments in everyone's marathon experience that you wonder whether your legs can take another step. For me, it was between miles 18-21.

The Friday before the marathon, I received several cards of encouragement from family and friends. I was now the recipient of support and honestly wasn't quite prepared. I read through the cards right before falling asleep knowing that in a few short hours, I would be running and running and running. Below are a few excerpts:

I know you are very nervous for tomorrow, but what is the reason behind your nervousness? You are prepared and you can run 26 miles in your sleep. Just go out there and run like you know how to. In football, we are told to play with authority because we know what to do and we know what will happen. So tomorrow, you must run with authority for the same reason.

May your heart be blessed in quietness and confidence. May your heart also be strong enough to get you through this marathon run!

Allow yourself to be lifted up.

With every step of your marathon, you will encourage all those around you in everything big and small.

Run, Mike, Run.

When it became overwhelmingly difficult…, when my quads hurt worse than I could ever remember…, when I saw my wife, Britt, taking pictures with our car just a few steps away (I could just sneak into the passenger spot!)…, when I thought, "There is no way I can do eight more miles....." ....it was then that quotes from the cards entered my mind....Run with authority...be lifted....run, Mike run. For three miles, I pushed these quotes to the front of my mind. For three miles, I struggled to put one foot in front of the other. I kept myself focused on reading the cards in my mind....Run with authority...be lifted....run, Mike run.

Although, it is hard to describe, I don't remember much of miles 21 -26. They just happened. I do remember the last .2, though. It was wonderful to see Britt. I couldn't help but smile. I could really see the finish line, not just imagine it like I had for the previous 26 miles.

I often write cards and letters to family/friends, staff and students after an event has occurred letting them know how impressed I was or how terrific I thought they did, etc. I would say about 80-90% of the time I write these after-event notes and only 10-20% before an event. I wonder if I might need to reverse this habit a bit.

If the friends and family who wrote me cards would have waited until after the marathon to write me a note, I wonder what I would have used during miles 18-21. What does this mean for the students we work with? Are you like me and write notes and talk to students after an accomplishment? Could our words and actions help them more if we were to offer them before an AP test, state assessment, presentation, or activity/sporting event? Could a single word or phrase help them right at the time they need it the most? I wonder how we might support our students and colleagues with authority before an important moment in their lives.

Mike Nelson
Superintendent
Enumclaw School District
michael.nelson@enumclaw.wednet.edu

What is Quality Learning for the Information Age? Rethinking how we create Learning Environments

2011-05-24T06:54:00.000-07:00

In the 21st century, the body of knowledge humankind has at its disposal is growing exponentially. The “half-life” of knowledge continues to shrink as the overall expansion of knowledge occurs. Put another way, this means that what may be considered the “truth” or correct information one day may become outdated and replaced the next day. Just look at a world map from a couple of years ago and compare it to today. Now expand this idea to science, art, literature, mathematics, music, engineering, technology, etc. and you will quickly see that simply teaching students what they need to “know” doesn’t cut it anymore.

Our students must be able to “think” in a process where they are perpetually learning and un-learning in an ongoing cycle rather than simply learning to know. Therefore, learning environments that are built on a teacher/textbook centered learning model that expects students to memorize rapidly decaying information that is disconnected from the learners’ life trajectory or fails to engage the learner in meaningful high cognitive demanding work is at best a futile educational effort and at worst a monumental disservice to the learner and to our society. In order for quality learning to prepare students for a rapidly changing world, the learning environments we create for students must also change.

To achieve this end, our practice as educators must change to support this shift in learner needs. The educational opportunity our students need today must be more of a learning platform that assists them to learn how to think independently rather than simply perpetuate the factory learning model designed to transfer knowledge from the teacher or textbook to the student as if their minds are some sort of biological file cabinet. To do this, we must create powerful, internally motivating learning environments that harness the energy behind every learner’s innate human need to learn. This work must begin with a redefinition of our roles as teachers from being simply deliverers of content (sage on the stage) to seeing ourselves as learning environment leaders (guide on the side) who use the content to develop independent life-long learners. Put simply, quality learning environments must be refocused to help students learn how to think rather than learn what to know.

A Learning to Think classroom (or better seen as a learning team rather than as a classroom) must be focused on assisting all learners to learn to think by using the content as compared to learning to know the content. The content remains vitally important but for a very different reason than we previously thought. Think of the content as more of a learning topography that the learners immerse themselves into so as to learn to think and thereby be able to learn anything (beyond the content used) independently of the teacher. In other words, the content is a means to an end rather than the end itself. A Learning to Think classroom is: 1) Designed to consistently engage the learner in both real and meaningful learning endeavors that expect the learner to have cognition beyond the memorization level; 2) Allow learners to receive and add on to multiple flows of information within and around the learning targets/objectives; and 3) Be built upon a foundation of trust that everyone within the learning team (learner and leader) has an innate need to own their own learning.

In conclusion, as educators we need to have a shift in thinking around how we create learning environments for our students. Failing to do so is similar to trying to teach someone how to drive a car by only seeing the image from the “rear view mirror”. As leaders of learning environments, we ourselves must look through the “windshield” and into the future and recognize that all signs point to a rapidly changing body of knowledge that our students must face. In other words, our students must become independent learners (i.e. thinkers) for a lifetime rather than simply knowers of information. This outcome can only occur if we ourselves as educators examine and change as needed first so as to create quality learning environments that are built upon learning how to think. Then and only then will our students have a real opportunity for quality learning for the information age.

Mark Mansell, Ed.D.
Superintendent
LaCenter School District
Mark.mansell@lacenterschools.org
(360) 263-2131

What's Happening with the Teacher Principal Evaluation Pilot? Wenatchee School District's Experience

2011-05-10T07:33:00.000-07:00

Wenatchee School District is one of eight school districts and one educational service district chosen to participate in the state Teacher Principal Evaluation Pilot (TPEP). We felt we were prepared for the task, since we had recently invested six years of work creating and implementing a new teacher evaluation system in our district. We believed the knowledge and work from that process would contribute greatly to the new state model. Also, we wanted to be part of the process, not just the recipient of a model handed to us.

The Law
In March of 2010, the Washington State legislature passed Engrossed Second Senate Bill 6696 (E2SSB 6696), a law requiring

The revision of the teacher and principal evaluation system.
A pilot project that would provide funding to selected districts that would then develop systems that would align to the new requirements.
All districts in the state of Washington are required to adopt evaluation systems that align to the new requirements by the 2013-14 school year.

The law requires pilot districts to create new teacher and principal evaluation models that must be aligned to eight new criteria using a four-tiered rubric. It requires the identification of, or development of, appropriate multiple measures of student growth. It also requires professional development programs and evaluator training for teachers and principals. The new tools must be piloted and evaluated during the 2011-12 school year. A state Teacher Principal Evaluation Pilot (TPEP) Steering Committee was formed to manage the process.

The Process
In Wenatchee, we formed three committees: a Steering Committee made up of the superintendent, four administrators and three teachers; a Teacher Committee with five administrators and six teachers, and a Principal Committee with six administrators and five teachers.

Among committee goals were to

Develop evaluation tools that reflect current research and promote professional growth.
Review the current tools and retain those aspects that are effective and eliminate or revamp those aspects that are not.
Build off of previous work and experiences.
Effectively use multiple measures of student growth for building/instructional improvement.
Develop tools that are truly beneficial, not just the fulfillment of a requirement

We brought in Scott Poirier, formerly Assistant Superintendent for secondary education at the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), currently the K-12 Education Coordinator for the Washington Education Association (WEA), to work with us on the creation of evaluation rubrics.

Then the committees rolled up their sleeves and got to work. The Teacher Committee began aligning existing district evaluation descriptors to the new criteria set forth by the state. They created new descriptors and identified evidence and measures for evaluating performance criteria and student growth.

The Principal Committee identified research-based characteristics of effective principal evaluation to create rubrics keeping with the characteristics and standards of effective leadership. They wrote the ‘gold standard’ for each criterion and aligned indicators to each gold standard, then differentiated the language for each of the four tiers.

Communication and transparency are an important part of the process. Face-to-face is always best, so we meet with building staffs for interactive dialogs. We also have a website rich in information, including budget (we were allotted $115,000 in grant funds to support our work.), goals, meeting minutes, committee members, links to state resources, and newsletters. We mail print newsletters and send eNewsletters to the community, and use email to communicate with all staff.

In January, the Steering Committee attended a TPEP-sponsored conference in Spokane, where we submitted the rubrics-in-process to national education expert, Charlotte Danielson. At this juncture the state TPEP steering committee recognized the importance of including instructional frameworks in conjunction with evaluation tools. Wenatchee has been working with Robert J. Marzano, PhD, a leading researcher in education, for our instructional framework. We began matching evaluation criterion to the Marzano framework. We also began work on determining a summative rating.

Currently we have posted our rubrics on our district Evaluation Pilot website and are preparing to submit our rubrics to the TPEP Steering Committee.

Lessons Learned So Far
One of the biggest lessons we’ve learned is that a collaborative working relationship is a must. We also realized that we didn’t know what we didn’t know, so technical support from WEA and the OSPI has been extremely beneficial. The work of finding the ‘cut-line’ has been challenging. We learned that an instructional framework is critical for creating a teacher evaluation tool, and that implementation of the new model will change the way we look at professional development. Professional development will now align to the instructional framework, where in the past professional development focused more on content-specific instructional strategies.

Challenges – Now and in the Future
We’re squeezing a tremendous amount of work into a very short period of time. We have the challenge of changing our culture to provide accountability, while supporting and ensuring growth. Developing a method to use data in determining impact on student learning has been a challenge. Constructing a summative rating has been a challenge, but thanks to some great math minds on our committees, we’re feeling confident about our method.

What’s Next

We are developing a pilot year plan and beginning the process of selecting fifty teachers from a pool of teachers who apply to participate. All principals will be evaluated using the new rubric.
We are creating a Professional Development Plan for use of the new tools, including calibration training, and we are developing a plan for evaluating the new tools.
In June 2011, OSPI will collect and analyze materials from the pilot districts and make recommendations to the Legislature regarding the adoption of one or more of the systems for use by districts in the state. We will pilot the new evaluation system in 2011-2012. We’ll evaluate, modify, and pilot again in 2012-2013. The following school year, 2013-2014, we will launch the full implementation of the new evaluation system in all school districts in Washington State.

It’s a task whose time has come. Creating the best possible schools is the ultimate outcome of effective evaluation. Positively impacting teacher and principal quality and student learning is the gold standard we are striving to achieve.

Brian Flones, Superintendent
Wenatchee School District
flones.b@mail.wsd.wednet.edu
(509) 663-8161

Wenatchee TPEP Team Interviews from WA TPEP on Vimeo.

What is Quality Teaching?

2011-04-12T08:44:00.000-07:00

Nearly every day I read something, observe a classroom, have a conversation, or spend time in reflection, which then causes to me to see the answer to the question: “What is quality teaching?” in yet a new way. My life as an educator began in 1962 when I started “Miss Becky’s School,” the summer after my freshman year in high school, which means I have been doing this for about fifty years. So, in this short article I can’t take you down the winding path that would explain how I have come to define quality teaching, but I would like to invite you into the thoughts that are rattling around in my head in the spring of 2011. I am now working with a high school as a school improvement consultant and thus have the opportunity to define, in practical terms, what quality teaching is and ways to bring about more of it.

There are two thinkers, Richard Elmore and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who are currently in my mind as I help this high school refine their focus on quality teaching and learning. I am fortunate to be working with building leaders (administration, instructional coach, and teacher leaders) who are willing to invest the time to observe, listen, talk and then act upon new and refined ideas about quality instruction.

First, we are spending time digging into Instructional Rounds in Education: A Network Approach to Improving Teaching and Learning by Richard Elmore. Study the three figures below for a minute and think about their implications for improving instruction.

First, Elmore argues that to improve instruction one must focus on the “Instructional Core,”. However, one cannot just focus on an element of the core; all elements must be addressed. That is, one must simultaneously work to improve the teacher’s skills and knowledge, the students’ level of engagement and participation in learning, and the rigor of the content being taught.

Elmore also notes that in most attempts to improve instruction, we have not focused enough attention on the content or the role of students.

The way one evaluates whether there are improvements in the three elements of the “Instructional Core,” and student learning, is to analyze the task that students are actually doing.

Task predicts performance
What predicts performance is what student are actually doing...the instructional task is the actual work that students are asked to do during the process of instruction-no what teacher think they are asking student to do or what the official curriculum says that the students are asked to do..."

Susan Perkins Weston on the Prichard blog sums up what Elmore means by increasing the level of tasks kids do in classrooms,

An Elmore catch phrase is that "task predicts performance." I think I understand that. If you ask me to peel vegetables, that's only going to give me a small step toward becoming a competent cook. If you assign me to walk around the block daily; that will never get me into shape for a marathon. And, if you give me worksheets and drills and lists of facts to remember, that isn't going to equip me to analyze demanding texts, build strong arguments from credible evidence, or tackle serious math and science challenges effectively. http://prichblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/in-teams-and-with-tasks-richard-elmore.html

I have had many conversations with the school’s leadership team to get clear about these ideas and we have visited classrooms to test Elmore’s theory. Now, the leadership team has begun to think about how our reading and observations can be put into action in the next round of school improvement strategies.

The other thinker we are spending time with this spring is Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, author of Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Csikszentmihalyi’s work addresses the emotional challenges caused by increasing the demands on both school personnel and students. The connections between Csikszentmihalyi and Richard Elmore are also very explicit. For years Elmore has argued that if we are going to ask teachers to dramatically increase student performance, we must provide significant professional development.

Since we are increasing the demands on teachers and students, we must also increase the skills of those asked to perform at higher levels. We need to provide the skills and knowledge training for both adults and kids and not just expect them to know how to reach higher levels of achievement. We want both our school personnel and students to be in the “flow channel” at the highest level. If we expect that, we need to be mindful of what happens if there is too much demand without increasing skills and also what happens if there is not enough demand.(We can see the area where flow occurs. Too much challenge or skill and we’d move out of flow. Too little and we wouldn’t care enough to keep going.)

This is merely a snap-shot of the deep work of Elmore and Csikszentmihalyi. I encourage you to read the original work and enter the conversations around this work that can be found on the internet.

Rebecca J. Downey, Technical Assistance Contractor
The Office of Superintendent of Instruction
rjdowney@comcast.net

The original texts:

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row, 1990.

Elmore, Richard. Instructional Rounds in Education: A Network Approach to Improving Teaching and Learning. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press, 2009.

A start on the internet conversation:

Richard Elmore:
http://egusdsecondaryed.pbworks.com/f/PA+ROUNDS.ppt
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/leadership/elmore.html http://prichblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/in-teams-and-with-tasks-richard-elmore.html

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi:
http://www.slideshare.net/trevor.vangorp/design-emotion-flow4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXIeFJCqsPs http://www.performancecoachingandtraining.co.uk/blog/tag/mihaly-csikszentmihalyi/

What is the Purpose for Grading?

2011-03-21T19:27:00.000-07:00

Some rights reserved by Mark Gstohl

Few issues have created more debate among educators, parents, and students than those associated with grading and reporting student learning. Despite the many debates and multitudes of studies, conversely, recommendations for best practice remain elusive. Although teachers generally try to develop grading policies that are honest and fair, strong evidence shows that their practices vary widely, even among those who teach at the same grade level within the same school.

Although educators would unquestionably prefer that motivation to learn be entirely intrinsic, grades and other reporting methods are important factors in determining how much effort students put forth. Studies show that most students view high grades as positive recognition of their success, and some work hard to avoid the consequences of low grades (Feldmesser 1971). At the same time, no studies support the use of low grades or marks as punishments. Instead of prompting greater effort, low grades more often cause students to withdraw from learning. To protect their self-images, many students view the low grade as irrelevant and meaningless. Other students may blame themselves for the low grade, but they may feel helpless to make any improvement. Sorrowfully, some teachers consider grades or reporting forms as their “weapon of last resort.” In their view, students who do not fulfill the teacher’s expectations must suffer the consequences of the greatest punishment a teacher can bestow: a failing grade. Such practices have no educational value and, in the long run, adversely affect students, teachers, and the relationship they share.

Measurement experts such as Peter Airasian explain that educators use grades primarily 1) for administrative purposes, 2) to give students feedback about their progress and achievement, 3) to provide guidance to students about future course work, 4) to provide guidance to teachers for instructional planning, and 5) to motivate students (Marzano, 2000). According to the research, each of the five purposes for grading has some support from educators. A useful question is which of the five purposes are the most important or, more generally stated, what is the relative importance of the five purposes? One of the more obvious purposes for grades is to provide feedback about student achievement. Studies have consistently shown support for this purpose. Both educators and non-educators perceived providing information about student achievement as the primary purpose of grading.

This is a very complex dilemma we face in education today. Many districts shy away from dealing with this issue because it is so complex. In Grandview School District, we have decided to embark on this topic. We have commitment from the school board, superintendent, and all administrators for job-embedded professional development, training teachers and administrators to understand and implement standards-based instruction and assessment. We have created a Standards-Based Reporting Committee with representation from all stakeholders, including parents, to develop a grading/reporting system based on a clear purpose for each reporting method. With parent representation in our committee work, they are able to communicate the system to other parents and the community. We have come up with a district purpose for grading in our district. This is “to communicate academic progress to students, parents, teachers, and others.”

Using Ken O’Connor’s ’15 Practices that Distort Achievement’ from A Repair Kit for Grading:Fifteen Fixes for Broken Grades, our district committee is now attempting to address our grading practices. Below are these 15 Practices:

Don’t include student behaviors (effort, participation, adherence to class rules, etc) in grades; include only achievement.
Don’t reduce marks on “work” submitted late; provide support for the learner.
Don’t give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
Don’t punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
Don’t consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
Don’t include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
Don’t organize information in grading records by assessment methods or simply summarize into a single grade; organize and report evidence by standards/learning goals.
Don’t assign grades using inappropriate or unclear performance standards; provide clear descriptions of achievement expectations.
Don’t assign grades based on student’s achievement compared to other students; compare each student’s performance to preset standards.
Don’t rely on evidence from assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
Don’t rely only on the mean; consider other measures of central tendency and use professional judgment.
Don’t include zeros in grade determination when evidence is missing or as punishment; use alternatives, such as reassessing to determine real achievement or use “I” for Incomplete or Insufficient Evidence.
Don’t use information from formative assessments and practice to determine grades; use only summative evidence.
Don’t summarize evidence accumulated over time when learning is developmental and will grow with time and repeated opportunities; in those instances, emphasize more recent achievement.
Don’t leave students out of the grading process. Involve students; they can - and should- play key roles in assessment and grading that promote achievement.

I believe grading and reporting practices for any district should support the learning process and encourage student success; and grades need to communicate academic progress to students, parents, teachers, and others. What do you think is the most important purpose for grading?

Sources:

Feldmesser, R. A. 1971. The positive functions of grades. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Marzano, Robert (2000).Transforming Classroom Grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

O’Connor, Ken (2010) A Repair Kit for Grading: Fifteen Fixes for Broken Grades, Second Edition, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Jose Rivera, Principal
McClure Elementary School
Grandview School District
jrivera@grandview.wednet.edu
(509) 882-7100

Are WSASCD Professional Development Opportunities Serving You?

2011-03-08T08:19:00.000-08:00

Washington State ASCD strives to provide all educators across the state with quality professional development opportunities that are both relevant and timely. It is our hope that all participants walk away from these conferences and workshops feeling that both their time and money were well spent and that what they have learned can have an immediate impact on improving daily practice and increasing student achievement.

The primary sources for determining which learning topics we tackle and provide support for come directly from you. In talking with administrators and teachers across the state, we make every effort to keep informed about what key topics or practices people would most like to explore in greater depth. We seek out both local and nationally renowned experts in these areas of focus and arrange opportunities for people across the state to come together and learn from one another.

During the past two years, we have provided in-service in the following key areas: Professional Learning Communities, differentiated instruction, grading for learning, instructional coaching, Pyramid Response to Intervention, and classroom-based assessment. In addition, we have brought many nationally renowned speakers and experts to the northwest including Dr. Robert Eaker, Mike Mattos, Rick Wormeli, Janel Keating, Michael Gurian, and Dr. Jeanine Butler.

Currently WSASCD is utilizing three primary vehicles for delivery of professional learning: The Annual Conference, regional workshops, and the on-site workshop in school districts. We host the Annual Conference every October. The regional workshops are usually repeated two or three times throughout the state to accommodate different geographic locations. We work hard to ensure that the delivery models for professional development opportunities are accessible and affordable to as many people as possible.

We recognize that during these difficult economic times it is becoming increasingly difficult for districts and schools to send people to outside professional development opportunities. We feel strongly that maintaining quality professional development for educators is absolutely crucial. Therefore, it is more important than ever to ensure that the professional development services we are providing are meeting your needs. We want to hear from you.
What instructional topics or strategies would be most relevant and meaningful to your learning currently?

Do the current models of delivery meet your needs? What changes or modifications to any of these delivery models would you suggest?

Jill Burnes, Principal
Enumclaw High School
jill_burnes@enumclaw.wednet.edu
(360) 802-7685

Is Accountability Something to Celebrate or Fear?

2011-01-04T09:39:00.001-08:00

Please read Adam Kulaas' article on Accountability at http://wsascd.org/downloads/critical_questions/January_2011_-_Critical_Question_Series.pdf. In what ways do you celebrate or fear accountability?