What is Quality Teaching?

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?

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:

1. Don’t include student behaviors (effort, participation, adherence to class rules, etc) in grades; include only achievement.
   
2. Don’t reduce marks on “work” submitted late; provide support for the learner.
   
3. 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.
   
4. Don’t punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
   
5. Don’t consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
   
6. Don’t include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
   
7. 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.
8. Don’t assign grades using inappropriate or unclear performance standards; provide clear descriptions of achievement expectations.
   
9. Don’t assign grades based on student’s achievement compared to other students; compare each student’s performance to preset standards.
   
10. Don’t rely on evidence from assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
    
11. Don’t rely only on the mean; consider other measures of central tendency and use professional judgment.
    
12. 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.
    
13. Don’t use information from formative assessments and practice to determine grades; use only summative evidence.
    
14. 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.
    
15. 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?

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?

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?