Grades, Huh, Yeh...What are they good for?

Okay...The title was my lame attempt at humor, calling on the well recognized phrasing from the song "War." Perhaps I wanted to go on to the next part of that phrasing..."absolutely nothing."

I'm not sure that I would say grades are worth nothing, but the reality is that grades are not a good indicator of what a student has learned. I know most teachers state that students have to earn the grades, like earning an allowance. What some students have learned all too well is that jumping through prescribed hoops in a prescribed manner gets them the grade they want. Taking that grade home and showing it to their parents results in smiles and hugs and dinners at their favorite restaurant and new video games. Grades have become the carrots that get kids to perform as we would have them perform. Grades are what we use to control kids. And they work for some kids and not for others. Those for whom grades do not work are considered failures.

So the purpose of grades is to control kids, to sort kids into categories of those we like and those we don't like, and to delude us into thinking that kids are actually learning what we want them to learn (which sounds like another mind-control objective). So, there are a lot of evils related to using the grading system that has defined education in America for over 100 years, but we seem to be stuck with it for the time being. (I stated that the grading system defines education. I think this is an important statement, for one would think that the grading system is only a part of education and that education defines the grading system. I am suggesting that it has been and is quite the other way around. I hope to address that topic at a later date.)

If we are to use the grading system, how might we use it best?

I will contend that the first step is to establish a clear understanding of the meaning of an A, B, etc. What are we saying about a student's work and learning when we award that student with a grade? After that, we have to consider the impact of giving a student a low grade or a high grade or an average grade. We cannot avoid the fact that awarding a student a grade is labeling that student. A student who earns an A is a star. A student who earns a C is just average, okay, nothing to write home about, but he'll do in a pinch. A student who earns a D is an annoyance. Why can't he work harder? Why doesn't he try to be like the other students? A student who earns an F is a failure--a failure as a child, as a student. We're likely to be paying his way through life forever. How can we avoid labeling students with grades?

The two questions posed here are deeply related, for it is the integrity of the grade that is in question. When a grade has integrity, it relates directly to how well a student was able to demonstrate an understanding of the concepts posed to be learned. When a grade has integrity, it is also only an indicator of where the student's learning is at that given moment in time. A grade of integrity provides direction for the student. The student is directed to revisit concepts for which he failed to show proficiency. Therefore, a grade of integrity has the potential to change to show that the student has mastered at this time what he had not mastered earlier. A grade of integrity also relates to the learning of the student relative to where the student began as a learner, rather than relative to his classmates.

We all know that some students come into the classroom far ahead of their classmates. We want them to move to 100 yards of learning and they are starting on the 90 yard line. Other students come in having done all right. They are on the 50 yard line. Still others are on the 10 yard line. At the end of the semester, the stars and those average students have crossed the 100 yard line. But those who started the furthest from the goal only made it to the 80 yard line. They failed.

But let's consider the learning that took place. The stars moved 10 yards, and for that we heap the glory on them. The average kids moved 50 yards, which certainly seems like more of an accomplishment. But those failing kids, they moved 70 yards. They didn't meet the goal set by the teacher for the class, but they showed the greatest improvement. So, why did we give them an F?

There is a lot wrong with our grading system. Maybe we should start with something new.

The Learning Perspective Revisited

Okay...I'm back...because I have something to say.

The American people have lost their way. Their thinking is askew, and the craziness of the epidemic is best summarized by the now popular statement, "Perception is reality." This statement is false. It would be better stated, "Perception is the illusion of reality."

To say that perception is reality is to say that what one thinks defines his world. There is validity in this statement to an extent, but I want to focus on the limits of this thinking. Taken to an extreme, if I perceive that a dog is really a monkey, then I am a fool. Still, perception is reality. That dog is a monkey in my world.

In a more realistic light, perceiving that a person loves you does not make that person love you. Perceiving that drilling in the Gulf of Mexico is a good idea does not make it a good idea. Basing one's decisions on perception keeps one from considering the facts related to the concept, keeps one from realizing the truth.

Consider a continuum of truth. To one far end is what is referred to as absolute truth. I have a difficult time providing an example of absolute truth. Nevertheless, I believe that it is a concept that helps us to consider degrees of truth and helps us to place concepts along the continuum. Somewhere in near the middle of the continuum is opinion--based on truth but not completely grounded in truth. Perhaps somewhere a little further down the continuum is belief, a little less founded on truth but still drawn from truth. Then to the far other end is perception. In other words, I place perception as far from absolute truth as it can possibly get. This does not mean that perception is the opposite of truth, because the entire continuum is founded on degrees of truth. However, perception is a long way from truth and, I suggest, a long way from reality.

What I have just done is drawn a connection between reality and truth. This could be further stated as what is truth is reality. What is not true is not reality. The legerdemain of a magician is not reality. It is all a hoax and we take pleasure in being fooled. (I suggest that being fooled is the process of becoming a fool. Funny that we delight in that, isn't it?) In reality, there is much about our culture that is founded upon our being fooled, upon our being mislead by our perception, upon our escaping reality. I think we would all agree with this, as we love movies and novels and games and so much more that helps us to escape the reality. But we don't like being called fools. But we are sometimes.

The bottom line is that perception is not reality. Reality is truth. Only through seeking the facts that underlie a real understanding of any concept will we be able to understand the reality of the concept. The curious thing is that understanding the reality will alter our perception. Indeed, I would suggest that perception is far more influenced by truth and reality than truth and reality are influenced by perception.

By the way...Those of you with the Chinese characters leaving comments...Who are you? Can you leave comments in English so that I may know what you are saying? I apologize for being so very limited in my understanding of language, but I long to know what you are saying.

Ten Truths about Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution is a skill that everyone needs. It is also a skill that can always be improved. However, colleges and universities do not teach conflict resolution to new teachers. New teachers are woefully ill-prepared to talk with an angry parent or to resolve any but the simplest conflict. Because conflict resolution skills are considered soft skills, many educators and many people in general underestimate the need to develop these skills, scoff at the suggestion that they need to develop these skills, and reject all efforts to improve these skills. These same people most often exhibit the exact opposite skills that would result in conflict resolution--entering into debates and arguments when they should be looking for resoluton.

I suggest that there are Ten Truths about Conflict Resolution and that if a person begins by accepting these truths, then that person will move a giant step toward becoming a skilled in conflict resolution.

The Ten Truths about Conflict Resolution are:

1. It is better to talk face-to-face than to talk over the phone. It is better to talk on the phone than to communicate through an email. It is better to communicate through an email than not to communicate at all.
2. When communicating through email, keep the message short and stick to the facts.
3. Meeting with people face-to-face not only helps to resolve conflict but also helps to develop relationships important in resolving future conflicts.
4. Parents have a right to be upset, angry, or frustrated. They want what is best for their children and love their kids. Let an angry parent talk. Let the parent express the emotions for a few minutes. Not only will the parent unburden himself of the frustration, but you will also be able to identify the problem.
5. Find the facts. When an angry parent calls, the problem may be wrapped in many layers of emotion. Listen carefully for the real problem.
6. You are the professional, the calm voice in the meeting. Remain calm and listen carefully. Identify the issue and when you have the opportunity to speak, restate the problem as you understand it. This will let the other person know that you are listening.
7. Take notes. It will help you to stay focused.
8. Be proactive. If a teacher has had a problem with a student during the day, the teacher should call the parent at the earliest convenience. The parent is more likely to believe the first story that he/she hears, and if that happens to be the story that the student tells, it will be more difficult for the teacher to convince the parent otherwise.
9. Invite the parent or other person to provide a solution. Ask the other person what he or she would like to see happen to resolve the issue. This does not mean that what that person proposes will be the solution, but it again communicates that you are willing to listen and to work toward a resolution that both can agree to.
10. It is not about winning. It is about resolving the issue.

Protocols

I have been the principal of my high school only since July 1, 2009. In that short time, I have encountered more than a few instances where a parent, having a concern regarding the way a teacher or coach has handled a situation involving the parent's child, has gone directly to the superintendent or a school board member first, without ever addressing the issue with the teacher, with the coach, or with a building-level administrator. The worst part about this behavior is that the superintendent or school board member does not insist that the parent take the concern or complaint to the teacher or coach first. This is a violation of proper protocol.

The proper protocol for dealing with complaints, concerns, and issues involving the relationship between the student and the teacher or coach is to first contact the teacher or coach. If the complaint, concern, or issue is not resolved through this process, then the parent should contact a building-level administrator--the principal or assistant principal or perhaps a guidance counselor. If resolution is still not established, then the parent should contact the superintendent or assistant superintendent. If resolution is still not established, then the parent may take his or her concern to the school board.

It is not entirely the parents' fault that such a violation of protocol has become the culture of a school district. Any time that a school board member or a superintendent responds to a complaint, concern, or issue registered by a parent without redirecting the parent to contact the teacher or coach, the superintendent or school board member is guilty for creating such a culture. I will, however, forgive the superintendent or school board member, suggesting that these individuals have not considered the appropriate response to parents and are, therefore, not prepared properly. (However, as the top professionals of the district, they have a responsibility to be properly prepared.)

I suggest that when a superintendent or school board member has a parent address a complaint, concern, or issue to him or her directly before talking to the teacher or coach, the first question that the superintendent or school board member should ask is, "Have you talked directly to the teacher or coach about this concern?" It will be likely that the parent will say that he has not and the parent will provide a rather convincing argument as to why the parent believes talking to the teacher or coach will not resolve the problem. Whatever the parent's reason is for not talking to the teacher or coach, it is imperative that the superintendent or school board member insist that the parent do so, regardless. By not forcing the parent to confront the teacher or coach, the superintendent or school board member is enabling the parent in avoiding conflict resolution, is expressing a lack of trust in the teacher or coach in having the ability to resolve the conflict, and is breaking protocol. If a parent is absolutely unwilling to address the complaint, concern, or issue directly to the teacher or coach, then the superintendent or school board member should express that nothing can be done to resolve the conflict.

Stating that nothing can be done to resolve the conflict at this point may sound callous and counter-productive; however, what is actually being expressed is a strength of resolve to follow the proper protocol. Through following the proper protocol, the superintendent and school board are expressing a trust in the professionals that they have hired to do their jobs effectively and allowing these professionals the opportunity to meet the challenges of their jobs.

People do not learn to resolve conflict by avoiding conflict resolution. Teachers and coaches cannot become proficient at conflict resolution by having the superintendent or school board member passing judgment from on high.

My final point is that I have heard that parents have expressed that they take their concerns to the superintendent or school board member because they are "tired" of taking their concerns to the building and nothing ever being resolved. The irony here is that I am a new principal and these parents have not given me the opportunity to resolve their issues. Granted, there are times when issues are not resolved to the satisfaction of the parent--and in response to this I will suggest that the parent's satisfaction is unreasonable. But this does not provide a sound reason to violate protocol. To allow a parent to bypass protocol for any reason is to enable that parent to avoid learning to resolve conflict and to teach the student the method of avoiding conflict resolution. It is the teaching and reinforcement of a bad habit that has been translated in our society that everyone is entitled to get their way.

This has got to stop and the only way that it will stop is if everyone, from the teacher to the school board member, makes a commitment to follow the proper protocol and to practice proper conflict resolution.

Do Whatever Is Needed to Help Students Succeed

I was recently at the Indiana Association of School Principal's fall conference. One of the keynote speakers was the author of If You Don't Feed the Teachers, They Will Eat the Students. The statement that rang truest with me was that we need to do whatever we can to help students succeed. Schools can have whatever mission statements and vision statements they have. But the motto of all teachers should be that statement.

So, what does this mean?

Success means something different to each person, without a doubt. Still, we can all agree that the opposite of success is failure. Therefore, any student earning an F in any course as a final grade has not succeeded. The question, at that point, is whether the teacher, the counselor, the administrator, or anyone else has done whatever was needed to help the student succeed.

When a student fails a class, it is usually because the student did not complete the homework assignments. This usually affords teachers an opportunity to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the student's failure, pointing out that the student had not learned to be responsible. But a very important reality of a student failing because he did not do his homework is that, often the teacher allowed the student not to do his homework. What did the teacher or anyone else in the school do to encourage or force the student to do his homework? Were there any calls to the parents? Were there any meetings with the parents and the student and the teacher and the counselor or the administrator? Was the student assigned any detentions for not doing his work? Was the student allowed to play sports in spite of not doing his homework? Was the student allowed to participate in any extra-curricular activities in spite of not having done his homework?

We need to do whatever is needed to help students succeed. If we are not, then we are allowing students to fail, which means we are allowing them not to learn. That is educational malpractice.

Defining Dropout

The latest educational cause that has educators and community leaders and business people and politicians linking hands and singing together is reducing the number of high school dropouts. It is good that everyone wants to get behind this noble cause. However, in Indiana the definition of a high school dropout may actually be a barrier to reducing the number of dropouts. Consider the following scenarios:

• A student earns his high school diploma but takes five or six years to do so.
  
• A student leaves the public high school and earns his GED.
• A student forgoes finishing high school because she has been accepted to a prestigious college where she begins working on her bachelor's degree. (Yes, this really happens.)
• A student, because of disabilities, is unable to meet the requirements for a general diploma but completes four or more years of high school, earning what is called a certificate of attendance.

Each of these students is defined as a dropout by Indiana standards. Yet one has to recognize that each of these students is successful. The first student took a little longer to earn the diploma, but he did earn his diploma. It is not unusual for a college student to need an extra semester, an extra year, or an extra two years to earn a degree; why should Indiana schools be punished because a student needs more time. Differentiated instruction would suggest that some students need more time to learn, but the state punishes schools for following best practice.

In the second scenario the GED is good enough to allow a student to enter community college or other universities, but is considered a failure by Indiana legislative standards.

Considering the third scenario, it does not follow that a student who is accepted by a university should be considered a dropout.

In the last scenario, it could be argued that the students do not earn a diploma, but these students finish four or more years of high school. This cannot be called dropping out by any standard.

When one drops out, one does not continue working toward the goal. To dropout means to quit, to give up, to stop working toward the goal.
If the State of Indiana is serious about working to reduce the number of dropouts, the first step is to change the definition of dropout. I do not suggest this as an easy way to increase the number of students being successful, but as a means of providing options for students who need options. For one reason that students dropout is that they feel they have no other option. As we are for charter schools to provide people with choice, we should be for changing the definition of dropout, to provide choice and to support students in earning the high school diploma.

The President's Speech

President Obama plans to address the students of the United States on Tuesday, September 8th with a message stressing the importance of graduating from high school. The entire speech has been made available for everyone to read.What should never have surprised me is the fact that many people are demanding that schools not allow the speech to be heard or seen in the schools and that students not be "exposed" to the President's message. One could argue that regardless of the President's party affiliation or stance regarding such issues as health care or war, all Americans owe the President the respect of hearing his messages. But that is not the position I want to take. My point is that it is wrong to pass judgment on any text without first having read or heard the message. What many people are advocating is contrary to the development of reasoning and critical thinking, which should be the primary goal of schools.

Understand, schools are neither Democratic or Republican. Schools are non-denominational with regard to religion. Schools are neither liberal or conservative. Schools must be neutral. By showing the President's speech, a school is not saying that it supports the President's position on health care or on the war in Iraq. The school is allowing a text to be presented so that the students may consider the text and weigh it against what they already know or what they thought they knew. Students may also get to hear opposing views so that they may learn to appreciate the varying perspectives that exist regarding an issue. This is key to critical thinking.

Preventing students from hearing a speech or from reading a text because of the adults' prejudices is a violation against the educative process. Such practice also stresses that intolerance is preferred to tolerance; is it any wonder that prejudice, racism, and hatred still exists in America?

The President's message is that students should stay in school and get their diploma. I've heard self-proclaimed conservatives on the television state that they are opposed to President Obama's views and do not want their children to hear his speech. This can only be interpreted that such conservatives do not want children to stay in school and believe that it is not important for students to earn their high school diploma. Okay, I'm sure that is not their position, but isn't that what it sounds like?

Don't make an uneducated decision. Suspend judgment until you have the facts. You may arrive at the same conclusion, but you will have done so intelligently.

To learn more about President Obama's address to our nations children, go to http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/academic/bts.html.

100% Together

One of the greatest frustrations for a teacher or administrator is to be working toward the enforcement of a school rule or policy or toward the achievement of the school's goals and objectives and to realize that other faculty members are not. School dress code may prohibit a student from wearing a t-shirt that advertises alcoholic beverages. Still, a student wearing such a shirt may get to third, fourth, or even sixth or seventh period before anyone takes issue and confronts the student. Is it any wonder that the student responds by saying nobody else said anything to him, suggesting that it was okay to wear the shirt?

The examples abound. One school decides to try a sustained silent reading program, having everyone reading for twenty minutes of every day. This goes over well in several classes, but a few teachers don't like the idea and communicate indifference through their body language and their actions. Students in their classes recognize that the teacher does not support the program; therefore, they don't take it seriously. Consequently, the program fails to meet its expectations. The non-compliant teacher is vindicated. But the reality is that the program was never fully implemented; therefore, there was no genuine failure in the program, only a failure in getting 100% commitment from the faculty.

Arguments are made consistently against any and all educational reform efforts and new practices, with the primary argument being that a school can never get 100% of the teachers committed to the new practice. But the bottom line is that these same teachers were hired to work as a team with the existing faculty and with the faculty that was hired after them. A personal and conscious decision not to comply with an established school policy or practice is a violation of the trust of the contract that the teacher entered into with the school. And this is grounds for dismissal.

This is not to say that one cannot disagree. Everyone should be allowed a time and opportunity to express his or her sentiments regarding a proposed policy or practice. Naturally, it would be in that person's better interest to provide the research that supports the opposing view; when opinions are presented without support, they are easily dismissed. Regardless, when the decision is then made regarding the policy or practice, the teacher or administrator has no other recourse than to be in 100% support of the implementation of the policy or practice.

Emerson stated that "Conformity is the hobgoblin of little minds" and that is true. And to some extent it is appropriate for a system to experience brief bursts of nonconformity. But when it comes to the system making a commitment to a practice or policy that has been well researched, well discussed, and well considered, it is in the better interest that everyone commit to the success of the policy or practice. There are times when conformity can be the better choice.

The Audacity of Anonymity, Part 2

I composed an earlier blog entitled The Audacity of Anonymity and have become somewhat obsessed with the thought. Conducting some research, I found a research article entitled "Effects of Anonymity and Arousal on Aggression," which had been published in The Journal of Psychology and was written by R. W. Rogers & C. M. Ketchen. In the article, the authors cite another researcher named Zimbardo who stated, "If others can't identify or single you out, they can't evaluate, criticize, judge, or punish you." The authors went on to say, "...anonymity may make aggression a more dominant response tendency because in our culture anonymity reduces the anticipated risk of detection and the ensuing social censure and/or punishment."

In other words, being anonymous promotes feelings of imperviousness (for lack of a better word). Then, as one feels he can do whatever he chooses without repercussions or consequences, he is, therefore, encouraged to exhibit more aggressive behavior. A state of anonymity inhibits civility, causes us to resort to our baser instincts, makes us less compassionate and more egocentric.

Just today (May 15, 2009) Bob Kravitz, a sports writer for the Indianapolis Star, addressed this very topic, and I have to say that I agree with Mr. Kravitz. Kravitz uses classic jock talk to suggest that anonymity is turning us into a culture of weenies. Note, he does not condemn blogs or email or twitter or text messaging. He does, however, condemn the rude behavior that the anonymity of such technologically interactive programs promote. He states very well that "We hide behind technology that provides us with pseudonyms and takes accountability out of the equation." And that is what I'm talking about. If we are so bold as to say something, then let us be bold enough to accept the consequences of our words and our deeds. Otherwise, shut up!

I'm not finished with this topic.

A New Principal's First Speech

I have recently been hired to serve as principal of another high school. This will be my first principalship. Today I met the faculty of my new school for the first time. I knew I could stand in front of them and ramble for fifteen or twenty minutes and say almost everything I wanted to say, but I chose instead to write out my first speech and deliver a more deliberate discourse in under ten minutes. Below is the greater part of that speech, which I publish here for I believe I had something of value to say. I look forward to your comments.

As an educator, I spent 18 years as a classroom teacher. During my early years, I experienced having four principals in five years. Therefore, I know you have no reason to believe anything I say today regarding how long I plan to be here or what I hope to accomplish. It will be my actions that will communicate my commitment to you, to the students of GHS, and to this community. Still, I want to take this time to express some of my beliefs about education, from which you may deduce the expectations that I hold as principal.

First, I am a supporter of teachers. Years ago there were the license plates in Indiana that declared “Kids First.” I wanted one that said “Teachers First,” not because I think less of kids, but because I believe that if we have great teachers in our classrooms, then we do not have to worry as much about the kids. Many kids come to us with their backs against the wall—home life is abysmal; parents have given up on their children and expect the schools to fix the problems; students have experienced so much failure in life that they now refuse to try. There is little we can do as educators to change these factors. What we can control is what happens at school and in the classrooms. We can call parents. We can ask parents to come in to meet with us. We can talk to the kids. We can set expectations and help kids meet those expectations while we hold them accountable. We can be the calm voice in the crisis. We can speak with reason when emotions are high. We can do so much. Therefore, great teachers are the most important ingredient to the success or our school.


Secondly, the outrage over No Child Left Behind has faded and we are now beginning to understand that every kid needs a high school diploma. Every kid will need some form of post-secondary education to compete in a 21st century economy. Our educational institutions are failing when we allow one student to leave without a high school diploma. Our goal must be a 100% graduation rate and we must do everything within our power to achieve that goal. Still, kids’ home lives are unsupportive and destructive. And you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. But we cannot afford to focus on the things we cannot change. We must concentrate on those things we can change and the places where we can make a difference—the classrooms and the halls of our school. We can set high standards and high expectations, and we can find ways to hold our students accountable to those standards and expectations, while supporting students as they learn. The excuses we find for allowing kids to fail do not excuse us of our duty. We must find a way to help every student to reach his highest potential with the compassion and dignity that every human deserves.


Finally, I believe that we, as educators, are models of integrity. We are held to a higher standard by our communities, by our students, and by our colleagues. As actions speak louder than words, we have to ask ourselves, “What are my actions communicating to those around me?” If I take every sick day and personal day to which I am fully entitled, what does that communicate to my students about the importance of attendance? If I refuse to enforce the rules of the school in my classroom and in the hallways outside my classroom, what does that say of my attitude toward the rules of the school? If I close my door to the concerns of my students—or in my case, of my teachers—what does that say regarding how much I value these people and their concerns? If I refuse to contact parents when a student is failing, what am I saying about the importance of the partnership that exists between the parents and the school? I strive to be a model of integrity and ask the same of you. When we falter, we must learn to begin again; for there are truly no failures, only those who give up too soon.

My greatest strength as an administrator for the past seven years has been my skill at conflict resolution. The key to conflict resolution is taking the time to truly listen to the concerns of other people. Therefore, my phone line is open. My door is open. And I promise to find the time to sit with you, with parents, with students, with school board members, and with community leaders to hear the concerns. I cannot always afford you the luxury of having your way, but I hope you will always feel that I value your time and, more importantly, that I value you.

I am more excited today at the prospect of coming to GHS to serve as the next principal than I have ever been in my educational career. My only promise is that I will work hard every day and allow my actions to tell the story of who I am and of my commitment to this school. I will make mistakes and work hard to correct those mistakes. And I will see successes and join in the celebration of those successes. I am looking forward to getting to know each and every one of you and I invite you to come see me this July. I’d appreciate getting to spend an hour or so with each of you before the next school year begins.

Thank you.

Weighing Teacher Effectiveness

As I began to think more about the topic of determining whether a teacher was effective, I noticed that I have accumulated a few books on the subject. And I know that I've read through some of them, because they have my characteristic underlining, squiggling, asterisks, check marks, and sidebar notations. Some of the books I have are:
Fiore, D. J. & Whitaker, T. (2005). Six types of teachers: Recruiting, retaining and mentoring the best. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Stronge, J. H. (2002). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tucker, P.D. & Stronge, J. H. (2005) Linking teacher evaluation and student learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

I am certain there is much in each of these books and many other texts that can help us to measure the effectiveness of a teacher. However, I believe there is a simpler method of determining a teacher's effectiveness, at least on a personal level. At the end of the day, every teacher needs to answer one important question:

"Was I the type of teacher that I would want my own children to have?

When I think about the type of teacher I wanted my children to have, I wanted someone who forgave my children when they made mistakes but held them accountable to the reasonable consequences of their actions.

I wanted someone who called my children to attention when they misbehaved but did not scream at them, belittle them, or destroy their self-confidence in the process.

I wanted someone who encouraged my children to take chances and to learn on their own, to experience that mistakes are part of the learning process. I did not want someone who declared that the only right answers were the ones she held in the back of the teacher's edition of the textbook.

I wanted someone who had compassion, who saw my child as a child even when he was seventeen, who listened more than she spoke, who looked for ways to make my child successful even when he struggled.

And if I, as a teacher, can meet the expectations of what I wanted for my own children when I was working with the children of other parents, then I know that I am a good teacher.

Dr. Daggett of the International Center for Leadership in Education speaks of rigor, relevance, and relationships as key to improving the quality of education. I agree. However, I suggest that relationships come first. Because kids really do not care about what you know, until they know that you care.

Classifying Learning

I am constantly thinking about ways to improve classroom instruction, because I believe that the most important factor affecting student learning is the teacher and the most important characteristic of good teaching is an understanding of methods and strategies that engage students in authentic learning. When considering any process, it is beneficial to classify and differentiate among the various parts of the process.

In How We Think (1910) John Dewey identifies three types of study. The first has to do with the "acquisition of skill in performance;" the second involves the acquisition of knowledge; and the third is concerned with the development of reasoning or "abstract thinking." Many years later, Mortimer Adler wrote about three modes of teaching in his book The Paideia Proposal: An Educational Manifesto (1982). The three modes of teaching were differentiated according to the intended goals as "acquisition of organized knowledge," "development of intellectual skills," and "enlarged understandings of ideas and values."

The similarities between the two lists are easily recognizable and worth a moment of consideration. Both authors recognize that learning involves the acquisition of or perhaps the accumulation of knowledge, the development and refinement of skills, as well as the development of reasoning, or what I will call critical thinking. Neither author suggests that one type of study or teaching is better than the other. Neither author suggests that one type of study or teaching should be excluded. Adler does suggest that the development of understanding or reasoning is often neglected in classrooms, but he does not advocate that any of the modes of teaching be sacrificed to make room for more critical thinking.

It is important that teachers understand that there are different types of learning and different modes of teaching designed to meet the needs of the different types of learning. We should not teach only rote memorization, but we should teach some rote memorization. For that reason, I, as an English teacher, required my students to memorize poems and to recite them in front of the class.

We are dealing with whole students; therefore, we should address the whole student in our teaching.

One Thing Wordle

Our school improvement team surveyed the faculty recently. One of the questions was with asked what one thing would they recommend to make the school better. There were many responses, although only about half of the faculty responded to this question. Still, when looking at the responses, I wondered how we might reduce the wordage, allowing us to group responses to get a feel for the one thing that the majority believed would be most beneficial. So, I suggested using Wordle. Wordle creates from the transcript a word cloud, in which the words which appear most often in the transcript are larger. Clearly, Wordle discounts articles and prepositions and such, so the words that appear in the word cloud are the pertinent words from the transcript. Here is the word cloud we created:
from http://www.wordle.net

Unless you have much better eyes than I, many of the words are too small to read. The words also come at you lacking semantic relevance. It is a beautiful thing to look at, but I find myself still wondering what is the one thing that teachers believe will improve our school...Or am I being obtuse?

Is the most important thing "Teachers"?

Plagiarism

My school recently experienced a rash of plagiarism, probably brought on by the pending ending of the grading period. This has prompted me to address plagiarism. There are plenty of books, web sites, and people suggesting that cheating is on the rise in America, so that is not my purpose. Instead, I would like to suggest that there are (at least) two different forms of plagiarism and (at least) two ways to respond to plagiarism.

The two types of plagiarism are "plagiarism of omission" and "plagiarism of commission." A student commits plagiarism of omission when she neglects to provide the proper documentation--fails to place quotation marks around a passage that is clearly taken directly from the source, provides no reference to the source from which the ideas came, or turns in a poorly organized "Works Cited" page. I call these acts plagiarism of omission because the student has left out important information giving credit to the source. Students make these mistakes out of confusion, a lack of understanding, and frustration--a natural part of the learning process.

Plagiarism of commission, on the other hand, is a conscious and deliberate act of deception. When one commits plagiarism, the intent is to deceive, to take advantage of another person's trust and to reap the benefits that may follow, provided that the deception is not detected.

There are generally two responses to plagiarism. The first and perhaps most common (at least at the secondary level of education) is to punish the student by denying credit for the work. In the clear case of plagiarism of commission, this is an appropriate reaction, although I will suggest that the perpetrator knew the risk he was taking and is probably not effected by the punishment. Without some required intervention, the student is likely to plagiarize again, knowing that the next teacher is not likely to catch him.

The second response is to turn the offense into a learning opportunity, allowing the student to correct the errors. A loss of some credit may be warranted--which is up to the teacher--but the student is allowed a chance to redeem her credibility, to learn the proper way to avoid plagiarism, and to develop a trust in her teacher as someone she can turn to for guidance in her learning. I suggest that this response is more appropriate when a student is suspected of plagiarism of omission.

Real learning is about taking chances, making mistakes, and correcting those mistakes. Certainly, a part of learning involves the decisions one makes to document correctly the information one includes in an essay and the consequences of those decisions. However, dropping the hammer of justice on every student who plagiarizes may inhibit learning. I suggest teachers consider whether a student is guilty of plagiarism of commission or of plagiarism of omission before passing sentence, and that teachers not allow a teachable moment to slip away because of righteousness.

One final thought: The information teachers present to their classes in handouts, PowerPoint presentations, and such are often taken from a variety of supplemental sources. To what extent does the teacher demonstrate a responsibility to document correctly the sources he or she uses? If we want our students to be responsible and to adhere to the rules protecting copyright, then we must be sure to demonstrate that responsibility at all times.

Okay...so here's a humorous look at plagiarism that I found on TeacherTube...

In the Moment

During my training in Socratic Seminars, there was a phrase that still echoes in my mind, holding much deliberate relevance to an almost intuitive understanding of the learning process: "Stay in the moment." I am currently reading Oliver Sacks book, Musicophilia, and have encountered the following concerning music: "Listening to music is not a passive process but intensely active, involving a stream of inferences, hypotheses, expectations, and anticipations..." Shortly after, Sacks refers to the work of Victor Zuckerkandl who writes in Sound and Symbol, " Hearing a melody is hearing, having heard, and being about to hear, all at once." In my mind, these three thoughts are all interrelated and imperative to an understanding of the workings of the mind with regard to learning, though not exclusively so.

When one is in the moment of listening, studying, engaging in dialogue, or playing a piece of music (and on this latter I am surmising for although I have long played the guitar, I am far from being an accomplished musician), one is drawing on past knowledge while simultaneously confronting the information of the moment and anticipating the next moment. To "stay in the moment" was, without a doubt, a call not to allow the remembrances of things past or the anticipation of things yet to come to distract one from the now, the moment of occurrence. However, I now suggest that staying in the moment does suggest that one will be simultaneously aware of the now, the then, and the yet to be, but that such awareness occurs perhaps subconsciously as a mental process. "Staying in the moment," in the here and now, is a means of suspending the intrusion of memory and anticipation to experience what is being seen, heard, felt with greater poignancy, deepening the experience and leading to learning--if one accepts that learning emerges first from experience.

I am reminded of a passage from Anne Rice's book, Interview with the Vampire (a most excellent read that surprised me with nearly every turn of the page). I can only summarize the passage here--for I am staying in the moment and loathe to run off to find the passage, fearing that I might lose my way in my thinking. In the book, the author wrote how the one vampire (I apologize for not remembering the names--It has been several years since I read the text.) listened to the other vampire the way we always hoped someone would listen to us, not waiting to pounce on the next pause but hearing every word while also sensing the tone of the words, the timbre of the voice, the intonation of the eyes and facial features. It was listening as if what was being said was important. And THAT is what each of us longs for in being heard. And THAT is what it means to stay in the moment.

Similarly, when one is speaking or writing--as I am doing here at 4 a.m. (I don't care what time it says this posts. I'm up early.)--when one is speaking or writing, one must concentrate to stay in the moment, to hear his own words and weigh their import--knowing vaguely where one wants to go, remembering vaguely where one has been, but focusing for the moment on where one is. In Sacks book, he writes how in performance the multi-dimensional awareness helps us to move through the performance. Knowing simultaneously where we have been and where we are going helps us to deal with where we are. If we were to think too intently upon each individual step we take, we might find ourselves unable to walk.

I distinguish this from the staying in the moment advocated in Socratic Seminars and in learning relative to finding one's way on stepping stones to cross a creek. If I have crossed that creek a hundred times, I am likely not to break stride but to step lightly from stone to stone to find myself on the other side without a second thought. But encountering the creek for the first time, I am much more cautious and likely to slip and end up wet to my knees. And THAT is staying in the moment.

So what? Allow me to suggest an action. Listen, not waiting for the next pause so that you may pounce upon the conversation and demand the attention of those you are talking at, but the way you want people to listen to you. Whether you are listening to your students, to parents, to colleagues, to your children, or to your spouse, listen. Then, when it is time to speak, begin by restating what you have heard so that the other person can know that you have listened, then speak. This brings up another cliche from Socratic Seminar training: Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

From time to time...choose to stay in the moment.

Jing, a way to share ideas online

Last semester I was taking a class online through Indiana State University. My instructor had given us an assignment involving conducting research. I had always thought I was proficient at doing online research through a university library, but I was having problems. So, I emailed my professor who sent me a link that provided a live tutorial guiding me through the process. It was helpful and I was amazed. I asked her how she did that and she told me about Jing.

More recently, I have been asked to make a presentation about Jing to teachers. I think the best thing I could do is present Jing using Jing. So, here is my Jing presentation introducing Jing:


You'll see, I really didn't do much work. Hope you can find hundreds of uses for this.

Process or Product and Assigning Grades

Recently a teacher expressed that his students would not have any grades for several weeks in his class because the students were working on a big project. Students would have a single grade when the project was completed. I question the validity of this type of thinking. As educators, are we interested only in the product or are we also interested in the process? Another way to phrase this is to ask whether we provide formative assessment or only summative assessment.

In his book Educative Assessment (1998) Grant Wiggins--famous for his work with Jay McTighe and Understanding by Design--states "the aim of assessment is primarily to educate and improve student performance, not merely to audit it." We can move from these concepts to use of the terms formative and summative assessment. In his book Classroom Assessement & Grading that Work (2006) Robert Marzano provides a definition of formative and summative assessment. He stated that formative assessment is "occurring while knowledge is being learned," whereas summative assessment occurs "at the end of the learning episode." Marzano cites Peter Airasian in further defining formative assessment as "interactive and used primarily to form or alter an ongoing process or activity." In other words, formative assessment addresses the process of learning as opposed to addressing only the product.

Now, the teachers in my school have recently been inundated with the learning trend of the moment: project-based learning (PBL). Therefore, they are all working diligently to engage their students in meaningful, hands-on, collaborative projects, with the purpose of making learning increasingly relevant and, therefore, more meaningful to the students and, consequently, more effective. (That is a quick summary of the philosophy behind PBL.) I know that the teachers are guiding students during the process of the learning; they are good teachers. However, some teachers find ways to provide students with grades along the way and others are waiting for the product grade when the project is finished. The handbook that has been provided to some of the teachers--Project Based Learning, second edition by the Buck Institute for Education--states that "the assessment plan should include both formative assessments--assessments that allow you to give feedback as the project progresses--and summative assessments--assessments that provide studens with a culminating appraisal of their performance."

I am going to suggest that the formative assessments may and should result--from time to time and on a regular basis--in the assignment of grades that can be posted. As parents and students are now accustom to checking grades 24/7 through online access, the grades provided for process help to inform the student and parent of progress and help to hold the student more accountable for the work. It is a way to provide timely feedback to guide instruction and learning.

Marzano also stated in his book that effective classroom assessments should meet four purposes:

1. Provide students with a clear picture of their progress on learning goals and how they might improve.
2. Encourage students to improve.
3. Be formative in nature.
4. Be frequent.

My suggestion is that formative assessment can result in the recording of grades that can be communicated to parents and students. Perhaps there is a valid argument against the use of grades completely, but that is for another time.

Setting the Bar

Concern was recently expressed regarding allowing students to elect to take high-ability classes at the high school level. Throughout elementary and middle school years, students are required to meet test-based criteria to qualify for high-ability classes. However, when students enter the high school, the opportunity to take a high-ability class becomes a matter of choice. Test results and teacher recommendations are still used to assist students in making course selections, but students are encouraged to try the more rigorous courses. Such a policy leads to questions regarding the level of expectations in the high-ability class and the responsibility of the teacher to the success of her students.

The level of expectations in the high-ability class are genuinely higher than in other classes. This is generally a consequence of the syllabus and subject being taught. At the high school level, for instance, many high-ability classes are either Advanced Placement classes or dual credit classes, both designed to meet college-level rigor. Allowing more students to elect to take these courses suggests that some students will enter the class lacking the skills or background knowledge needed to achieve at a high level. In other classes, the teacher would differentiate instruction to allow students to work from their ability level. Teachers often see the differentiation as a means of lowering the bar, when it is really more a matter of helping students learn from a different perspective. The bar cannot be lowered in the high-ability class (and should not be lowered in any class). Students need to know the expectations and be held to those expectations. This is the student responsibility to his or her learning: meet the expectations.

The teacher, however, also has a responsibility to the success of her students. Students should never be written off as lacking the necessary skills and knowledge. Students should always be given the support they need to learn the material--even if the material is in some way beyond them at the given moment. Sometimes a teacher of a high-ability class will make the first few weeks of the class so difficult that the struggling students will rush to their counselor to drop the class. In the teacher's mind, the students did not belong in the class; her classroom is for the elite and not democratically open to the masses. Such a teacher misunderstands her profession, for the students she is left with can learn without her and not because she has empowered them. She needs to work with the struggling students as well, helping them to find a way to be successful.

Stating that students are responsible for their successes and their failures is a good thing, but the statement does not absolve the teacher of her responsibility. Whether working with struggling students in lower-level classes or working with high-ability students in high-ability classes, the teacher's first priority is to help her students learn and to grow intellectually.

Some will scoff at my thoughts as too idealistic--"all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average." But I believe there is truth to these words, and dismissing the thoughts contained here does not absolve us of our responsibilities as educators.

The New Educational Utopia of 21st Century Learning

Today's EdWeek newsletter led me to an article entitled "Backers of '21st-Century Skills' Take Flak." The article identifies 21st century skills as "a push for schools to teach ­­­critical-thinking, analytical, and technology skills, in addition to the “soft skills” of creativity, collaboration, and communication that some experts argue will be in high demand as the world increasingly shifts to a global, entrepreneurial, and service-based workplace." The leading group making this push is the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Another group that also promotes 21st century skills and learning is the Metiri Group with the enGuage 21st Century Skills. There are similarities between what each presents. I have long preferred the enGuage presentation of the skills, but the Partnership group have begun to attract the greater attention. (I believe the Partnership for 21st Century Skills signed an agreement to work with ASCD--the Association for Supervison and Curriculum Development in March of '08--giving that group a real boost in credibility, whether deserved or not.)

What struck me most about the EdWeek article was the opposition to 21st century skills. Could it be that project-based learning, collaboration, and other such "soft skills" are not as essential as we are being led to believe? The article made reference to Diane Ravitch. I had never heard of her but she was speaking out, so I googled her and found her associated with a group called Common Core. She is more importantly an educational historian at New York University. On the Common Core site, Dr. Ravitch has posted a blog that sheds considerable light on the opposition to the touting of 21st century skills as the new way to utopia. She begins with:

In the land of American pedagogy, innovation is frequently confused with progress, and whatever is thought to be new is always embraced more readily than what is known to be true. Thus, pedagogues, policymakers, thought leaders, facilitators, and elected officials are rushing to get aboard the 21st century skills express train, lest they appear to be old-fashioned or traditional, these terms being the worst sort of opprobrium that can be hurled at any educator.

From there, Dr. Ravitch outlines decades of school reform methods that parallel the 21st century skills movement with the conviction that such efforts ultimatel seek to devalue solid academic learning.

So maybe I agree with Dr. Ravitch; maybe I disagree. Either way, what she has to say is important and worth reading, and I hope that if you have taken the time to read my drivel that you will take the time to read her blog. Then, please, come back and post a response.

I'm anxious to hear what you have to say.

Critical Thinking and the Intentional Non-Learner

In the fall of 2008 I attended the CELL conference in Indianapolis and was privileged to hear Katy Haycock, of the Education Trust, (The link will take you where you can hear Haycock's keynote.) speak about student achievement. Among many gems that I tried to capture with my cell phone keypad, I recorded Haycock as saying that the United States is the only country that believes kids can catch up by slowing down. She was speaking about the importance of providing a rigorous curricula for every student. I've been thinking about what that means.

Many schools are guilty of slowing down the learning of the struggling learners in a well-meaning effort to improve learning. There is sound reasoning in doing this, to some extent. Students learn at different rates, some faster and others slower. It is reasonable to allow more time for those who need more time, if it results in learning. But I don't believe that such is the problem with the "remedial" learning that is provided for the struggling students. Often, the struggling student is assigned to an education of low-level thinking. Recognizing that the student struggles with knowledge, comprehension, and application, we educators determine that the student needs more work with the same. When the student shows proficiency in the low-level thinking, we'll give him a shot at some higher-order thinking.

Every student needs the opportunity to engage in higher-order thinking--in analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Through critical thinking a student is able to experience greater engagement in the learning experience and perhaps the joy of learning. Through engaging in higher-order thinking the student sees a reason to know, comprehend, and apply the other learning--lower-order thinking--that to this point has been meaningless.

Before I became an administrator I taught English to resistant freshmen and sophomores. I engaged these students in Socratic Seminars. When I wrote quizzes over something they were to have read, I wrote six questions: one from each of the six levels of the taxonomy of knowledge attributed to Bloom. I found that my students did well on the higher-order thinking questions but struggled on the lower-order thinking questions. However, as the semester progressed, students began to answer all questions better. Now, this only leads to a hypothesis and I do not suggest this to be anything more. But it does lead me to suggest that students will benefit from a more rigorous curriculum focused on challenging students to engage in higher-order thinking.

If we believe our students are not capable of higher-order thinking, we are right. And if we believe our students are capable of higher-order thinking, we will find this also to be true.

Why not give a kid a chance?