Guest bloggers on The Inspired Classroom and I have often touched upon personal philosophies of education.  These philosophies have ranged from technology to special ed, to education and teaching in general.  My first written philosophy of ed (from about 13 years ago) compared teaching to gardening, and I was brought back to those images once again while reading Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work – New Insights for Improving Schools (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, 2008).  Early in the book, the authors mentioned how throughout history, many schools have tended to use teaching strategies and assessments in particular to “weed” out the less successful students so that the other students can move on to greater success; a “sort and select” process.

When you first hear this, you may think this is horrible.  I did.  But sometimes you have to face reality and realize that methods of “sorting and classifying” children and young adults happen all the time.  But the image of “weeding” out the students who are not getting it at a steady pace?  That is simply not what education should be about.  So – I ask you (and myself): Are we weeding or cultivating?

If the purpose of education is to develop high achieving students, then we also need to develop learners, life-long learners, people who show a love of all learning as they strive for their personal best.  Sounds corny, huh?  But it’s true.  We need to help students understand that learning is a natural part of life.  Whether they are learning basic skills, necessary curriculum or more about what interests them, our job is to cultivate that learning, not squash it.

In the chapters on assessment that I have read, an example of this really stood out for me.  In a school culture build around PLCs, if  students are given a common formative assessment and fail in any aspect, they are given extra support as well as another opportunity to retake the assessment.  But here’s the clincher: The student’s new grade replaces the old one.

All through my schooling, that would not have happened.  Instead the two grades would be averaged for a final assessment grade.  And this is a practice I have carried into my own teaching (that is until about 2 weeks ago!)  I had to pause for a moment and really think this through.  If a student works hard to learn the material for which he is accountable (even after the majority of the class is done), retakes a variation of the assessment and does considerably better, shouldn’t he receive the new grade and not an average of the two?

Here are two quotes from the book that helped transform my thinking:

• We have yet to find a (school) mission statement that says, “(Students) must all learn fast or the first time we teach it.”
• If some students must work longer and harder to succeed, but they become proficient, their grade should reflect their ultimate proficiency, not their early difficulty.”  (p. 219)

Makes sense, doesn’t it?

Another example of this, which I LOVED, was when the authors wrote about how teachers in one school assigned students to write an essay and then they didn’t give them a grade.  Instead, the teachers wrote feedback for each student, handed the essays back, gave students time to revise and then graded the next draft.  I think this is a wonderful practice that really demonstrates to students that you want them to learn and succeed at what they are doing.

Students who are told that feedback ‘will help you learn’ learn more than those who are told that ‘how you do tells us how smart you are and what grades you’ll get.’ (p. 223)

Again, it just makes sense!

One of my goals in teaching is to cultivate learners.  I try to spend a lot of time getting students to become aware of their learning styles, getting them to take ownership of their own learning.  It’s important to not just preach this, but practice it.  Students deserve the opportunity to learn and even practice how to learn.  And in the 21 century, it’s not about weeding anymore in education, it MUST be about cultivating life-long learners.

~EMP

Click one of the tags from this post to find related posts.

In my last post, “Common Formative Assessments Built by PLCs,” I talked about what common formative assessments are as a reflection of my reading Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work – New Insights for Improving Schools (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, 2008).   But you may be wondering WHY you would do this.  I’d like to explore that here.

When you do not have common formative assessments (CFA), the teaching among teachers can be disjointed.  For example, I work in a team of five fourth grade teachers, if we all teach “States of Matter” but do it all in our own way and assess it in our own ways, our students may not all receive and understand the same information.  In addition, we are all doing our own work to prep for lessons and assessments that could be shared with one another.

When teachers come together to create a CFA, all the teachers have an end in mind – a goal for students that has been thoughtfully created and embedded in the standards.  Of course this “end” is not really the end at all.  Since the assessment is formative, the results of such an assessment are then analyzed by the team and students are given additional opportunities to learn the content.

The use of CFAs helps students, individual teachers and teams.  Think about it – you work with other teachers to create and then analyze the data knowing that students will get the help they need to achieve the high standards you’ve set.  Then, those students who are lacking skills can get assistance from anyone in the team of teachers.  It’s not about analyzing the data and pointing fingers at students who aren’t “getting it” or at teachers who aren’t “giving it right.”  Instead, when these teachers meet, they are sharing strategies, ideas and talents with one another.  These types of meetings have the potential to help individual teachers as much as they do individual students.

The key to remember with CFAs is that they are assessments FOR learning not OF learning (as in summative assessments).  The book explains the three steps that must take place in order to have effective common formative assessments (p 217).  Here they are:

• The assessment is used to identify students who are experiencing difficulty in their learning.
• A system of intervention is in place to ensure students experienceing difficulty devote additional time to and receive additional support for their learning.
• Those students are provided with another opportunity to demonstrate their learning and are not penalized for the their earlier difficulty.

See, creating CFAs is not enough in a PLC.  There is an implied step here that teams do not simply create CFAs, but they also meet to reflect and problem solve in the interest of all students reaching high standards.  Teams need to plan for this and some sort of system for flexibility needs to be in place.

Let’s face it, we all want students to do well.   In a PLC, the whole idea is that we work together to make that happen.  I’m sure I mentioned in the last post that my principal and a group of teachers are looking at the PLC model to see how it can be a good fit for our school.  It has such potential and the use of common formative assessments seems to be one of the backbones of implementing successful PLCs.

The great thing to realize is how our teams of teachers do work together often and are always striving for student excellence.  Working toward this PLC model will certainly make our work more efficient and in-depth.  I look forward to sharing more about our journey.

~EMP

Image from http://www.impactconsultingassociates.com

Related posts:

1. Common Formative Assessments Built by PLCs
2. So many assessments!
3. Creating a Safe Learning Environment

PLCs are Professional Learning Communities made up of teachers who work together in a professional environment to discuss student work and help student learning. This year, I joined a book club at my school that is reading Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work – New Insights for Improving Schools (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, 2008).  Throught the reading of this book it is our hope that our school starts to look at how implementing PLC time in our days will in fact impact student learning.

To start the year, our principal assigned chapters of the text to people in the book club.  My chapters are on assessment (chapters 8 and 9).  My next couple posts will be about my findings, specifically in common formative assessments – the backbone of strong and effective PLCs.

True student learning occurs when achievement is NOT limited to selected students, but is offered to ALL.  PLCs use common formative assessments to help all students achieve high levels of learning.

Common formative assessments are assessments made by a team of teachers in a PLC that guide their teaching.  This is very different from summative assessments.  Summative assessments take the attitude that at the end of a unit, the grade you get is the grade you get; we are done with this material and need to move on.  When you really think about it, that should not be the goal of teaching, yet, we are probably all guilty of this way of thinking – until, of course, it’s brought to our attention.

The idea of a formative assessment is not only to “check in” with students, but then to put them in a position to learn what they have not yet learned.  In this way, students are held to the high standards of learning.  After a formative assessment, students are given additional tutalage independently or in groups.  That is what’s expected by both the teacher and student.  It isn’t a punishment, simply extra practice so that all students are able to achieve the curricular goals.

The teachers themselves create the assessments that are given.  That, of course, is the “common” part of the assessments.  Then the teachers all teach in their own styles, give the common assessment and meet to review the outcome.  It’s at these meetings that teachers are able to analyze their students’ progress skill by skill and, in essance their own teaching.   They then share ideas and strategies that will allow all teachers to make sure all students are learning all the material they need to understand.  They also figure out how to reach the students who are lacking skills.  They may go back and reteach or break up the students so they can teach those that need it most.

In this way, teachers are sharing, collaborating and using their talents in a professional, collegial manner.  The intent is not to show up another teacher, but to all learn at once as they strive for student excellence across the board.

In my school we have some common assessments.  I would even consider many of them formative.  However, this in-depth approach to team work and meeting to truly assess each student’s progress is what’s lacking and what could be the most important piece to make the most success.

I am actually wondering if it may be best for a PLC of elementary teachers (such as I am) to start working with common formative assessments in a content area that isn’t already “assessed to death” such as math or literacy.  That way, the approach to the creation, use and review of such assessments are more pure.  That is, they are build from the ground up by a team for a team.

As always, I would love your comments.  Please let me know what your thoughts are about common formative assessments and their use in PLCs whether you have experience in them or not.  In the next post, I plan to write more about my reading about these assessments and how I feel they will play a part in my classroom, my team and my school.

~EMP

Related posts:

1. So many assessments!
2. PLCs and PLNs – Go Us!
3. Community Built Through Music

I just finished posting my grades for report cards which will be going out on Wednesday.  What a relief!  But it is often with a hesitant click, that I post those final grades.  Did I put enough time in?  Did I miss anything?  Did I write enough in the comments?  Will the parents agree?  Do I have enough evidence to support what I’ve posted?  Of course, I have put in the time and have the evidence, but the doubts kick in.  Why?  Well, because I’m not sure those grades are really the best way for me to reflect what students have learned.

I often wonder about report cards…and grades.   Putting a number or a check to a name and a subject – is it really the best way to show a student’s growth?  Sure it is ONE way, but is it the best?

I have students who are starting to really challenge themselves in class.  Can a one sentence comment amidst the numbers and checks truly show the greatness of that?

I have students who are really struggling to read material that is two levels below the expected.  Is a number with a key going to suggest my urgency to help this child?

Of course, there are parent phone calls and meetings, extra support and enrichment activities.  I just know how much importance is put on the report card in our society and wonder if our emphasis is on the right stuff.

I play this conversation in my head every time report card grades are due.

Joe Bower is a teacher in Alberta, Canada and he has done a lot of work to abolish grading in his teaching.  His ideas are well respected and worth checking out.

And so I throw it out to you:  Please let me know your thoughts on grades…

Click one of the tags from this post to find related posts.

Rachel Evans, today’s guest blogger, is a passionate artist and teacher.  Her post will prove this.  When it comes to the arts, Rachel knows students need to be held accountable.  Read on for some great insights into arts assessment as well as assessment ideas.  Be sure to follow Rachel on Twitter. ~EMP

It’s no secret:  the arts can rev students’ engines and get creative ideas rolling when used in arts integration.  Knowing that “create” is the pinnacle of Bloom’s Taxonomy, teachers’ interest in incorporating music, dance, visual arts, and theatre continues to veer towards that destination.

While it’s a comfortable ride to use arts integration as the vehicle to deliver learning goals and objectives to students, it would be really unfair if it were a free ride.  There’s a fare to be paid for what the arts intrinsically provide: fuel and service.  And that price is the blood, sweat, and tears that only high quality assessment can bring.

Arts integration is more than using an arts-based activity in service of another discipline; it’s meeting two sets of goals simultaneously, allowing students to explore both more deeply.  If we integrate the arts into other content areas, it’s essential that the arts component have identified objectives with discrete methods of assessment.  To neglect assessment of the arts is to contribute to the “the arts are easy,” “the arts requires talent you’re born with,” and “the arts are soft subjects” mentality.  The arts have rigor, need scaffolded sequential instruction, and possess assessable knowledge, skills and values like every other subject.

I am not professing that we need to test the fun out of the arts.  But just like any other educational endeavor, students and teachers alike must be held accountable for progress towards achieving objectives.  Arts assessment may take many forms; checklists, rubrics, reflective writing prompts, peer critique, and oral presentations are just a few options available to the educator using arts integration.

Constructing an assessment plan inclusive of arts learning goals, ones that are fully integrated with other content, will take extra effort initially.   There is a silver lining:  the focus and attention on goals beyond those strictly related to language arts, math, science, social studies, foreign languages or health education may provide much needed variety for learners.  Not only do students benefit from variety in instructional strategies, but they also benefit from a broad assessment spectrum, one reflective of all colors of knowledge.  As a student, I may get bogged down in repeated spelling drills, but completing the visual arts checklist for an accompanying assignment might help me improve my aesthetic vocabulary—literally!

Additionally, while observing student progress in an arts integration lesson, a student’s lack of proficiency in a content area may be more immediately and more easily remediated than if assessment was confined to a summative, content-only format.  Seeing a student’s comfort zone expanded to include arts’ skills may ease discomfort in less familiar curricular terrain.  As a teacher, I may not realize that my students are unclear about the cause and effect circumstances surrounding the start of World War I.  Rather than wait until the exam to identify the absence of understanding, I might notice this sooner if I ask them to write theatrical dialogue between two historical figures.  Synthesis of concepts would be necessary from the first exchange between the characters.

The arts, whether integrated or standing alone, are more inclined towards formative assessment than summative.  In the examples above, the students would need to take ownership of their growth as artists and playwrights, just as they do about grades in spelling and history.  The teachers would need to be clear about expectations for the visual arts checklist in spelling class and for the playwriting assignment in history. The challenge is for us, as educators, to be able to articulate the knowledge, skills, and values needed to create meaningful artifacts as evidence of learning.  It’s a steep fare initially, but the long-term investment will undoubtedly result in a lucrative return.  Hop on and enjoy the ride!

Rachel Evans

Related posts:

1. Freedom in Assessment
2. The Arts are not Quick
3. Free Thinking

Assessment is where I am feeling the least free within the structure we have in our district. Our mandated reading and math assessments are so comprehensive and numerous that to create new, performance based assessments would be counterproductive to student learning.

However, my teammates and I enjoying working within the science and social studies curricula to design assessments that challenge students and allow them to demonstrate their learning in unique ways. Students write poetry about the water cycle, design science posters that highlight land and water forms, assume the identity of an historical figure for a Wax Museum and work in teams to create bridges with straws, pins and masking tape to connect a given distance, just to name a few activities. These activities build student confidence, creativity and problem solving and just as importantly, do the same for their teachers.

Designing these assessments with your peers gives you a chance to see where your colleagues’ hidden strengths and talents lie. It pushes you use new strategies and techniques and can give you a fresh perspective on a tired unit. I would love this type of freedom and flexibility to pursue more of this kind of assessment development in literacy and numeracy.

Related posts:

1. Children's Freedom in a Classroom Structure
2. So many assessments!
3. Freedom in Classroom Routines