New York State moves 3-8 testing to May
It started with a question on a listserv, sort of like a rumble in the background. I spent a lovely day doing program design and then visiting The Cloisters in New York City. My cell phone battery died mid-morning so I missed the rumble rising to a dull roar. By time I got home and back on-line, the roar had crested and the conversations regarding implications already in progress.
All New York State students in Grades 3-8 will be taking the mathematics and English Langauge Arts assessments in May beginning next year.
The rumor was confirmed on the DATAG listserv with the following message:
Positive Consequence: Teachers can now teach Math and ELA all year long. April Spring Break can provide a natural break between teaching content and teaching students test sophistication or test wise-ness.
Negative Consequence: Eighth graders may conceivably be testing (Math, ELA, Science, and SS) more than learning during the month of May. (Angela)
Positive: The assessments can be viewed as a one-shot deal that happens at the end of the year. A chance to show off what you know, like the big kids in high school.
Negative: A nine year old probably won’t see it that way. (Theresa)
Positive: Weather is less likely to impact testing administration.
Negative: Scoring all assessments at the same time might lead to more than one testing and assessment coordinator cowering in a corner, whimpering.
Positive: The media will report on test data once a year, rather than twice. (Erin)
Negative: People may perceive this as a response to the increase in scores. A way to shake things up so students don't get to used to the test.
I expect the conversation will crest again as the press reports the change. I, like many others, have lots of questions. I wonder how students feel about the change. Were students given the chance to respond to the survey? Angela wonders if it's time to combine ELA and Social Studies into one assessment. What about the impact on final exams, especially given the recent article in The Buffalo News about schools using SED scores in student averages? ... and more more.
Your thoughts?
All New York State students in Grades 3-8 will be taking the mathematics and English Langauge Arts assessments in May beginning next year.
The rumor was confirmed on the DATAG listserv with the following message:
Johanna Duncan Poitier just sent out a special edition issue of News and Notes which provides important updates from the June meeting of the Board of Regents to District Superintendents, Superintendents of Schools, Administrators of Charter and Nonpublic Schools, and Other Partners which included a confirmation of the Regents action earlier today moving the 3-8 ELA and Math assessments to May starting next year.I’m sure more will be released in the coming days, including guidance on how schools should handle administration, scoring, data reporting, and other aspects of the assessments. To hear what others were thinking, I connected with my PLN on Twitter and Facebook and the responses were similar. Lots of surprise that we went from survey to action so quickly, panic at the thought of 3rd graders sitting through 5 straight days of testing, and bafflement about what it will look like in practice. Talking through the consequences has been fascinating. Some of the comments from conversations are below. I liked to the author's blog when possible:
Positive Consequence: Teachers can now teach Math and ELA all year long. April Spring Break can provide a natural break between teaching content and teaching students test sophistication or test wise-ness.
Negative Consequence: Eighth graders may conceivably be testing (Math, ELA, Science, and SS) more than learning during the month of May. (Angela)
Positive: The assessments can be viewed as a one-shot deal that happens at the end of the year. A chance to show off what you know, like the big kids in high school.
Negative: A nine year old probably won’t see it that way. (Theresa)
Positive: Weather is less likely to impact testing administration.
Negative: Scoring all assessments at the same time might lead to more than one testing and assessment coordinator cowering in a corner, whimpering.
Positive: The media will report on test data once a year, rather than twice. (Erin)
Negative: People may perceive this as a response to the increase in scores. A way to shake things up so students don't get to used to the test.
I expect the conversation will crest again as the press reports the change. I, like many others, have lots of questions. I wonder how students feel about the change. Were students given the chance to respond to the survey? Angela wonders if it's time to combine ELA and Social Studies into one assessment. What about the impact on final exams, especially given the recent article in The Buffalo News about schools using SED scores in student averages? ... and more more.
Your thoughts?
Change or Slight of Hand?
According to news reports this past week, 46 states including New York State, have agreed to “the process and development of voluntary, common standards.” Said standards would be in draft form for review by July 2009 with grade-by-grade standards available in December 2009. States would have three years to adopt and implement those standards.
Now, I am not against national standards per se, I just want standards that are manageable, measurable and relevant. Having waited anxiously for the revision to the NYS ELA standards since last June, I find it hard to believe that a national group with appropriate representation is going to be able to reach consensus and produce something that will meet those criteria in a matter of a few weeks. Sadly, I became even more skeptical when I read the actual agreement drafted by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices which contains criteria for said standards, which will be:
It has taken a year for NYS to review and develop a plan for their revision of state standards in ELA. The last time I was in Albany I was told the committee was still discussing them and “tweaking” what they had before roll-out for public comment, now scheduled for Fall 2009. We have had some sneak peeks at what to anticipate, such as the fact that we will now have a Literacy and Literature strand and that in addition to Reading, Writing, Listening and Speaking, we will now add Viewing and Presenting.
The latter two are very similar to the National Council for the Teachers of English (NCTE) Standards for the English Language Arts which frankly don’t look too terribly different from what NYS currently has in place. So the cynic in me is doubting whether there is going to be any real change when it comes to the standards. If NYS has already spent significant time and energy into developing these revised standards, yet have agreed to develop the national pieces (of which 85% should be adopted by the states voluntarily) – is there going to be real change or are we just going through the motions?
Now, I am not against national standards per se, I just want standards that are manageable, measurable and relevant. Having waited anxiously for the revision to the NYS ELA standards since last June, I find it hard to believe that a national group with appropriate representation is going to be able to reach consensus and produce something that will meet those criteria in a matter of a few weeks. Sadly, I became even more skeptical when I read the actual agreement drafted by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices which contains criteria for said standards, which will be:
- Fewer, clearer, and higher, to best drive effective policy and practice;
- Aligned with college and work expectations, so that all students are prepared for success upon graduating from high school;
- Inclusive of rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills, so that all students are prepared for the 21st century;
- Internationally benchmarked, so that all students are prepared for succeeding in our global economy and society; and
- Research and evidence-based.
It has taken a year for NYS to review and develop a plan for their revision of state standards in ELA. The last time I was in Albany I was told the committee was still discussing them and “tweaking” what they had before roll-out for public comment, now scheduled for Fall 2009. We have had some sneak peeks at what to anticipate, such as the fact that we will now have a Literacy and Literature strand and that in addition to Reading, Writing, Listening and Speaking, we will now add Viewing and Presenting.
The latter two are very similar to the National Council for the Teachers of English (NCTE) Standards for the English Language Arts which frankly don’t look too terribly different from what NYS currently has in place. So the cynic in me is doubting whether there is going to be any real change when it comes to the standards. If NYS has already spent significant time and energy into developing these revised standards, yet have agreed to develop the national pieces (of which 85% should be adopted by the states voluntarily) – is there going to be real change or are we just going through the motions?
Technically Writing
I spent last week helping some of my teammates lead the regional scoring of the NYS Assessments in Mathematics. It was quite a relief to just have to "be there" this year as opposed to having to play an active role in the training! And that allowed me to really listen to and think about the conversations the teachers were having about student answers.
Being a social studies teacher with a passion for all things writing, I was struck by how much writing is required of students on the math assessments. Interestingly, it was often the writing that prevented students from receiving full credit on some of the answers. Many of the teachers complained about this, particularly as we moved onto the middle grade levels. Often, I heard comments like these:
"These kids clearly knew the answer - I don't know why we can't just give them full credit."
"These scoring guides penalize the students who can 'do math' in their heads and don't need to show their work."
I understand their arguments but I also know that NYS is trying to emphasize (through the standards as well as the assessments) the power of communicating in math. And in order to communicate well in math - they must do so using the very technical language of math. While these teachers found the issue to be one of math (and sometimes of reading), I really saw these as the students not being able to express themselves in the mathematical language. A few examples:
Writing in the disciplines is very content specific. I have long held the belief that each content area has its own literacy that goes beyond merely teaching students to use the English language. In social studies, students need to be able to read and communicate about maps using correct terms. They need to understand the symbolism in political cartoons and the trends in charts/graphs. In science, they need to understand scientific notation, the symbols in chemistry and how to write a chemical equation. I could go on and on but you get the picture. Each discipline requires a highly technical language and one that we must explicitly teach our students. Each of us truly is a teacher of literacy.
For my math friends, it didn't seem the appropriate time to share my thoughts about the difference between having students muscle through the math to come up with a correct answer and having them share their understandings of the process and relationship between numbers in written form. But you can bet that I will be learning more about the technical writing in other subjects so that I can help them teach writing there as well.
Cross-posted on Writing Frameworks.
Being a social studies teacher with a passion for all things writing, I was struck by how much writing is required of students on the math assessments. Interestingly, it was often the writing that prevented students from receiving full credit on some of the answers. Many of the teachers complained about this, particularly as we moved onto the middle grade levels. Often, I heard comments like these:
"These kids clearly knew the answer - I don't know why we can't just give them full credit."
"These scoring guides penalize the students who can 'do math' in their heads and don't need to show their work."
I understand their arguments but I also know that NYS is trying to emphasize (through the standards as well as the assessments) the power of communicating in math. And in order to communicate well in math - they must do so using the very technical language of math. While these teachers found the issue to be one of math (and sometimes of reading), I really saw these as the students not being able to express themselves in the mathematical language. A few examples:
When asked to express their answer in exponential form, several students would provide the correct answer when writing "three to the sixth power" but could not receive full credit because they did not write it in correct form.
Some students would write to explain how they found a particular answer, but in a somewhat vague manner such as "because you have to find the straight 180 so you would subtract." Teachers would argue that it is evident that the students understood the notion of complementary angles, but in reality there is not enough detail in this statement. The straight 180 what? Subtract what? From what?
Writing in the disciplines is very content specific. I have long held the belief that each content area has its own literacy that goes beyond merely teaching students to use the English language. In social studies, students need to be able to read and communicate about maps using correct terms. They need to understand the symbolism in political cartoons and the trends in charts/graphs. In science, they need to understand scientific notation, the symbols in chemistry and how to write a chemical equation. I could go on and on but you get the picture. Each discipline requires a highly technical language and one that we must explicitly teach our students. Each of us truly is a teacher of literacy.
For my math friends, it didn't seem the appropriate time to share my thoughts about the difference between having students muscle through the math to come up with a correct answer and having them share their understandings of the process and relationship between numbers in written form. But you can bet that I will be learning more about the technical writing in other subjects so that I can help them teach writing there as well.
Cross-posted on Writing Frameworks.
EQ: Teacher Leadership
What does it take to truly develop teacher leadership?
When this question lept off the page for me at a recent Communities for Learning session, it seemed that three days worth of thinking had found a home. This post has been in draft form for a while but I have decided that examining the research and practice around this essential question will be one focus for me in the upcoming year. Since this post will capture my initial thinking around this topic, it is not heavy in the research but merely my attempt to capture the "problem."
Consider these scenerios that recently presented themselves in my work:
District A has adopted a new series and carved out a 90 minute literacy block. Teachers are struggling with the use of the block and despite having an onsite "coach" do not seem to be making good use of the time. In a planning meeting to discuss the development of the teachers, the idea of starting by coaching those teachers who were closest to the ideal in order to have them lead their colleagues was suggested. Building principal was not sure there were many teachers who were "close" and was concerned about how those teachers who were coached might be percieved by their peers.
District B has slowly been acquiring new technology resources for teachers to use and the building principal has been committed to providing teachers with the use of interactive whiteboards. As teachers see this equipment being used in the school, some are ready to embrace the technology (and the learning curve) and try out some lessons. Building principal asks the early users to showcase how they use the technololgy for their peers at a faculty meeting - none feel they have the expertise to do so and the computer teacher demos something instead.
In the same district, one new teacher (untenured) has slowly been integrating the technology even though she has not been given one of the interactive whiteboards. She researchs sites on the Internet, is taking a graduate course on media literacy, brings her class to the school lab weekly and has integrated quite a bit of technology. She even selected a technology based lesson for her observation with the building principal. She is not asked to present at the faculty meeting and has recently been passed by for the installation in her classroom of a new whiteboard purchased by the PTA.
In District C, a consultant has asked teachers who have been engaged in a long-term professional learning opportunity around discourse to share an instance where they took a risk and were successful. In the reflection around this question, teachers struggled to think of answers where they had been successful.
In each of these examples, I am certain that the district wants to foster teacher leadership and that there are teacher leaders available - yet they have not been tapped. What conditions must be in place in a school system for teacher leadership to be developed, and more importantly, to thrive in a sustained way? What dispositions must teacher leaders exhibit to be effective? In short, the essential question is what does it take to truly develop teacher leadership?
As I work to frame this question and my research better - I would appreciate any warm/cool feedback on the identification of the problem and question!!
When this question lept off the page for me at a recent Communities for Learning session, it seemed that three days worth of thinking had found a home. This post has been in draft form for a while but I have decided that examining the research and practice around this essential question will be one focus for me in the upcoming year. Since this post will capture my initial thinking around this topic, it is not heavy in the research but merely my attempt to capture the "problem."
Consider these scenerios that recently presented themselves in my work:
District A has adopted a new series and carved out a 90 minute literacy block. Teachers are struggling with the use of the block and despite having an onsite "coach" do not seem to be making good use of the time. In a planning meeting to discuss the development of the teachers, the idea of starting by coaching those teachers who were closest to the ideal in order to have them lead their colleagues was suggested. Building principal was not sure there were many teachers who were "close" and was concerned about how those teachers who were coached might be percieved by their peers.
District B has slowly been acquiring new technology resources for teachers to use and the building principal has been committed to providing teachers with the use of interactive whiteboards. As teachers see this equipment being used in the school, some are ready to embrace the technology (and the learning curve) and try out some lessons. Building principal asks the early users to showcase how they use the technololgy for their peers at a faculty meeting - none feel they have the expertise to do so and the computer teacher demos something instead.
In the same district, one new teacher (untenured) has slowly been integrating the technology even though she has not been given one of the interactive whiteboards. She researchs sites on the Internet, is taking a graduate course on media literacy, brings her class to the school lab weekly and has integrated quite a bit of technology. She even selected a technology based lesson for her observation with the building principal. She is not asked to present at the faculty meeting and has recently been passed by for the installation in her classroom of a new whiteboard purchased by the PTA.
In District C, a consultant has asked teachers who have been engaged in a long-term professional learning opportunity around discourse to share an instance where they took a risk and were successful. In the reflection around this question, teachers struggled to think of answers where they had been successful.
In each of these examples, I am certain that the district wants to foster teacher leadership and that there are teacher leaders available - yet they have not been tapped. What conditions must be in place in a school system for teacher leadership to be developed, and more importantly, to thrive in a sustained way? What dispositions must teacher leaders exhibit to be effective? In short, the essential question is what does it take to truly develop teacher leadership?
As I work to frame this question and my research better - I would appreciate any warm/cool feedback on the identification of the problem and question!!
Giving “Practice” Math Tests? Read me first. (Part 2)
Part 1 is here.
Usually, the most common reason for giving a practice math test is to identify students’ weaknesses. Hopefully the first post showed why it’s so critical to determine the weakness you’re talking about: familiarity with format, time, etc. If you’re worried about the math there are particular ways to approach the practice test.
First, ignore how the student did on the assessment. It sounds counter-intuitive but there is rationale reason for it, I promise. It’s more important how your students did on particular items than how they did overall. There are a couple of reasons for this:
NYS Assessments are based on a criterion-referenced model. Typically, when you give a student 25 questions, you mark the correct responses, determine a fraction of correct over total and come up with a score. Generally, we talk about these scores in percentages. Due to the complexity of the NYS assessments and the fact that they focus on performance in relation to a standard or criteria, scores are NOT reported this way. In fact, the number of raw points needed to demonstrate mastery shifts from year to year depending on the standard setting process.
It’s not the real deal. Regardless of the conditions we create, students know it’s not the real deal. Their performance may be inflated or deflated for that very reason and may not reflect their true performance.
NYS Test Design procedures. NYS follows a particular test design model that requires the test include items with varying difficulty. I’m sure you’ve noticed looking through the test that some questions “feel” easier than others. This isn’t a coincidence. Items are strategically chosen for the assessment that reflect a range of difficulty based on how students performed on them on the field testing. It doesn’t make sense to include 25 questions on Book 1 that were missed by most students during field testing. So, the test designers include items with a variety of difficulty – a few hard, a few easy and most middle of the road. This concept of item difficulty is called “p-value” – most simply put, what percent of students responded correctly to a question. In shorthand, we say items with high p-values are easy, while items with low p-values are hard for the particular group of students under discussion. So - two districts side by side may have different p-values on the same item. We need a neutral standard or benchmark to act as judge and jury around item difficulty. That's where the state data come in.
A great deal of data about NYS tests are made public every year – including p-values. These data can tell us which questions are easy and which are hard. It’s not a secret and requires only a smidge of background to use correctly. P-values are provided at a couple of levels. The one that is most important is for our purposes here Low Level 3. In this example, let’s talk about fifth grade. My mental model around scale scores and p-values is to picture a giant swimming pool filled with every fifth grader in the state of New York who took the state assessment last year. Floating above their head is their scale score. Students from the Bronx to Buffalo, from Long Island to Lake Placid. Students with and without disabilities. Levels 1, 2, 3 and 4.
I can look at how ALL the students did on items but included within the mix are students who really struggled and students who did really well (We assume most questions were hard for students at Level 1 while most were easy for students at Level 4.) So, I as the data lifeguard blow my whistle and call out every child who scores Levels 1 and 2. Same for the Level 4’s. Left in the pool are my Level 3’s – every child who met the standard. Because I want the data to be as clean and precise as possible, I’m going to boot out every child who scores above the minimum standard – which in Fifth grade in 2008 was 650. Left in the pool I have a few thousand students – all who met the minimum standard, AKA scale score 650. For each question these students took, I can look at how many got each question right and compare (or benchmark) my students to their performance. The graph below shows you what that looks like:
At the other end of the difficulty continuum are easy questions. The Low Level 3's did pretty well on question 3. If you discover that your students didn't do well on questions like 3 (any item with a p-value higher than 80%), then your warning bells should start warming up.
However, before assuming it's a strength or weakness, look for other evidence that the students understand the concept. Formative assessment can really come in handy here. You can pose a similar question and ask students to respond on their way out the door. This time though, ask:
Anne has completed 87% of the race. What fraction represents that portion of the race she has NOT finished?
If students get the math, they should pick A. If they pick C, it's probably a testing issue. They slid past the NOT. Anyone who picks B or D may have a problem with fractions in general. How did they do on question 15 which taps a similar understanding? (I use Tinkerplots to answer these questions. It's one of my favorite data toys.) The students will form themselves into like-needed groups, depending on what the other instructional evidence shows.
So - if you're going to give the test to identify weaknesses:
Usually, the most common reason for giving a practice math test is to identify students’ weaknesses. Hopefully the first post showed why it’s so critical to determine the weakness you’re talking about: familiarity with format, time, etc. If you’re worried about the math there are particular ways to approach the practice test.
First, ignore how the student did on the assessment. It sounds counter-intuitive but there is rationale reason for it, I promise. It’s more important how your students did on particular items than how they did overall. There are a couple of reasons for this:
NYS Assessments are based on a criterion-referenced model. Typically, when you give a student 25 questions, you mark the correct responses, determine a fraction of correct over total and come up with a score. Generally, we talk about these scores in percentages. Due to the complexity of the NYS assessments and the fact that they focus on performance in relation to a standard or criteria, scores are NOT reported this way. In fact, the number of raw points needed to demonstrate mastery shifts from year to year depending on the standard setting process.
It’s not the real deal. Regardless of the conditions we create, students know it’s not the real deal. Their performance may be inflated or deflated for that very reason and may not reflect their true performance.
NYS Test Design procedures. NYS follows a particular test design model that requires the test include items with varying difficulty. I’m sure you’ve noticed looking through the test that some questions “feel” easier than others. This isn’t a coincidence. Items are strategically chosen for the assessment that reflect a range of difficulty based on how students performed on them on the field testing. It doesn’t make sense to include 25 questions on Book 1 that were missed by most students during field testing. So, the test designers include items with a variety of difficulty – a few hard, a few easy and most middle of the road. This concept of item difficulty is called “p-value” – most simply put, what percent of students responded correctly to a question. In shorthand, we say items with high p-values are easy, while items with low p-values are hard for the particular group of students under discussion. So - two districts side by side may have different p-values on the same item. We need a neutral standard or benchmark to act as judge and jury around item difficulty. That's where the state data come in.
A great deal of data about NYS tests are made public every year – including p-values. These data can tell us which questions are easy and which are hard. It’s not a secret and requires only a smidge of background to use correctly. P-values are provided at a couple of levels. The one that is most important is for our purposes here Low Level 3. In this example, let’s talk about fifth grade. My mental model around scale scores and p-values is to picture a giant swimming pool filled with every fifth grader in the state of New York who took the state assessment last year. Floating above their head is their scale score. Students from the Bronx to Buffalo, from Long Island to Lake Placid. Students with and without disabilities. Levels 1, 2, 3 and 4.
I can look at how ALL the students did on items but included within the mix are students who really struggled and students who did really well (We assume most questions were hard for students at Level 1 while most were easy for students at Level 4.) So, I as the data lifeguard blow my whistle and call out every child who scores Levels 1 and 2. Same for the Level 4’s. Left in the pool are my Level 3’s – every child who met the standard. Because I want the data to be as clean and precise as possible, I’m going to boot out every child who scores above the minimum standard – which in Fifth grade in 2008 was 650. Left in the pool I have a few thousand students – all who met the minimum standard, AKA scale score 650. For each question these students took, I can look at how many got each question right and compare (or benchmark) my students to their performance. The graph below shows you what that looks like:
Students are likely to pick A because it practically screams "PICK ME!" at them. Your students may know fractions inside out and sideways. Picking A and not C is an issue of testing sophistication, not mathematics. When reviewing similar problems with students, as much as possible, give them "PICK ME!" choices so they can learn what they look like and how to avoid their siren song.
At the other end of the difficulty continuum are easy questions. The Low Level 3's did pretty well on question 3. If you discover that your students didn't do well on questions like 3 (any item with a p-value higher than 80%), then your warning bells should start warming up.
However, before assuming it's a strength or weakness, look for other evidence that the students understand the concept. Formative assessment can really come in handy here. You can pose a similar question and ask students to respond on their way out the door. This time though, ask:
Anne has completed 87% of the race. What fraction represents that portion of the race she has NOT finished?
If students get the math, they should pick A. If they pick C, it's probably a testing issue. They slid past the NOT. Anyone who picks B or D may have a problem with fractions in general. How did they do on question 15 which taps a similar understanding? (I use Tinkerplots to answer these questions. It's one of my favorite data toys.) The students will form themselves into like-needed groups, depending on what the other instructional evidence shows.
So - if you're going to give the test to identify weaknesses:
- Consider how your students do on easy questions (high Low Level 3 p-values) versus hard (low Low Level 3 p-values) questions.
- Be aware of what wrong answers students give as that's often more interesting than what they got right.
- Consult other evidence (formative and summative) before confirming the students have a mathematical weakness.
Giving “Practice” Math Tests? Read me first. (Part 1)
Similar to the weeks prior to the ELA assessment, many schools across the state are giving their students old copies of the state assessments to prepare their students for the big day. Based on conversations with schools and fellow professional developers, these practice tests serve several different purposes. Regardless of the reason for giving the assessment, there are several strategic moves that can be made to get the best return on your time investment and hopefully, minimize the impact on instructional time and students' sense of what school is all about.
First things first. Be honest about the reason you're asking students to take the old assessment. "To prepare them for the test" is a big broad topic. A common problem in test prep is trying to tackle two problems in one fell swoop. It's a given a that when you're teaching students a new strategy, you introduce it with familiar content or low level text. You wouldn't ask a middle school student to text-tag for the first time with a college level text. The same holds true for practice tests. It's not fair to ask students to "do their best" on the math content and expect them to notice the format and structure at the same time. Their brain is going to be busy with the math. I'm going to tackle a couple of common reasons for giving practice tests over the next couple of days and highlight the benefits of approaching different purposes in different ways.
If your goal is to expose students to the test format:
There are few students on the planet as test savvy as 8th grade students. They have been been tested since they were in fourth grade. They know what the test looks like. Some could even write it. If you work with middle level students, your time may be better served by telling them what's different in the grade 8 assessment (no editing, but extended writing). If the concern is that they really don't know the format, than give them time to do that - and only that. What do they notice about about the font? About the spacing and the structure? The set up of the questions? What might trip them up on the actual test? Make sure they know how to use the ruler, the protractor and the rules of getting as many points as possible on Book 2 and Book 3.
If your goal is to familiarize your students with timed testing:
Consider chunking the test. First, give your students the appropriate time to take Book 1 - and tell them the purpose of taking the practice test is to give a sense of how much time they'll have. Next, when they're done, take ten minutes to process what happened. A Behavior over Time graph (below) is a great tool for helping students process their stress level. Did they feel more stressed at the beginning of the test? At the end of the test? Finally, give them the support to develop a plan. If they freak out in the beginning, what can do they do to avoid the freak out? What helps them calm down? You'd be surprised the ideas that students generate during these types of conversations. It's also a nice way to reveal "rumors" that kids have heard. 
Coming up tomorrow - how to tackle practice tests if your goal is to identify student weaknesses. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this!
Making a Difference: Three Cups of Tea
Reflecting upon the dreams of those who came before us and the dreams that we have for our children on the eve of the Presidential Inauguration, I wonder when in our history we took education for granted. As a social studies teacher, my students were always amazed to learn that education wasn't always mandatory. That children would often work in very dangerous conditions to help to support their families. That education was something that people strove to achieve - not something that was expected.
Today, we argue about whether we are preparing our students adequately for the world they will enter when they leave school. Since their inception with compulsory education, schools in the United States have operated under a factory model. We have bells, we have a set curriculum, we churn out graduates like Model T cars. Only we don't, do we?
I am not sure that I have the answer for education - in fact, I am pretty sure that I do not. But after reading Three Cups of Tea: One Man's Mission to Promote Peace...One School at a Time I have been thinking very differently about education. Throughout the book, which chronicled Greg Mortenson's struggles to build schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan against the backdrop of the internal and external conflicts of those countries, Mortenson talks about the power of education to bring peace. The communities where Mortenson built schools worked together to see them constructed - often carrying materials on their backs to the remote areas where the schools would be built. They challenged traditional and religious norms to allow their daughters to attend school. Those schools brought the world to remote villages, for all the good and bad that entails. It brought new perspectives and new opportunities.
We have plenty of schools in this country - but we don't have the passion for them to exist that is described in Mortenson's book. I am struggling with why.
Photo credit: Lewis W. Hine. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division.
Professional Discourse
So I'm minding my own business doing e-mail today, pulling together a database, having a grand old time listening to the Dr. Horrible soundtrack. I open an email from an international listserv on statistics in education. A member posted a question about a study, unclear on why a particular test had been used to analyze the data. Her question was neutral, well-reasoned and appropriate to the listserv. In effect, a professional said "I don't understand this. Can you people who are in the same field as me help me understand it better?"
The response to her inquiry a few minutes later?
So maybe he is the woman's best friend and he has an odd way of teasing her. Perhaps he knows the authors and feels the need to defend their academic honor. Or perhaps he's provided yet another example of why we as a profession so often chose to struggle alone rather than revealing our challenges or struggles in front of others. In any event, I sincerely hope the listserv moderates call him out and give the original author some positive lovin'. Odds are they won't.
The response to her inquiry a few minutes later?
Did one of the authors of this paper steal your boyfriend in grammar school by any chance? As to your question "Am I missing something here?", I would have to say professionalism, scruples, and a LIFE!
So maybe he is the woman's best friend and he has an odd way of teasing her. Perhaps he knows the authors and feels the need to defend their academic honor. Or perhaps he's provided yet another example of why we as a profession so often chose to struggle alone rather than revealing our challenges or struggles in front of others. In any event, I sincerely hope the listserv moderates call him out and give the original author some positive lovin'. Odds are they won't.
The 11th Hour
New York State opens the testing window the ELA grades 3-8 on Monday. My hunch is that most schools are starting on Tuesday and spending Monday doing a wide variety of "test prep" activities, both helpful and detrimental to students and teachers. I imagine there's going to be a run on Tums on Sunday night and some child will have a hard time falling asleep, convinced that if they fail the test their life, as they know it, is over. In time, I think the pendulum will swing toward the middle. In the meantime, my two cents on how to spend Monday.
Odds are good that by this point, the students are familiar with the format of the test and would not benefit from taking any additional practice tests. This is especially true for 8th graders who could probably write the test by now. An approach that may be more beneficial is to spend some time reminding the students of the purpose of the tests and the intended audience. It is not to find out if Jane or Jose is smart or is a good student or to determine their self-worth or to find out if their teacher is good. The audience is every student, Grades 3 through 8, in the state of New York. In other words, a student's self-check for a correct response might be: is this the best answer or is it best for me?
Monday may best served by reminded them how to translate all of that learning to one particular format. A useful strategy may be to provide the students with a Venn Diagram on the board or chart paper and have a discussion about the difference between Real World behaviors – all of those great things we do when we interact with texts in our “real lives” versus what we do on the day of the test that we do at no other time. To anchor yourself in this mental model, consider how you drove the day of your driver's test. How did you behave when driving while running errands or driving to work (assuming there weren't three inches of ice on the roads - yeah Buffalo!)? There are some things in common (text tagging, using the text to find an answer) but there are lots of differences that are worth highlighting:
Odds are good that by this point, the students are familiar with the format of the test and would not benefit from taking any additional practice tests. This is especially true for 8th graders who could probably write the test by now. An approach that may be more beneficial is to spend some time reminding the students of the purpose of the tests and the intended audience. It is not to find out if Jane or Jose is smart or is a good student or to determine their self-worth or to find out if their teacher is good. The audience is every student, Grades 3 through 8, in the state of New York. In other words, a student's self-check for a correct response might be: is this the best answer or is it best for me?
Monday may best served by reminded them how to translate all of that learning to one particular format. A useful strategy may be to provide the students with a Venn Diagram on the board or chart paper and have a discussion about the difference between Real World behaviors – all of those great things we do when we interact with texts in our “real lives” versus what we do on the day of the test that we do at no other time. To anchor yourself in this mental model, consider how you drove the day of your driver's test. How did you behave when driving while running errands or driving to work (assuming there weren't three inches of ice on the roads - yeah Buffalo!)? There are some things in common (text tagging, using the text to find an answer) but there are lots of differences that are worth highlighting:
The analogy may not work for all students - if that's case - and seriously (even in the most "test netural" schools Monday is a high stress day) what else are you going to be teaching/talking about? - spend some time Venn-ing out behaviors playing basketball versus football, watching TV versus watching movies or eating dinner at home versus eating dinner at a friend's house, then shift to testing and real world behaviors.
In any event, regardless of how the is spent, it's helpful to keep in mind the sage advice of Dr. Seuss in Hooray for Diffendoofer Day!
Miss Bonkers rose. “Don’t fret!” she said.
“You’ve learned the things you need
To pass the test and many more –
I’m certain you’ll succeed.
We’ve taught you that the earth is round,
That red and white make pink,
And something else that matters more –
We’ve taught you how to think.”
Leading for Results, Part 2 – Stretch Goals
Leadership is hard work. Leadership is lonely work. It seems that for every success and innovation one has, there this someone who attempts to tear it down, bit by bit, eroding that feeling of success. Reflecting on Day 2 of my workshop with Dennis Sparks on the way home from from NSDC, I am realizing that true leaders must accept that it is not going to be easy, but it will be rewarding. And that the power of a support network is absolutely critical to success.
Day 2 of the workshop used the “I want” cards that we began the day before. We brainstormed a few more cards after being reminded that anything we viewed as a challenge or a problem were really thwarted intentions. For example – “The IT guy won’t unblock Blogspot so that I can blog with my students” is really:
We were then asked to select one “I want” card that were we to get it on Christmas morning would have a significant impact in our life. We were reminded that as human beings and particularly as educators, we operate from a point of view that when we select a goal if we don’t already have an idea of how to achieve it, then it is not a reasonable goal and therefore we won’t make much progress. We needed to brush that notion aside and remember that it is easier to achieve substantial change than to do it incremental steps. Citing Change or Die (one of my favorite books), Sparks reminded us that a larger goal requires a fundamental change in our belief system and is therefore more likely to result in change. We were going to take our “I want” statement and make a stretch goal.
We started by re-writing the card for paradise. “I want the IT department to trust that I will monitor my students’ use of the Internet” became “I want the IT department to provide me completely open access to aspects of the Internet to use with my students.” We then had to take that card and rewrite it again, only four times bigger. This was extremely difficult to do because frankly, my new statement was Nirvana!! But after thinking about it aloud with my group it became “I want the IT department to provide all teachers and student with open access to the Internet and for all teachers and students to know how to use it responsibly and effectively.” Not sure that it is Paradise times 4 but you get the picture.
The notion of stretch goals is extremely powerful and it is certainly something to think about when creating a clear vision for the future. However, I know from previous experience that goals that are set too big with no measure of how close we come to achieving it or a feeling of little success can often lead to frustration. I know that my stretch goal of looking like Beyonce by this time next year is an extremely ambitious goal. And while amusing – it does seem terribly impracticable. When it comes to health and my weight, it has always been more worthwhile to set a goal of losing X pounds or exercising for X minutes per day. And while in reality I will never resemble Sasha Fierce – it does cause me to think about what I really want as a fitness goal in reality and make that more clear.
No matter what stretch goals I set – I cannot achieve them without support.
Whether it is the IT goal or my fitness goal, I need to have others there to listen, to encourage, to take action with me. And those people will not be able to do that unless I am absolutely clear about where I want to be. It means that everyone needs to practice committed listening. Not active listening, not listening to respond, not listening to defend – just listening.
As we practiced this with others in the room, I realized that this is difficult to do and that I don’t do it often enough. Many of my conversations involve me doing more than one thing: typing an email, checking my feeds, cleaning out a drawer – just about anything than just listening. If I want people to hear me, I need to start to listen to them.
Returning to work tomorrow – I have set some goals for myself:
Not a timid list by any means – but it is the time of year for resolutions isn’t it?
Day 2 of the workshop used the “I want” cards that we began the day before. We brainstormed a few more cards after being reminded that anything we viewed as a challenge or a problem were really thwarted intentions. For example – “The IT guy won’t unblock Blogspot so that I can blog with my students” is really:
1. I want to have my students express their thoughts and opinions, receive feedback on them and reflect on their learning using blogs.
2. I want the IT department to trust that I will monitor my students’ use of the Internet.
3. I want the IT department to work with me to discover alternatives they feel safe with in order to help me meet my objectives with my students.
We were then asked to select one “I want” card that were we to get it on Christmas morning would have a significant impact in our life. We were reminded that as human beings and particularly as educators, we operate from a point of view that when we select a goal if we don’t already have an idea of how to achieve it, then it is not a reasonable goal and therefore we won’t make much progress. We needed to brush that notion aside and remember that it is easier to achieve substantial change than to do it incremental steps. Citing Change or Die (one of my favorite books), Sparks reminded us that a larger goal requires a fundamental change in our belief system and is therefore more likely to result in change. We were going to take our “I want” statement and make a stretch goal.
We started by re-writing the card for paradise. “I want the IT department to trust that I will monitor my students’ use of the Internet” became “I want the IT department to provide me completely open access to aspects of the Internet to use with my students.” We then had to take that card and rewrite it again, only four times bigger. This was extremely difficult to do because frankly, my new statement was Nirvana!! But after thinking about it aloud with my group it became “I want the IT department to provide all teachers and student with open access to the Internet and for all teachers and students to know how to use it responsibly and effectively.” Not sure that it is Paradise times 4 but you get the picture.
The notion of stretch goals is extremely powerful and it is certainly something to think about when creating a clear vision for the future. However, I know from previous experience that goals that are set too big with no measure of how close we come to achieving it or a feeling of little success can often lead to frustration. I know that my stretch goal of looking like Beyonce by this time next year is an extremely ambitious goal. And while amusing – it does seem terribly impracticable. When it comes to health and my weight, it has always been more worthwhile to set a goal of losing X pounds or exercising for X minutes per day. And while in reality I will never resemble Sasha Fierce – it does cause me to think about what I really want as a fitness goal in reality and make that more clear.
No matter what stretch goals I set – I cannot achieve them without support.
Whether it is the IT goal or my fitness goal, I need to have others there to listen, to encourage, to take action with me. And those people will not be able to do that unless I am absolutely clear about where I want to be. It means that everyone needs to practice committed listening. Not active listening, not listening to respond, not listening to defend – just listening.
As we practiced this with others in the room, I realized that this is difficult to do and that I don’t do it often enough. Many of my conversations involve me doing more than one thing: typing an email, checking my feeds, cleaning out a drawer – just about anything than just listening. If I want people to hear me, I need to start to listen to them.
Returning to work tomorrow – I have set some goals for myself:
1. Practice committed listening with at least one other person every day.
2. Be clear about what I want – and turn those goals into stretch goals.
3. Focus on the assets, not the deficits.
4. Work with my signature strengths.
Not a timid list by any means – but it is the time of year for resolutions isn’t it?
Leading for Results - Part 1
I am at the NSDC Conference in Washington, D.C. and attended the first day of my two-day preconference with Dennis Sparks around his book Leading for Results. Imagine my surprise to walk into a national conference that had no homework in advance of the session, no LCD projector and screen in the room, and no handouts. For many people, these are the hallmarks of a "good" presentation - the notion that when you pay for things (and pay a great deal) you need to have "things" to show the value of what you learned.
Dennis quickly dispelled us of this notion. In going through how he wrote the book (now in a second edition) he talked a lot about his favorite word: perturbed. He used it a great deal and it really resonated with me as I have long been a favorite of the phrase "educational deviant." They mean the same thing : someone who is shaking up the status quo in education. Not in a bad way, not in a "dig in your heels because we are never changing this" way. Instead, in a this is not working, hasn't worked for a very long time and if we don't do something different then we are doing a huge disservice to our students way.
Throughout the course of the day - Dennis asked us to reflect on and write about a problem that if we had the solution would have a significant impact on our life. As we listened to him talk about how to lead for results, he would stop and have us reflect on how using that one tool or idea might help lead to the solution. This was pretty powerful - not just that we were able to take the time and apply it to the problem, but that we started with making an assumption that it just might be the answer.
I believe that in education we work from a deficit perspective- we find gaps in data, we focus on the students who are under-performing, we work to "fix" teachers who are getting it done, we show how we don't measure up to other countries in any number of areas. Rarely do we see a focus on the assets we have in education.
I want to start focusing on those assets. I want to be what Dennis calls a resonant leader: one who creates "virtuous spirals of emotion" in those around them. And that needs to start with me identifying and working on my "signature strengths." We did a powerful exercise do help uncover those. Dennis had us think back to the last day that we were at work. Then think back to the last hour of that day. We then listed our strengths by telling a story of that last hour. I realized that I have some strengths that I often wish were better - things that I am good at but I always look at as in need of improvement.
Finally - we ended the day by taking 100 blank index cards and writing "I want" statements. These could be wants we have in any area of our life: work, family, friends, health, spirit. We had to write as many as we could, one per card. We wrote like this for about 20 minutes and then shared with a small group - one at a time. We then wrote for 10 more minutes. Our homework: double the number of cards we had for this morning.
The point? Sometimes people are a lot more clear about what they DON'T WANT than what they WANT. As leaders, we need to be clear about what we want in order to lead well. We need to speak with the voice of intention and that voice needs to be crystal clear. Clarity is a magnet.
We'll do more with those cards tomorrow - but for now I am just trying to get clear.
Dennis quickly dispelled us of this notion. In going through how he wrote the book (now in a second edition) he talked a lot about his favorite word: perturbed. He used it a great deal and it really resonated with me as I have long been a favorite of the phrase "educational deviant." They mean the same thing : someone who is shaking up the status quo in education. Not in a bad way, not in a "dig in your heels because we are never changing this" way. Instead, in a this is not working, hasn't worked for a very long time and if we don't do something different then we are doing a huge disservice to our students way.
Throughout the course of the day - Dennis asked us to reflect on and write about a problem that if we had the solution would have a significant impact on our life. As we listened to him talk about how to lead for results, he would stop and have us reflect on how using that one tool or idea might help lead to the solution. This was pretty powerful - not just that we were able to take the time and apply it to the problem, but that we started with making an assumption that it just might be the answer.
I believe that in education we work from a deficit perspective- we find gaps in data, we focus on the students who are under-performing, we work to "fix" teachers who are getting it done, we show how we don't measure up to other countries in any number of areas. Rarely do we see a focus on the assets we have in education.
I want to start focusing on those assets. I want to be what Dennis calls a resonant leader: one who creates "virtuous spirals of emotion" in those around them. And that needs to start with me identifying and working on my "signature strengths." We did a powerful exercise do help uncover those. Dennis had us think back to the last day that we were at work. Then think back to the last hour of that day. We then listed our strengths by telling a story of that last hour. I realized that I have some strengths that I often wish were better - things that I am good at but I always look at as in need of improvement.
Finally - we ended the day by taking 100 blank index cards and writing "I want" statements. These could be wants we have in any area of our life: work, family, friends, health, spirit. We had to write as many as we could, one per card. We wrote like this for about 20 minutes and then shared with a small group - one at a time. We then wrote for 10 more minutes. Our homework: double the number of cards we had for this morning.
The point? Sometimes people are a lot more clear about what they DON'T WANT than what they WANT. As leaders, we need to be clear about what we want in order to lead well. We need to speak with the voice of intention and that voice needs to be crystal clear. Clarity is a magnet.
We'll do more with those cards tomorrow - but for now I am just trying to get clear.
Please excuse my class from test prep
Dear Principal:
Please excuse my class from test prep this month. Between today and the NYS ELA Assessment in January are a two week school recess, a possible snow storm, and lots of celebrating. Rather than giving my students another practice test which is driving us all batty, We're going to go to 25 Days to Make a Difference and have a conversation about the theme of the project (Standard 4.R.2.18: Use specific evidence from stories to identify theme - a skill directly assessed every year on the Grade 4 assessment).
We may read Laura's list of suggestions and decide what makes the most sense for each of us (Standard 4.R.3.14: Analyze ideas and information on the basis of prior knowledge and personal experience) and leave comments (Standard 2-4.CPI.W.14: Develop an idea within a brief text) or perhaps join a community of students and adults dedicated to this simple yet eloquent idea.
I hope this note provides examples of some of the ways I will prepare my students to demonstrate mastery of the NYS English Language Arts Standards (as assessed by one test, given on one day) without donating our learning time to test prep. I promise that I'll spend the six days before the test teaching them the rules of the test and how to put their best foot forward. I assure you they'll get their fill of test prep but right now, at this moment, when our country and world are so ready for change, I'd rather donate our learning time to making a difference.
Sinerely,
A 4th grade teacher
Please excuse my class from test prep this month. Between today and the NYS ELA Assessment in January are a two week school recess, a possible snow storm, and lots of celebrating. Rather than giving my students another practice test which is driving us all batty, We're going to go to 25 Days to Make a Difference and have a conversation about the theme of the project (Standard 4.R.2.18: Use specific evidence from stories to identify theme - a skill directly assessed every year on the Grade 4 assessment).
We may read Laura's list of suggestions and decide what makes the most sense for each of us (Standard 4.R.3.14: Analyze ideas and information on the basis of prior knowledge and personal experience) and leave comments (Standard 2-4.CPI.W.14: Develop an idea within a brief text) or perhaps join a community of students and adults dedicated to this simple yet eloquent idea.
I hope this note provides examples of some of the ways I will prepare my students to demonstrate mastery of the NYS English Language Arts Standards (as assessed by one test, given on one day) without donating our learning time to test prep. I promise that I'll spend the six days before the test teaching them the rules of the test and how to put their best foot forward. I assure you they'll get their fill of test prep but right now, at this moment, when our country and world are so ready for change, I'd rather donate our learning time to making a difference.
Sinerely,
A 4th grade teacher
Make a Difference!
Times are tough - the economy is a bit scary and everyone just seems a bit down. I know how incredibly fortunate I am in many, many ways and so it is only right to share that good fortune.
Last night, I read about the work of two incredible bloggers and what they are doing this holiday to "pay it forward." Over at the Fischbowl, Karl Fisch talks about a great way to support Kiva, which provides loans to entrepreneurs in impoverished communities. He is making his contribution but also purchasing two gift certificates for people to contribute as well. His hope is that the people he gives it to will "pay it forward" and do the same. But more importanty, since so many people read his blog and have seen his "Shift Happens" video - he has a chance through his PLN to make a real impact here. I am joining Team Shift Happens!
Laura started her "25 Days to Make A Difference" campaign again this year and little sister Nina is joining in!! Laura and Nina aren't going to be donating money on behalf of the winner this year - instead they will be doing service work and fundraising. This is a powerful statement about our students - and one that I hope many teachers will join her in promoting. Please consider having your classrooms join her here and spread the word!!
Laura and Nina aren't going to be making monetary donations this year - but I am going to on their behalf. Around this time of the year, it takes a little bit to motivate me to exercise as much as I should so for each day between December 1 and December 25 that I exercise at least 20 minutes a day, I will put $5 in a jar. On December 25th, Laura and Nina can tell me where they want that money to go on their behalf for inspiring me. I'll keep you posted weekly on how I do!! (And I promise I won't let you down!)
So what do you say readers - ready to pay it forward?
Cross-posted on Writing Frameworks.
Last night, I read about the work of two incredible bloggers and what they are doing this holiday to "pay it forward." Over at the Fischbowl, Karl Fisch talks about a great way to support Kiva, which provides loans to entrepreneurs in impoverished communities. He is making his contribution but also purchasing two gift certificates for people to contribute as well. His hope is that the people he gives it to will "pay it forward" and do the same. But more importanty, since so many people read his blog and have seen his "Shift Happens" video - he has a chance through his PLN to make a real impact here. I am joining Team Shift Happens!
Laura started her "25 Days to Make A Difference" campaign again this year and little sister Nina is joining in!! Laura and Nina aren't going to be donating money on behalf of the winner this year - instead they will be doing service work and fundraising. This is a powerful statement about our students - and one that I hope many teachers will join her in promoting. Please consider having your classrooms join her here and spread the word!!
Laura and Nina aren't going to be making monetary donations this year - but I am going to on their behalf. Around this time of the year, it takes a little bit to motivate me to exercise as much as I should so for each day between December 1 and December 25 that I exercise at least 20 minutes a day, I will put $5 in a jar. On December 25th, Laura and Nina can tell me where they want that money to go on their behalf for inspiring me. I'll keep you posted weekly on how I do!! (And I promise I won't let you down!)
So what do you say readers - ready to pay it forward?
Cross-posted on Writing Frameworks.
Notes from the Middle: Formative Assessments, ELA and SED
Spent the weekend mulling over what I learned at the Fall meeting of the NYS Middle Level Liaisons. Here are some notes and thoughts (remember - this is my interpretation of what I heard and think about what I heard!! If you were there - feel free to correct/add/disagree!)
Ira Schwartz - Coordinator, Accountability, Policy and Administration
Ira remains my favorite SED speaker by far - he is open and honest and I really believe that he is working very hard against incredible odds to make sure that all the accountability pieces that have been put upon us are interpreted in the best possible way for kids and school districts. Ira spoke to us about the Growth Model that is currently before the USDOE and what NYSED hopes will happen, as well as a "growth for all" component that is not a part of accountability measures but makes good sense. In this model - schools will be rewarded (but not penalized) for the growth that students who have already achieved proficiency may make. This is pretty powerful as many of the districts in my region that participated in the Battelle for Kids model noted that the students who made little to no growth were indeed those who had been labeled proficient. I am thinking this is a great step forward in thinking and using the data. I still don't know exactly how they are determining growth - but I will leave that to people far wiser and more astute with numbers! Ira's PowerPoint can be found here.
Howard Goldsmith (Executive Coordinator for the Office of Curriculum and Instructional Support) presented with Nancy Noonan (Assistant Superintendent, ONC BOCES) who has served on the ELA Standards Review Committee to update us on the status of the ELA Standards review. This was a pretty brilliant move on Howard's end as we were able to get the perspective of "the field" with Nancy reporting out. Basically - in terms of the schedule that was reviewed again, the ELA standards are now moving from the review to the revision stage - with a first draft of the new standards hopefully available in January for public comment. (No worries - we reminded them that January is a bit of a rough month for ELA teachers in NYS!)
Folks can read the initial report put out by the team here and the PowerPoint slides from the presentation last week are here. Some interesting tidbits:
1. "Without a doubt, NYS is behind regarding standards." Howard made this comment as he was sharing the process the committee used to review the standards and I don't think that it comes as a surprise to anyone, particularly those who have worked at any length with our ELA standards!! What is interesting is that the committee spent a great deal of time reviewing what other states have done and Nancy acknowledged that the group was pretty impressed with those of West Virginia. I have to admit that a cursory glance at them is impressive to me as well! We were also reminded that the regional forums came out with the contradictory charge of fewer Performance Indicators but more specificity. Dealing with that will be interesting! Nancy indicated that at first blush, about 50% of the current PIs will be retained.
2. Which came first - the standards or the test? Howard reminded us once again that it is the standards that drive the curriculum, not the assessments. And when teachers state that they are teaching to the test, they are doing a disservice as it is impossible for ALL standards to be represented on individual tests. No matter how many times I hear this (and this is not the first time I have heard SED representatives say this) and how many times I bring this back to the teachers - I still hear this when I am working in districts. Not sure what else to say on this topic!
3. Literacy needs to be embedded in all content areas - each teacher must be considered a teacher of literacy. I am very grateful that they didn't call them teachers of reading and writing!! I have long held the notion that each content area has it's own "literacy" - as a social studies teacher I have seen this first-hand! Yet, not all teachers see their content area in that way. I have tried for 3 years to run a content area literacy course around this idea just for social studies and I never get enough folks to come. But - with ELA being first up in the review cycle and laying the groundwork for the other content areas, I am hopeful!
4. Viewing and Representing will be included as standards - not too much specificity here but I like the notion of embracing the fact that technology is quickly changing and so the standards will be relatively vague here. Howard was asked about the 21st Century skills and told the group that SED had a contract with the group but that we would be working on integrating those skills into our standards, not necessarily becoming a 21st Century Partner state. Discussions have been held with the group about focusing on things like appropriate use of social networks, understanding audience, validity of sources, and the ethics of communication. IMHO - these sound like pretty interesting conversations at the state level and I am really hoping they translate into the new standards!
5. Assessment, assessment, assessment!! Nancy spoke about the fact that the field seemed to prefer teacher-created (versus vendor created tests) and that the committee would continue to recommend that. Howard reminded everyone that the test development process takes 3 years and that a new RFP would go out after the new standards have been approved. It was here that Nancy commented that we need to use formative assessments on a "minute by minute" basis and Howard added that formative assessment was a misnomer in that formative assessments are a process, not one assessment. I was thrilled to hear those comments from state leaders and am desperately hoping that message filters down - like yesterday!
6. Early childhood development, specificity on text strategies, developing a common terminology and conventions & grammar were all also mentioned but not in great detail. I can't wait to hear more about how these are playing out in the standards revision.
I've tried to weed out the other notes to capture just what started conversation and isn't what folks might already know. We had many other speakers and topics but still digesting those!! Any comments or questions - add them to the comments below!!
Ira Schwartz - Coordinator, Accountability, Policy and Administration
Ira remains my favorite SED speaker by far - he is open and honest and I really believe that he is working very hard against incredible odds to make sure that all the accountability pieces that have been put upon us are interpreted in the best possible way for kids and school districts. Ira spoke to us about the Growth Model that is currently before the USDOE and what NYSED hopes will happen, as well as a "growth for all" component that is not a part of accountability measures but makes good sense. In this model - schools will be rewarded (but not penalized) for the growth that students who have already achieved proficiency may make. This is pretty powerful as many of the districts in my region that participated in the Battelle for Kids model noted that the students who made little to no growth were indeed those who had been labeled proficient. I am thinking this is a great step forward in thinking and using the data. I still don't know exactly how they are determining growth - but I will leave that to people far wiser and more astute with numbers! Ira's PowerPoint can be found here.
Howard Goldsmith (Executive Coordinator for the Office of Curriculum and Instructional Support) presented with Nancy Noonan (Assistant Superintendent, ONC BOCES) who has served on the ELA Standards Review Committee to update us on the status of the ELA Standards review. This was a pretty brilliant move on Howard's end as we were able to get the perspective of "the field" with Nancy reporting out. Basically - in terms of the schedule that was reviewed again, the ELA standards are now moving from the review to the revision stage - with a first draft of the new standards hopefully available in January for public comment. (No worries - we reminded them that January is a bit of a rough month for ELA teachers in NYS!)
Folks can read the initial report put out by the team here and the PowerPoint slides from the presentation last week are here. Some interesting tidbits:
1. "Without a doubt, NYS is behind regarding standards." Howard made this comment as he was sharing the process the committee used to review the standards and I don't think that it comes as a surprise to anyone, particularly those who have worked at any length with our ELA standards!! What is interesting is that the committee spent a great deal of time reviewing what other states have done and Nancy acknowledged that the group was pretty impressed with those of West Virginia. I have to admit that a cursory glance at them is impressive to me as well! We were also reminded that the regional forums came out with the contradictory charge of fewer Performance Indicators but more specificity. Dealing with that will be interesting! Nancy indicated that at first blush, about 50% of the current PIs will be retained.
2. Which came first - the standards or the test? Howard reminded us once again that it is the standards that drive the curriculum, not the assessments. And when teachers state that they are teaching to the test, they are doing a disservice as it is impossible for ALL standards to be represented on individual tests. No matter how many times I hear this (and this is not the first time I have heard SED representatives say this) and how many times I bring this back to the teachers - I still hear this when I am working in districts. Not sure what else to say on this topic!
3. Literacy needs to be embedded in all content areas - each teacher must be considered a teacher of literacy. I am very grateful that they didn't call them teachers of reading and writing!! I have long held the notion that each content area has it's own "literacy" - as a social studies teacher I have seen this first-hand! Yet, not all teachers see their content area in that way. I have tried for 3 years to run a content area literacy course around this idea just for social studies and I never get enough folks to come. But - with ELA being first up in the review cycle and laying the groundwork for the other content areas, I am hopeful!
4. Viewing and Representing will be included as standards - not too much specificity here but I like the notion of embracing the fact that technology is quickly changing and so the standards will be relatively vague here. Howard was asked about the 21st Century skills and told the group that SED had a contract with the group but that we would be working on integrating those skills into our standards, not necessarily becoming a 21st Century Partner state. Discussions have been held with the group about focusing on things like appropriate use of social networks, understanding audience, validity of sources, and the ethics of communication. IMHO - these sound like pretty interesting conversations at the state level and I am really hoping they translate into the new standards!
5. Assessment, assessment, assessment!! Nancy spoke about the fact that the field seemed to prefer teacher-created (versus vendor created tests) and that the committee would continue to recommend that. Howard reminded everyone that the test development process takes 3 years and that a new RFP would go out after the new standards have been approved. It was here that Nancy commented that we need to use formative assessments on a "minute by minute" basis and Howard added that formative assessment was a misnomer in that formative assessments are a process, not one assessment. I was thrilled to hear those comments from state leaders and am desperately hoping that message filters down - like yesterday!
6. Early childhood development, specificity on text strategies, developing a common terminology and conventions & grammar were all also mentioned but not in great detail. I can't wait to hear more about how these are playing out in the standards revision.
I've tried to weed out the other notes to capture just what started conversation and isn't what folks might already know. We had many other speakers and topics but still digesting those!! Any comments or questions - add them to the comments below!!
Reflections on Social Networking
I had to laugh as I was searching this blog's archives to link in a new post on Plugging In. What a difference a year makes!
LAST YEAR: "I don't have a FaceBook or MySpace account - mostly because I am old (or at least feel like it) and because I maintain several blogs. I network and connect through those."
THIS YEAR: What on earth was I thinking? I have a Facebook account now and while it is not as addictive for me as for some of my friends, it has been great fun to connect with high school and college friends as well as with my current friends. While I have recently been forced to think about the presence of my family on Facebook (Do I really need to know what my godson is doing in Arizona? Rather - do I want to?), nothing gives me more joy then throwing sheep at people! It is the casual side of my networking.
And having a blog, or two or three or eighty, doesn't mean that I am networking and connecting! The ClusterMaps on the blogs show readers and where they are located but the comments aren't always there. Blogging still feels like a one-way conversation (and fortunately, one I still enjoy having!)
LAST YEAR: "I also am concentrating on tools that I think I can help teachers translate into practice - ones that are worth their time learning. I have to confess - I just don't get the Twitter craze. Who cares what I am doing RIGHT NOW?"
THIS YEAR: After the post I just wrote on Plugged In - I am sure many of my friends (real and virtual) are laughing out loud right about now. I am a Twitter junkie and have found it to be such a valuable resource that I am blushing at my comments from last year. "Ones that are worth their time learning" - how arrogant was I? Sigh.
LAST YEAR: "But I also need to reach those who struggle with the technology and might not have the courage to stray from the traditional. To admit that we are now teaching in a very different world from that which taught us. How do I slow it down and make it more comfortable for them?"
THIS YEAR: Realizing now that teachers don't need to stray too far from the traditional to make use of the powerful tools out there. And have also realized that it isn't about the tools or slowing down (again - who do I think I am?) Instead, it is about bridging the gap between what we as teachers are good at and what many of our students are very good at - meeting them half-way if you will. And it isn't about teaching them, it is about modeling for them. I am not great at this - but I am more transparent in my learning about this.
Now that I have had a hefty helping of humble pie, I am realizing in finding and reflecting on this post how much I have grown and how much more I need to grow. I have become so comfortable with some of these tools and have integrated them into what I do, I realize that I might make some assumptions about the learners around me and their comfort level. I am very comfortable with the tools I know well but my increased networking has helped me realize how much I don't know as well as to start to ask in a very public way.
Funny - I wonder what blogging about my classroom practices (back in the day) and then finding those thoughts a year later would have done that simply reviewing my plan books didn't.
LAST YEAR: "I don't have a FaceBook or MySpace account - mostly because I am old (or at least feel like it) and because I maintain several blogs. I network and connect through those."
THIS YEAR: What on earth was I thinking? I have a Facebook account now and while it is not as addictive for me as for some of my friends, it has been great fun to connect with high school and college friends as well as with my current friends. While I have recently been forced to think about the presence of my family on Facebook (Do I really need to know what my godson is doing in Arizona? Rather - do I want to?), nothing gives me more joy then throwing sheep at people! It is the casual side of my networking.
And having a blog, or two or three or eighty, doesn't mean that I am networking and connecting! The ClusterMaps on the blogs show readers and where they are located but the comments aren't always there. Blogging still feels like a one-way conversation (and fortunately, one I still enjoy having!)
LAST YEAR: "I also am concentrating on tools that I think I can help teachers translate into practice - ones that are worth their time learning. I have to confess - I just don't get the Twitter craze. Who cares what I am doing RIGHT NOW?"
THIS YEAR: After the post I just wrote on Plugged In - I am sure many of my friends (real and virtual) are laughing out loud right about now. I am a Twitter junkie and have found it to be such a valuable resource that I am blushing at my comments from last year. "Ones that are worth their time learning" - how arrogant was I? Sigh.
LAST YEAR: "But I also need to reach those who struggle with the technology and might not have the courage to stray from the traditional. To admit that we are now teaching in a very different world from that which taught us. How do I slow it down and make it more comfortable for them?"
THIS YEAR: Realizing now that teachers don't need to stray too far from the traditional to make use of the powerful tools out there. And have also realized that it isn't about the tools or slowing down (again - who do I think I am?) Instead, it is about bridging the gap between what we as teachers are good at and what many of our students are very good at - meeting them half-way if you will. And it isn't about teaching them, it is about modeling for them. I am not great at this - but I am more transparent in my learning about this.
Now that I have had a hefty helping of humble pie, I am realizing in finding and reflecting on this post how much I have grown and how much more I need to grow. I have become so comfortable with some of these tools and have integrated them into what I do, I realize that I might make some assumptions about the learners around me and their comfort level. I am very comfortable with the tools I know well but my increased networking has helped me realize how much I don't know as well as to start to ask in a very public way.
Funny - I wonder what blogging about my classroom practices (back in the day) and then finding those thoughts a year later would have done that simply reviewing my plan books didn't.
Pondering PD
This is the third draft of my ponderings on professional development and I hope that I do not sound as cranky as the original. I've decided to go with a bullet like format because I really am not trying to make a point, but to reach out to others with my wonderings and get some feedback (push back?). Bear with me!
Lots of feedback lately about how PD sessions are engaging and "lots learned" but how do we know if it really impacted classroom practice and therefore students. Finding it harder and harder to get districts to commit to long term PD with coaching in order to make that happen due to the "time" factor. What is the tipping point?
Special area teachers - encore teachers - teachers in non-core content areas (or whatever the PC term is in your district) provide feedback that they would like more PD on topics relevant to their content area. How are folks handling this one?How do those content areas "fit" into the larger district work?
Seems like districts are suffering from "initiative overload" from the teacher perspective. I am fairly certain that the administration does have a big picture in mind but it never seems to be shared with the teachers. How do we help them with that? Should we be making that clear if they are not?
Wondering if we really see ourselves as learners on professional development days? I started a recent session with teachers reflecting on their students and learning and then made the connection to their learning for the day. Many seemed surprised that would be the focus. Are we so busy with accountability and mandates that we have forgotten our true purpose?
Help me out - before I burn out!
Photo credits: All photos from Flickr (dominoes, puzzle, transparency, reflection, extinguish)
Lots of feedback lately about how PD sessions are engaging and "lots learned" but how do we know if it really impacted classroom practice and therefore students. Finding it harder and harder to get districts to commit to long term PD with coaching in order to make that happen due to the "time" factor. What is the tipping point?
Special area teachers - encore teachers - teachers in non-core content areas (or whatever the PC term is in your district) provide feedback that they would like more PD on topics relevant to their content area. How are folks handling this one?How do those content areas "fit" into the larger district work?
Seems like districts are suffering from "initiative overload" from the teacher perspective. I am fairly certain that the administration does have a big picture in mind but it never seems to be shared with the teachers. How do we help them with that? Should we be making that clear if they are not?
Wondering if we really see ourselves as learners on professional development days? I started a recent session with teachers reflecting on their students and learning and then made the connection to their learning for the day. Many seemed surprised that would be the focus. Are we so busy with accountability and mandates that we have forgotten our true purpose?
Help me out - before I burn out!
Photo credits: All photos from Flickr (dominoes, puzzle, transparency, reflection, extinguish)
Blogging the October 2008 DATAG Meeting
I wrote about the meeting last year here.
This year's meeting has the largest attendence ever at a DATAG regular meeting. That's a whole lot of data heads in the same room. I was tweeting some of David's comments for those following back in Buffalo but it's hard to take what David Abrams says and filter it down to 140 characters. My tweets were:
*Achievement is up in English statewide, except in Grade 8.
*n from 3-8 assessments - 1,200,000 students in ny. Thought it was higher
*"dis-intuitive" new word - describing the role of new language acquisition and NYSESLAT assessment. David has hit his verbal stride.
*"we are persistent because we're New Yorkers. And we're loud."
*12 minutes ago from web what happens when you change standards and implement new exams? Bigger bump at year 2 than expected.(math)
*David just reeled off about 10 different statistics about schools in ny. Sexy.
"degenerative rhetoric" - describing mathematics as a mastery skill
*FYI - David began his presentation by saying he isn't talking to be understood, he expects some won't understand him. "Deal with it."
*NY is one of the most tightly coupled states around testing. Arizona is at the other end of that spectrum.
I think he shared something very important about Algebra but I'll have to listen to the recording to figure it out. If David were hooked up to an MRI machince while talking, I imagine it would look like fireworks at Disney World. In the space of two minutes, he gave a commentary on Pie Charts, an anecdote about students graduating early from High School and comments about the rules of large numbers. He added a quick aside about the fact that someone people wouldn't come back next year because of him and shrugged, pretty much saying "this is the system. If you want to be a part of it, learn how it works".His PowerPoint is below. I'll figure out a wy to post the audio later.
WOW!
I think that the title of this post sums up how everyone is feeling lately. Educators are wondering what "school" will look like in the future and everyone is wondering what our finances/lifestyles/government is going to look like tomorrow. It is a crazy and amazing time to be alive.
I miss my social studies class with everything that is going on in the world right now. The teachable moments, the opportunities to push student thinking and the possibilities are endless right now. I keep trying to pump up the teachers around me to discuss these things in class, but at times it seems like we try to insulate our kids while they are in school.
I've also been in faculty rooms lately where I have heard teachers say they aren't intending to vote - that their vote doesn't matter - that everyone knows how the election is going to turn out anyway. (Do we? I mean really - have people not learned anything from the past?)
I'm not trying to espouse any political viewpoint here - just encourage everyone to be active citizens this November. And this video just summed it all up for me...pass it along to five friends!
I miss my social studies class with everything that is going on in the world right now. The teachable moments, the opportunities to push student thinking and the possibilities are endless right now. I keep trying to pump up the teachers around me to discuss these things in class, but at times it seems like we try to insulate our kids while they are in school.
I've also been in faculty rooms lately where I have heard teachers say they aren't intending to vote - that their vote doesn't matter - that everyone knows how the election is going to turn out anyway. (Do we? I mean really - have people not learned anything from the past?)
I'm not trying to espouse any political viewpoint here - just encourage everyone to be active citizens this November. And this video just summed it all up for me...pass it along to five friends!
How the hell do you get people to dance?
Constant readers of this blog (both of you!) will recall that Jenn shared the "Where the Hell is Matt?" video with us in June and it is something that sort of set the theme of the summer for me. It really captured the idea that our world is indeed flat, but even more importantly, we can find joy in the smallest of things.
In my feeds today, I ran across the video below where Matt explains how we got people to dance with him using a presentation method called "Ignite": a five minute presentation using 20 slides, each slide advanced automatically every 15 seconds.
There is a lot that I love about the presentation. First, the style which calls into play some real creativity and use of time (21st century skills if I ever heard them!) Second, it was done at a conference called Gnomedex which sound a little like a techie TED conference. And thirdly, the technology and resources that Matt used to make those incredible videos.
Watching Matt in all of the videos, including this one, makes me smile. Of course, Jenn and I convinced some folks to dance with us this summer as well but in a much more low tech and local way. We'll never share that video outside our community but it makes me smile just as much as Matt. How can you get people to dance with you?
In my feeds today, I ran across the video below where Matt explains how we got people to dance with him using a presentation method called "Ignite": a five minute presentation using 20 slides, each slide advanced automatically every 15 seconds.
There is a lot that I love about the presentation. First, the style which calls into play some real creativity and use of time (21st century skills if I ever heard them!) Second, it was done at a conference called Gnomedex which sound a little like a techie TED conference. And thirdly, the technology and resources that Matt used to make those incredible videos.
Watching Matt in all of the videos, including this one, makes me smile. Of course, Jenn and I convinced some folks to dance with us this summer as well but in a much more low tech and local way. We'll never share that video outside our community but it makes me smile just as much as Matt. How can you get people to dance with you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)