Thinking Like an Assessor, Criteria and Validity, and Homework or No Homework?

In this week's chapters from Ubd, I can understand the importance of determining the types of assessment before designing lesson plans. I agree with Wiggins and McTighe, this is an unnatural process for teachers. Teachers are always creating lessons that engage students, spark their interests, and make it "fun". Then, when we have completed a section, chapter, or unit we give quizzes, tests, and sometimes a project (where fluff seems more valuable than the knowledge presented). Now the connection seems so obvious. We create the assessments first, to ensure understanding and transferability is met. Otherwise we are in the situation with the apple orchard, bobbing for apples, and making applesauce as was discussed in the beginning of this book. However, if the assessments are expressly stated in the curriculum, teachers do not have the liberty to choose their own assessments (that is, if the teacher were following the curriculum correctly). On the other hand, by doing this curriculum makers ensure that understanding and transfer are achieved and that teachers are correctly assessing the learning of their students. Is it possible to give specific assessments and also allow teachers the opportunity to choose which method they prefer?

As a math teacher, I am always finding myself looking for new methods of evaluating my students. After all, math seems to be so cut and dry, either they have the right answer or they don't, right? WRONG! While the answer is usually right or wrong, the methods students use to get the answer differ greatly. Some students use pictures, some use words, and some use formulas to answer a problem. I have even had some students try to use logical reasoning to determine the answer to a problem. I have attended several workshops on differentiated instruction, authentic assessment, and cooperative learning to develop new ways of "teaching" math. But as my Ubd group discussed, there was no time given to make the transfer of this knew knowledge. The only way the transfer could take place is if I spent time after the session to develop plans incorporating the new knowledge. It made me realize that I too have to allow my students time in class to take new skills explained and apply them appropriately.

"Criteria and Validity" in Ubd, sparked my memory about a workshop I attended on authentic assessments. In the workshop we discussed how to create rubrics. Since math is my passion, I need numbers to help me in assessing students grades. It is difficult for me to look at a project and say, "Well that looks like a B+ to me." I always felt that I needed to follow something, some criteria, in order to be fair to my students. I think that rubrics are a good way to grade objectively with assessments that are subjective in nature. This chapter brings up a valid point pertaining to "correctness". "We typically pay too much attention to correctness and too little attention to the degree of understanding." In math, this scenario is all too familiar. I am becoming increasingly educated in assessing student learning in real and authentic ways. As a result of this, I am more aware of the degree of understanding, and not merely whether the answer is right or wrong. Learning is a process, so the way we assess needs to look at the whole process, not just one outcome.

After reading chapter eight of Ubd, I thought about the ways I assess my students. One of the criteria we are expected to use in our grading is homework. In fact it is written in our grading policy, homework is to count for at least 20% of a student's grade. While I do not believe in loading students up on homework, some teachers do not share my philosophy. It can become burdensome for students and families when the student is expected to complete hours of homework after school. With the limited time parents have to spend with their children, who wants to be sitting at a table doing homework or yelling at a child to make sure the homework is completed? From a teacher's perspective, however, I feel that homework is a useful tool for educators in assessing student learning. It is another way we can look at a student's work and determine whether the transfer has taken place. However, this is not the only source of data for teachers, and I do not feel it should ever be the only source.

On a related note, March's issue of Educational Leadership has an article about homework (this was where I made my connection). The article explains how research has indicated the effectiveness of homework. Despite the research, the argument against homework is becoming more and more popular among parents and students. I often wonder if that is because students are expected to learn more at younger ages and parents are unable to assist their children, or are students over involved in activities outside of school and have difficulty finding the balance? The article also makes one point clear on both sides, "only assign homework that is beneficial to student learning instead of assigning homework as a matter of policy." This definitely goes against my district's policy for homework. However, I will stand my ground and assign only homework that makes sense for my class, not unnecessary busy work, policy or no policy!

Enduring Understandings Teachers Grapple With

Teachers have to grapple with several understandings. As I read the Understanding By Design chapters for this week, I started to think about how the six facets of understanding relate to my professional life as a teacher. I believe the six facets of understanding (Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-knowledge) all have a place in the minds of teachers throughout their careers. When I think about these facets I imagine a common scenario in classrooms- critiquing student work. The facets of understanding are often visited by teachers when students do poorly on an assessment. I will try to go through the facets using this classic example.

With the facet of explanation, teachers are always asking, Why are the scores so low (or high)? What do the scores mean? By answering these questions we attempt to improve on our teaching for the next lesson or unit. Teachers always try to rationalize why the results turned out the way that they did, creating theories of their own. In the facet of interpretation, we build upon the explanation facet. Once we have developed our theories of why things are the way that they are, we then try to figure out Why does it matter? and What does it mean? Both of these questions are important to answer before moving on with the curriculum. If students have failed the chapter test, there must be a reason for it. Since I teach mathematics, I can easily relate to this facet. If the students do not understand the unit on multiplication then they will not be able to understand the unit on multiplying fractions or multiplying decimals. While these skills are independent of one another, they are also connected and some consider them building blocks. Along the same idea of students failing a test, the teacher also visits the facet of application asking How can I use this knowledge in the next class? How can my thinking and planning change to meet the demands of my students? Teachers are also able to visit the facet of perspective asking themselves Do the students not understand the material because of how it was presented, or are there other factors? Did the students complete their homework and did they ask questions when they did not understand something? By looking at the situation from another point of view, teachers are able to have a deeper understanding of why students are not doing well in class. Along these same line, we come to the facet of empathy. I remember a situation one year where one of my best students failed the standardized test. I was completely shocked, so I started to investigate how this could have happened. I finally discovered that this student was having a difficult time at home. Clearly her home life was affecting her school life. And on the day of the testing she was concerned with the situation at home and was unable to focus on the test. Teachers have to have the ability to be compassionate and caring toward their students. To understand why students think or act the way they do, a teacher has to be able to empathize with the student's situation. The final facet of self-knowledge should often be visited by teachers of various levels. Teachers must always self-reflect about lessons and interactions with students and colleagues. Teachers have to constantly question the way they view the world and be willing to see things in a different light.

This is only one area that teachers try to understand. There are many other aspects of the education profession that teachers still question. These include students, parents, administrative decisions, National mandates, local policies, etc. The list goes on (research in education is forever developing new ideas and solutions to problems) and probably will continue to be added to throughout our careers. It is up to the teachers to question and understand what is occurring in schools so that they may be able to make a positive change in the world.

On a related note, I received my Educational Leadership magazine today and was drawn to the first article "All Our Students Thinking" by Nel Noddings. As I read this article, it seemed as though the words jumped off of the page! He talks about how students are taught the skills but are not required to understand the information taught. "The key is to give students opportunities to think and to make an effort to connect one subject area to other subject areas in the curriculum and to everyday life." The most intriguing part of the article is when Noddings discusses how we should apply "critical thinking" to the teachers as well as the students. "The pressure to cover mandated material can lead to hasty and superficial instruction that favors correct responses to multiple choice questions over thinking." He feels that teachers should be "willing to think critically about education theory." If students are expected to think and understand (through Explanation, Interpretation, Application, Perspective, Empathy, and Self-knowledge), then teachers should be required to do the same within the realm of education. Teachers should question "why?", in order to have a complete understanding of their students and the way that they think.

Characteristics of a SUCCESSFUL Novice Teacher

As I reflect on my personal experiences as a novice teacher, I wonder, could I be considered successful? Does the completion of the first year and the willingness to return the following year classify me as successful? According to Scott Mandel, in Educational Leadership (March 2006) "First-year teachers have one basic goal in mind—survival." Looking back on my experiences, both positive and negative, I wonder, what is success? One may classify a successful neophyte teacher as innovative, creative, and spontaneous in the classroom. This includes lesson plans, extra-curricular activities, as well as the overall classroom environment. Someone else may classify effective classroom management skills as success for a novice teacher. Still others may think that success lies in the amount of material that is "covered" in the first year. And yet we have the standardized tests and observations that some may use to measure the new teacher's success. To me, success is measured by more than just one aspect of the classroom. As teachers, we use several assessments to measure the students' understanding of the material. As administrators, we need to be willing to do the same for novice teachers.

What are the characteristics of a successful novice teacher? To me, when it comes to talking about teaching, the words "successful" and "effective" are synonymous. While first year teachers need the support and time to develop professionally, their long term goal should be to become effective teachers. Here are some characteristics I feel novice teachers should strengthen to become effective:

• Willingness to learn and implement suggested strategies
• Enthusiasm for teaching, learning, and content
• Ability to praise and encourage on a regular basis
• Talent to motivate students to learn or facilitate their learning
• Capacity to treat students equally and fairly (without regard to student ability, ethnicity, or gender)
  
• Possess knowledge of content and pedagogical skills and how to incorporate them in the classroom
  
• Ability to move past the "basics" toward the "core" of the content taught
• Capability to implement the curriculum
• Capacity to make sound decisions, plans, and goals
• Possess the skills necessary to manage the classroom context so that students are engaged in learning
• Desire to help students develop positive attitudes toward school and self
• Desire to be a role model
• Compassionate and respectful of students, self, and colleagues
  

Being an effective teacher takes time, patience, and willingness to learn and change. It is not something that can be accomplished overnight. Reflection is key for those first years of teaching. A successful teacher is able to see when something doesn't work and changes it. They are flexible and thick skinned, able to bounce back when needed. If a neophyte teacher is able to walk away that first year with three or more of these characteristics they are, in my mind, successful. To accomplish this task, however, new teachers need support of the administration and colleagues. While some teachers may never possess ALL of these characteristics, they should always aim for excellence and improve in these areas.

Mission, Vision, Curriculum, Politics

After reading this week's readings for class, I began to try to understand (as mentioned in UBD) the connection between a school's mission, vision, curriculum, and the political demands on school systems. UBD discusses how important it is to keep the end in mind and work backwards when constructing curriculum. If the state standards dictate our "final" results , how can a meaningful and useful mission, vision, and curriculum be established?
So, here are my thought about this subject. A mission explains the school's current goals, for the immediate future, whereas a vision is the "big" picture or what the school will be like in the end. A professor I had last semester stated it beautifully: "Mission is the goal to lose weight, while vision is the image of what you will look like after you lose the weight." Curriculum utilizes these goals to map out what is to be taught and what the learning outcomes are. However, the curriculum is not independent from the mission and vision. They all have to work together to improve student learning.
The complicated portion of this is the demands be the government (i.e. passing the state standardized tests). The only way I could make sense of this was to create a scenario. Suppose we take this scenario. A school has in it's mission and vision something about "developing critical thinkers," for example. The curriculum is then created with learning tasks and objectives to aid the students in becoming critical thinkers. Then the state standards and standardized tests also promote students as critical thinkers. This is where it works! But what happens when the mission, vision, and curriculum are not working toward the same goals? Do those schools fall behind since they do not share the same goals, or are the goals unspoken goals?
After thinking about this topic further, I started to imagine the difficulties faced by administrators when trying to motivate the staff toward passing the state tests. This becomes especially difficult when the administrator does not share the same beliefs as the state. I then looked to a book I am reading that explains this process beautifully. In What Great Principals Do Differently by Todd Whitaker, he says "Effective leaders focus on the behaviors that lead to success, not the beliefs that stand in the way of it. Effective principals don't let standardized tests take over the entire school." He then continues to discuss the schools that exceeded the state's expectations on the tests, and how the principals of those schools felt and what they believed. He explains that these principals realized the importance of test results to others and how it, "brought their school greater autonomy to do what they believed was best for students." These principals also understood the "powerful backdrop" provided by the state standards in aligning and improving curriculum. "The state standards forced educators to shift the focus on the real issue of student learning."
Curriculum must be changed to address the the standards given by the state. However, our mission and vision should also be aligned with the curriculum. All of this is connected and all of it has one main goal: to focus on student learning.

What is Curriculum?

There are many different perspectives to what curriculum entails. I believe that curriculum is made of several different components. Curriculum is the set of guidelines that define what a course of study will be. Curriculum could also include textbooks or materials used in the class as well as the content to be covered. It may also be the set of objectives or what the learning outcomes should be at the conclusion of the course of study.

Now that I have explained my definition of curriculum, who should design it? I believe this is a job for the education professionals. This means that the teachers, supervisors and administrators should be actively involved in the process of curriculum development. I do not believe that a textbook should define the curriculum for the course, but rather a curriculum should define the textbook. I think it would also be a great idea for the parents and students to be a part of the curriculum development. While teachers have great insight as to what may work well in the classroom, students can be very helpful critics. After all, it is the students that are responsible for their own learning.

So, who should control it? Well I know who does control it, but I feel that the same people who create the curriculum should have the control. After reading and discussing about mission statements, it is imperative that the teachers, administrators, and students are actively involved in the mission statement process. Otherwise the mission statement becomes just another piece of paper that schools can check off of their big checklist of things to complete for the year. I feel that the same is true for curriculum. If curriculum is made for courses of study with little or no input from the teachers involved, the curriculum becomes just another piece of paper to check off of the checklist. Curriculum needs to be a document where all stakeholders are involved in creating it so they will be more likely to follow it. I can relate this to a classroom example. If a teacher gives rules to the students and says that this is the way we will do things this year, the students may follow it or they may resist it. However, if the teacher works with the students to develop a list of rules as a class the students will be more likely to follow it and to remember the rules, simply because they are actively involved in the process.

Personal Mission

My mission in school is to model and teach how to become a "life-long" learner. As a teacher, I learn something new each year. I learn new things about myself, my students, and about the profession. I am constantly put into new and diverse situations where I have to reflect on my beliefs and, many times, I have to create different solutions to one problem. My mission is simple, and yet it can be very complex. I love what I teach, and I love teaching. I hope that my passion for my subject is contagious, and I hope that students will want to explore more than just what I present to them in class. Over the years, I have had some reassurance that this mission has been completed, when a few students had brought to class websites, articles, etc. that they found on their own time and shared them.