Arguing against “coding for all”

Nathaniel Calhoun writes:

If I have the attention of a classroom of young, poorly educated, low-income citizens of the world for three hours a week over the next six months, what is the absolute most important thing that I can teach them?

I’m a pragmatist, so I might rephrase that question: Is there anything I could teach this class of students that will actually confer an advantage upon them, which helps them to become more secure and better able to meet their needs and those of their families?

I think there is. But it isn’t trying to anticipate what professional skills will be in demand four years later.

This is an interesting and cogent argument against the “coding for all” movement. In the end, I believe it’s most important to teach problem identification and solution skills using content that resonates with the learner. If that’s learning to code, fine. But it might not be …

Full article here.

Thanks @yonkeltron!

Using the FIT Teaching™ Framework for Successful Teacher Evaluations

fit-teaching-white-paperThe FIT Teaching™ framework, a coherent approach designed for schools and districts, ensures that high-quality teaching and learning occurs in every classroom, every day. Based on the work of Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey, FIT Teaching is both a tool for teachers to ensure success for every learner, as well as a resource for supervisors to conduct successful observations and evaluations that support instructional growth. Fisher and Frey have developed a clear and thoughtful framework that, when consistently and thoughtfully implemented, results in success for all. Using FIT Teaching, teachers can show continuous growth in a high-stakes evaluation process; more important, students are provided the opportunity to thrive and achieve.

Download a FIT Teaching white paper that describes the framework and aligns it to the five major teacher evaluation models (Danielson, Marshall, Marzano, McREL, Stronge). Access the paper from the ASCD website here.

Join me for a FIT Teaching workshop in sunny La Jolla, California on December 2-3, 2014. Click for information.

Educating Kids is harder than rocket science

Jack Schneider writes in the Washington Post:

“most of us—reformers, particularly—think we know what’s best for the public schools. But we would never presume to have answers about where to look for sources of Gamma-rays or about the importance of measuring Jupiter’s atmosphere.

Imagine Congress exerting control over NASA through a bill like No Child Left Behind, or coercing policy shifts through a program like Race to the Top. Or well-intended organizations like Teach For America jumping into the fray—recruiting talented college graduates and placing them on the job as rocket scientists. Or philanthropists deciding to apply lessons from their successes in domains like DVD rentals to “disrupt” the NASA “monopoly.”

How long would any of this be taken seriously? …

Schooling … is plagued by a number of challenges. Some are relatively straightforward; schools need adequate funding, for instance. But most of these issues are dilemmas rather than problems. The difference being that whereas problems can be solved, dilemmas can only be managed. What, for instance, do you do about student engagement? That’s a question not easily solved by introducing new gadgets or by paying students to stay focused.

Want to put a rocket into space? No problem. Just get enough brains working on the task.

Want to educate 50 million students in a powerful, relevant, and relatively equal way? Now that’s a challenge.

As it turns out, educating kids isn’t rocket science. It’s harder.”

Read the entire article here.

Student Success Starts with a FIT Culture

Cross-posted at ASCD In Service

Now that the school year is underway, you’re rockin’ and rollin’ and making great strides with your pacing guide and curriculum content. As you plan your lessons and consider activities and instructional strategies, take a moment to pause and reflect on the culture of learning that is being established, both in your classroom and in your school.

“Academic press is absolutely necessary, but not sufficient to operationalize the mission of the school. . . . No school improvement effort will be effective, maintained, or enhanced unless school culture and academic press are both addressed and aligned” (Fisher, Frey, & Pumpian 2012, p. 5). Within the FIT Teaching™ model, school and classroom culture is a critical prerequisite to implementing effective instruction.

THE 5 PILLARS

In their book How to Create a Culture of Achievement, Fisher, Frey, and Pumpian. identify five pillars that are critical to student achievement. These pillars are useful when working to implement a strong school and classroom culture. They are also invaluable when examining the current state of affairs in your learning environment.

Pillar 1: Welcome

Imagine checking into a hotel and waiting a long, long time to be helped, only to then be treated brusquely at the front desk and shuffled off, unceremoniously, to your room. You would probably choose never to patronize that hotel again.

Similarly, many visitors to schools and classrooms often feel as though they are an unwelcome disruption rather than an honored guest. The same goes for students as well. This pillar suggests that educators need to make a conscious effort to establish a welcoming environment for all learners and visitors.

How do we know our school and classrooms are welcoming?

  • Try the secret shopper method and invite a stranger to visit and have them report back.
  • Send out a student and/or parent survey asking for anonymous feedback.
  • Hold student focus groups to allow free discussion about the nature of your welcoming environment.

Pillar 2: Do No Harm

Behavior issues—often referred to as disciplinary issues—are a sticky subject for many schools and classrooms. Discussions around behavior issues and how to respond to misbehavior monopolize time and can often be emotionally charged.

This pillar describes the importance of all adults agreeing to be the models of correct behavior. This begins with the adults discussing behavioral goals and expectations and making a concerted effort to work together to hold everyone (not just students) to the agreed upon standards. In such an environment, one teacher doesn’t permit gum chewing in class while another ignores it. With this approach, school rules have a purpose and are consistently monitored. Ultimately, however, the goal is for students to self-regulate so that “enforcement” becomes a moot point.

How do we know our school and classrooms subscribe to a policy of “do no harm”?

  • Survey the students about school rules. Don’t just ask if they know the rules, but ask if they know why the rules are important.
  • Audit your discipline referrals. What are the trends, patterns, and commonalities? Do certain issues warrant further action—perhaps a more concerted effort on the part of all staff?
  • Survey the teachers. What do they believe are the major behavioral issues? Do their answers match what your audit results suggest?

Pillar 3: Choice Words

In his book Choice Words, Peter Johnston writes, “Language . . . is not merely representational (though it is that); it is also constitutive” (2004, p. 9). He shares an example of a teacher asking students questions for which she already knows the answers. This reinforces the teacher’s role as the font of all knowledge and students as recipients. In another example, a teacher announces that the class will have free choice time, but only after finishing the reading task first. This subtly indicates that the reading is a necessary work chore to be completed before having “fun.”

According to this pillar, the language teachers choose to use has a great effect on how students come to view their lives at school, the tasks they are to complete, and their roles as learners. Consider the nuanced difference between these exchanges:

Student: I’m having trouble correcting the grammar in this sentence.

Teacher: What have I taught you about subject-verb agreement?

Or …

Student: I’m having trouble correcting the grammar in this sentence.

Teacher: As a writer, what have you learned about subject-verb agreement?

In the first example, the teacher is firmly in control of the knowledge and expects the student to recall what has been taught. In the second example, the teacher reinforces that the student is a writer who is learning the critical aspects of a writer’s craft.

How do we know our school’s educators choose words carefully?

  • Teachers can self-assess the language they use in the classroom. Are they phrasing things in a way that creates a sense of agency for their students?
  • Administrators can support teachers’ self-assessment by collecting observation data and sharing it with teachers so they can reflect on their language choices.

Pillar 4: It’s Never Too Late to Learn

The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

This Chinese proverb suggests that there is value in working toward achieving goals no matter how late we are in getting started or how daunting the task may seem. This idea is particularly relevant for our students, who arrive at school with test scores labeling them a certain number of years “below grade level.”

This pillar suggests that all educators must believe that students can be successful and competent learners—not merely compliant students. In her book Mindset (2006), Carol Dweck describes the power of people’s beliefs. In the first mind-set she depicts, one believes abilities are etched in stone, permanent and immutable. Our intelligence is fixed and thus we hold a fixed mind-set. In the other mind-set, one believes that learning and achievement can be cultivated through hard work and perseverance. In this example, we hold a growth mind-set.

Imagine the difference for students when administrators and teachers in their school regard them with growth mind-sets, not fixed ones! Combine this with the notion of choice words and compare these statements made by a teacher:

Wow, great work on this project. You are so smart.

Or …

Wow, great work on this project. You put a lot of thought and effort into it.

In the first example, the student is reminded that her inherent intelligence was responsible for her success. This creates a lot of pressure for a student—what happens if that intelligence isn’t enough? In the second example, the student’s work and effort is acknowledged. Hard work is not a finite resource. When a student struggles, perseverance will see them through.

How do we know our school and classrooms are places where it’s never too late to learn?

  • Review the content and level of cognitive tasks given to students. Do they represent high expectations for all?
  • Analyze formative and summative assessments for the depth of knowledge required. Are the questions asking students to recall and reproduce or to analyze information and extend their thinking?
  • Discuss academic recovery efforts in your classrooms and your school. What happens when students don’t achieve as expected? What supports are in place?

Pillar 5: Best School in the Universe

Although this statement might invoke images of bragging educators—We work at the best school!—it is actually about members of a school holding themselves accountable for creating the best possible environment for students. This pillar suggests a continuous improvement effort in order to make a school great. Teaching is a complex and demanding job that requires constant attention from motivated individuals in order to be effective.

In his book Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motivates Us (2009), Daniel Pink identifies three critical aspects of motivation: autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Autonomy speaks to our ability to be self-directed in our work and learning. Mastery describes our desire to get good at something. Purpose reflects our wish to pursue meaningful tasks—not busy work or artificial assignments.

These principles can be applied to the work of educators and the work of students within a school. After all, the best school in the universe is one that’s a great place to work as well as a great place to learn.

How do we know our school and classrooms are the best in the universe?

  • Are students’ tasks challenging, authentic, and relevant?
  • Do tasks offer students choices and collaborative opportunities?
  • Are supports designed so that students can master important learning?
  • Are educators given opportunities to be self-directed?
  • Are educators given opportunities and supports to continuously improve their craft?
  • Are educators engaged in meaningful pursuits that have a direct effect on student learning?

Don’t get too caught up in your curriculum without considering the environment. FIT Teaching™ begins with a culture of achievement.

REFERENCES:

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Ballantine.

Fisher, D., Frey, N., Pumpian, I. (2012). How to create a culture of achievement in your school and classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Johnston, P. H. (2004). Choice words: How our language affects children’s learning. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

Yikes! Be careful choosing your textbooks.

During a recent curriculum review meeting, a social studies teacher looked at the US History final exam that had been used for years in the district. “Why are there 10 questions about the Alamo?” she asked.

Good question for teachers in Pennsylvania. While the Alamo may be interesting, should it comprise 10% of the final exam (and consequently, 10% of the year’s instruction)? With some digging, it didn’t take long for the group to realize that they were using the final exam provided by the textbook manufacturer, and that the textbook was designed for students in Texas. Thus began a deep discussion about the teaching of history, and the realization that sometimes no textbook is better than a significantly biased textbook.

Enter new information from a group of educators assessing proposed textbook updates for Texas — and this should be a concern for everyone. Because, as Texan textbooks get adopted, they are marketed to the rest of the United States:

Scholarly reviews of 43 proposed history, geography and government textbooks for Grades 6-12 — undertaken by the Education Fund of the Texas Freedom Network, a watchdog and activist group that monitors far-right issues and organizations — found extensive problems in American Government textbooksU.S. and World History textbooks, Religion in World History textbooks, and Religion in World Geography textbooks.  The state board will vote on which books to approve in November.

Ideas promoted in various proposed textbooks include the notion that Moses and Solomon inspired American democracy, that in the era of segregation only “sometimes” were schools for black children “lower in quality” and that Jews view Jesus Christ as an important prophet.

Here are the broad findings of 10 scholars, who wrote four separate reports, taken from an executive summary, followed by the names of the scholars and a list of publishers who submitted textbooks.

  • A number of government and world history textbooks exaggerate Judeo-Christian influence on the nation’s founding and Western political tradition.
  • Two government textbooks include misleading information that undermines the Constitutional concept of the separation of church and state.
  • Several world history and world geography textbooks include biased statements that inappropriately portray Islam and Muslims negatively.
  • All of the world geography textbooks inaccurately downplay the role that conquest played in the spread of Christianity.
  • Several world geography and history textbooks suffer from an incomplete – and often inaccurate – account of religions other than Christianity.
  • Coverage of key Christian concepts and historical events are lacking in a few textbooks, often due to the assumption that all students are Christians and already familiar with Christian events and doctrine.
  • A few government and U.S. history textbooks suffer from an uncritical celebration of the free enterprise system, both by ignoring legitimate problems that exist in capitalism and failing to include coverage of government’s role in the U.S. economic system.
  • One government textbook flirts with contemporary Tea Party ideology, particularly regarding the inclusion of anti-taxation and anti-regulation arguments.
  • One world history textbook includes outdated – and possibly offensive – anthropological categories and racial terminology in describing African civilization.
  • A number of U.S. history textbooks evidence a general lack of attention to Native American peoples and culture and occasionally include biased or misleading information.
  • One government textbook … includes a biased – verging on offensive – treatment of affirmative action.
  • Most U.S. history textbooks do a poor job of covering the history of LGBT citizens in discussions of efforts to achieve civil rights in this country.
  • Elements of the Texas curriculum standards give undue legitimacy to neo-Confederate arguments about “states’ rights” and the legacy of slavery in the South. While most publishers avoid problems with these issues, passages in a few U.S. history and government textbooks give a nod to these misleading arguments.

Read the entire Washington Post article here.

Seven Key Takeaways From FIT Teaching

Recognize that wrong answers came from somewhere. Dig deeper to find out where they came from. Teachers feel there’s never enough time to remediate for students when they struggle. But, if we can learn to understand the difference between a mistake (when pointed out, a learner knows what to do next) and an error (when pointed out, the learner has no idea what to do next, thus requiring reteaching), then we can spend precious instructional time where it’s most needed. Did a student simply forget to capitalize the first word of the sentence? Or does that student truly not understand punctuation rules? Teachers can maximize their student interaction time when they spend some time analyzing student responses.

Ask students what they are learning, not what they are doing. This seemingly small change in questioning allows a shift in focus that can help teachers better gauge students’ understanding of content. Rather than asking students what they are doing—that is, asking them to explain a task—teachers should ask students what they are learning—that is, asking students to explain the purpose of a task and how they are learning from it. At Health Sciences High and Middle College, where Fisher and Frey teach, staff—and even visitors—regularly ask about learning rather than doing. Try this change in your classroom to see how it shifts the conversation and helps you to better determine your students’ levels of understanding.

Separate compliance from competence. This has huge ramifications for grading practices. Why do we grade every worksheet, homework, or quiz that students turn in? If we grade everything, we are asking students to be compliant (that is, keep up with the work and you’ll get more points). If we focus on students’ mastery of concepts, however, we’ll send an important message: I’m here to help you learn and will only give you a grade when you appropriately demonstrate your competence in this subject.

Automate responses to recurring events.  Principals are faced with daily demands that take away from the time they can spend in classrooms focusing on the teachers and students. More and more, principals are asking the question, “How can I spend more time focusing on instruction in my building?” The answer is to analyze the systems within your school and create automated responses to recurring events. Buses arriving late? Have a response team ready with a standardized checklist of action items. Cafeteria won’t be open for lunch on time? Plan out the response in terms of personnel and schedule revision. Planning for automaticity in a system means that principals can have more time in the classrooms focusing on the most important aspect of their job: instructional leadership.

Establish the purpose of a lesson. Determine what students should learn and why they should learn it. One of the most important ways we motivate learners is by establishing a good reason for the learning to take place. Without a clear goal, students rightly perceive their work in school as artificial, and this may lead to compliance or even defiance. If we instruct without a purpose—or fail to convey that purpose to our students—then we shouldn’t be surprised when they don’t meet the learning target.

Get kids to produce language, not just hear it. Encourage collaborative work using academic vocabulary. Teachers need to scaffold and assess language needs so students can better access content. The Common Core, in fact, asks for students to use rich academic vocabulary. One of the keys ways to support students in learning language and using academic vocabulary is to ask students to produce and practice using language more. Collaborative work time should be used to have students speak and use academic vocabulary. Fisher and Frey recommend that teachers aim to set aside 50 percent of a lesson for collaborative work. While this will not always happen, teachers should always keep in mind that collaborative work, where students are encouraged to communicate and interact, will help students build language skills and increase academic vocabulary usage.

Remember that the gradual release of responsibility does not have to be linear. Many are familiar with the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) framework, which articulates how responsibility should be turned over from the teacher to the student. Focus lessons (“I do”) and guided lessons (“we do”) place the responsibility on the instructor, while collaborative work (“you do it together”) and independent work (“you do it alone”) put most of the responsibility on the student. There is a common misconception, however, that this framework is linear—that is, that the different types of instruction have to go in order. In fact, good teachers use formative assessment to pick which element of GRR is needed for individual students and differentiate accordingly. Here is an example from Fisher and Frey’s YouTube channel that shows that the GRR framework does not have to be implemented linearly.

As all of these different take-aways show, participants at the FIT Teaching Academy were able to dig into the FIT Teaching model and consider how it resonates with them. The Academy was a full three days of amazing conversations about current practices and how FIT Teaching can provide an integrated and streamlined approach to make teaching more responsive to student needs. Participants left energized, motivated, and encouraged.

Cross-posted at ASCD In-Service.