(De) Testing the Common Core

The surge of Common Core State Standards, once hailed as a turning point in education, is under fire from the left and the right for a variety reasons but for me the most pressing issue is the assessment piece  and the tentacles that surround it. Taking a look at the anchor standards (ELA) for reading, writing, speaking and listening I like the language that relates to the upper levels of Bloom's taxonomy. We want our students (and adults!) to be great at interpreting, analyzing and evaluating all kinds of text. It's imperative that they be great communicators able to write clearly and coherently as well as speak effectively, using rich language, in the form of a monologue or dialogue where critical listening skills come into play. Developmental psychologists debate the age appropriateness of the grade level standards and while increasing the sophistication of the application of the anchor standards with age makes perfect sense to me I'm not sure explicitly outlining what that looks like works well with authentic assessment. Therein lies snake in the weeds for me, the assessment.

sample PAARC item

Having a solid set of standards and significant content is an essential piece of effective instructional design. Teachers should be starting with the end in mind and designing around authentic assessment of those standards and content. But how authentic are the standardized tests being designed around the Common Core? Having looked at some sample items from different companies like Smarter Balanced and PAARC I can appreciate the layered nature of the questioning shown in the image. This is much better than the isolated 4 choice multiple choice questions that we've seen for decades but as a student I would wonder "why"? Good questioning in a contrived context leaves less time for quality instruction and leaves thoughtful students with the feeling of being exploited. Being subjected to a random set of irrelevant questions so someone, somewhere can judge me and/or my school isn't exactly the most motivating scenario. But testing is just a necessary evil that students and schools just need to "get through it" right?  As the father of a 4 and 6 year old I acknowledge that sometimes there are indeed situations that necessitate doing things just because they need to be done but I'd argue that evaluating student and school progress is not one of them.

What's the answer?

So if not a standardized testing system then what? The answer is not easy and that is the problem, using standardized tests are the easy way out. While the nation's guidance counselors may disagree, administering one test that can be scored quickly and used to compare kids is relatively simple but the limits on the reliability and validity are questionable. The Common Core skills are a small part of what makes our students successful in college and career and limiting our evaluations to those skills is insulting. Much has been made of the progressive schooling in Finland and while the problems and challenges are not the same as in the US it is interesting to note some key differences. As this Smithsonian article points out the overhaul included a much different approach to teacher preparation that has allowed for statements like this: "Finland has vastly improved in reading, math and science literacy over the past decade in large part because its teachers are trusted to do whatever it takes to turn young lives around." So should we trust our teachers? Speaking in general terms yes, we should trust the intentions but having faith in their training is another thing. The parent in the video above remarks, that if our teachers don't know their student's learning by April we have a problem and she's absolutely right. While many of our schools may know scores of their students they haven't learned how to authentically assess the teaching and learning going on in the building, and there is a difference. It's imperative that we train our teachers to design instruction that effectively assesses our students so we can trust their judgement and feedback to be used in a way that standardized tests only hope to accomplish. This reform includes building systems, like tuning protocols, into our schools that ensure quality with narrative feedback and creating a culture of critical collaboration among students and staff. Instead of teacher evaluations based on checklists they should be having conversations around meeting essential elements. If we knew that our teachers were doing a great job of assessing students on the local level why would we need a behemoth of a testing system?  With the concern of assessing teacher quality being a driving force behind the creation of our testing culture this will take a massive retooling by our teacher training institutions and a re-visioning of local quality controls. This isn't tinkering with incremental change, it will require a reboot of nearly every aspect of our educational system. Consistent calibration with established norms to ensure quality work at each school would allow students to be assessed within the normal parameters of their daily "school work" instead of being subjected to days of external testing.

The continuation of the "achievement culture" that remains focused on preparing for tests and comparing scores is a dead-end road with a low ceiling for our students, schools country. Demanding that our legislators and schools focus on high quality, meaningful work that results in authentic assessment will produce more engaged and prepared students. Quality education will never be an easy proposition but grassroots efforts and campaigns seem to be swinging the discussion away from the relative "efficiency" of standardized tests and I'm hopeful we can help them gain enough strength to scale the mountain.

Assessing creativity with critical thinking

The other day as I showed one of the new Common Core ELA aligned presentation rubrics soon to be published by the Buck Institute for Education (it'll be in the FreeBIEs section) to a few colleagues I noticed a somewhat strong reaction to the word "creativity" being included in one of the sections. To be clear, this rubric is meant to assess a demonstration in project based learning that falls in the category of communication but the word creative shows up in the above standard "presentation aids" section. While the list of potential 21st Century Skills developed by various groups and organizations can be overwhelming many like to focus on the four C's (critical thinking, collaboration, communication and creativity). While I have argued for inclusion of compassion in a previous blog entry I think it's worth exploring the intersection of critical thinking and creativity and consider merging them for assessment purposes.

New Tech Network

Just over one year ago, Grant Wiggins argued the merits of assessing creativity in a blog post. In that post he mentions synthesis as a level of thinking for creativity. I agree and think we can expand that to include evaluation and application as well. Using Sir Ken Robinson's definition of creativity, the process of having original ideas that have value, you can see how this might apply to the upper level of Bloom's taxonomy. Isn't the process of creating valuable ideas really evaluating, analyzing and applying prior knowledge in order to synthesize it into something original and useful? Paul Curtis of New Tech Network recently addressed this creative process through questioning in his recent blog, A Good Question is Better Than a Great Answer. As  he notes, "it is clear that fostering creativity and innovation can only happen if students are asked questions that don't have a predetermined correct answer". As students engage in in-depth inquiry, the process of moving from left to right in the image above would necessitate the application of prior knowledge (activated by a Driving Question) as a point of divergence followed by the analysis and evaluation of the ideas generated to converge toward solutions. Through this process of synthesis comes Robinson's "original ideas that have value."

Returning to Grant Wiggins, he offers a rubric for creativity that includes language of synthesis like: 

• The problem has been imaginatively re-framed to enable a compelling and powerful solution
• There is an exquisite blend of the explicit and implicit

that make even more clear the intersection of critical thinking and creativity 

Incorporating elements of design thinking and project based learning to identify challenges and solutions of value can be a fantastic invitation to creative thinking. Fostering creativity is one thing, assessing it is an entirely different matter and in my work training teachers implementing PBL, the issue of assessment is often one of the more daunting challenges. As a teacher, on presentation day, having too many things to assess in a short and intense time can be overwhelming and counterproductive. Instead of using separate rubrics meant to assess creativity and critical thinking you might consider using one with the language of critical thinking while looking for student processing toward original ideas that have value. 

Teams and groups...does distance make the heart grow fonder?

Recently a friend and colleague of mine, Tom Stanley, shared this great RSA video of renowned leadership specialist Khoi Tu talking about the "Secrets of Superteams". This talk left me with some important takeaways, especially as they relate to the management of students in a project based learning setting.

In my experience training teachers in PBL workshops one of the typical concerns is how to form and manage teams. Some PBL models like Edvisions seem to favor individuals mostly working on projects by themselves but the Buck Institute for Education model I mostly work with suggests forming teams or groups of four as a best practice. That's not to say that individual project work can't be useful but if we're holding collaboration up as an essential 21st Century Skill then harnessing the power of groups is one of the best ways to address this.

But what about those students who prefer to work alone? Sometimes students prefer to work alone because they're afraid they'll have to do the bulk of the work while others slack off and receive the same grade. Certainly one of the challenges of effective group work is designing and managing for individual accountability. When some students don't carry their weight there needs to be a systemic way for the the group and the teacher to address this. One method I've seen used successfully is to award the group a grade or points for their presentation or cumulative product then multiply those points by the number of group members and ask them to divide among themselves. So in practice this might look like the worksheet pictured below. In this system in order for one student to be awarded more points there will be fewer points available for others. This allows students to connect evidence of their work to their points and have the sometimes difficult discussion of holding one another accountable. Feel free to contact me if my admittedly brief description of this method leaves you with questions.

One of the points made by the speaker in the video that struck me was his telling of how the Rolling Stones have endured for 50+ years by giving one another space. As he describes the different roles Keith and Co. play in the band Tu notes that they often grew tired of one another. This would lead them to break apart from each other for a time but inevitably returning to work together again. Great groups are made up of great individuals playing their roles but often individuals become frustrated when they are not allowed appropriate space to work. A popular idiom says "distance makes the heart grow fonder". Keeping this in mind when working with groups or teams in PBL, how might you allow for individuals to reap the rewards of a diverse group while also offering them opportunities and space to work alone? Perhaps that means groups identify work to be done by each member with a timeline to return to the group to share their work. Your groups may not produce hits like the Rolling Stones but allowing individuals the option to work alone may help them to be happier and more productive individuals and as Tu says, great teams are made up of great individuals.

Engagement, Compassion and public attacks

http://www.middletowninsider.com/

One week ago today another tragic and violent act occurred, this time at Sandy Hook elementary in Newtown, CT. Not to minimize other recent public attacks but without a doubt the nature of the victims in this attack struck an unthinkable chord of horror. With a daughter in kindergarten I found myself struggling to choke out words when trying to explain to her just the basics of what happened. The night of Sandy Hook, in a discussion with friends, I struggled to answer why the recurrence of these tragedies seem to be increasing. I do believe we need to have an honest discussion on the availability of assault weapons as well as the accessibility of mental health treatment but as a former classroom teacher what I came to is the absence of engagement and compassion.

Good teachers will tell you engaged student are less likely to act out. In the classroom that means designing for authentic and meaningful work that should involve collaborating and communicating with others. If we can assume that the classroom is in many ways a microcosm of society we can extrapolate the bad behavior that often comes with a disengaged class to dangerous acts in the "real world". Engaged students not only take part in the learning but in the community of learners in which they are immersed. At the same time that community reciprocates engagement with each individual in a way that allows for formal and/or informal assessment of progress. In a highly functioning classroom a struggling student would never go unnoticed or unsupported by his/her peers  I'd like to think the same in a highly functioning society but ours is a society of disengagement. Yes we're more connected via social media but is that true engagement with people? In a truly engaged society the story in Sandy Hook could have been incredibly different. Instead of a withdrawn and isolated Adam Lanza perhaps a community could have identified and strengthened his deficiencies early in his life. Acknowledging the reality of mental illness and the paradox of humanity that brings unpredictable and often uncontrollable behavior I wonder if the increasing inertia of a disengaged society isn't at least partly to blame for the uptick of public attacks.

Does engagement with a community need an ally? 

http://kingpinlifestyle.com/

If engagement is at least a part of the answer then it must start at an early age and it must be in a way that is not solely self-serving. If our children are taught (and assessed) to work with others in meaningful ways they learn habits of mind and societal norms that can reap massive benefits down the road. In my work with the Buck Institute for Education we often stress three C's of 21st Century Skills (collaboration, communication and critical thinking) but I'm wondering if it's time to add a fourth...compassion. Inspiring a sense of compassion and empathy in our children can serve as powerful sidekick to engagement. Work that is meaningful to others like Kiva microfinancing, Dots in Blue Water, and the Green Bronx Machine intertwines engagement and compassion by helping students identify instances of cognitive dissonance where they note a situation that needs to be improved or a problem that needs solved.

To be clear, tragedies like Sandy Hook are not the fault of schools or teachers. This is a complex and deep societal problem that unfortunately is not likely to disappear completely regardless of corrective measures. But our schools can be a valuable asset in the pursuit of that ideal. Schools were never meant to be parental surrogates and are certainly unable to solve all of the ills of our society but I'll ask what I think is a rhetorical question.

Why would we not design instruction in a way that engages students and helps them learn compassion?

Don't lose sight of your Need to Knows!

As I was engaging in a discussion this week with colleagues about traits of our "ideal school" one of the themes of our discussion was project based learning. While PBL is definitely not new, see John Dewey's sentiments on learning by doing, it seems to be experiencing a resurgence as a pushback to the testing culture created by No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. With the understanding that not all teachers feel as strongly as I do about PBL I began to think about the most essential of the "Eight Essential Elements". If I had to choose just one of those elements which would I adopt in my work helping teachers? For me that's a loaded question but a great start for teachers moving from traditional teaching to one that incorporates more inquiry is establishing the practice of Need to Knows.

When competent professionals in the adult world work they engage in this process constantly. Maybe not in the way we might have students write down or track their Need to Knows but most certainly our brains are implicitly checking and rechecking what we know, need to know, and likely what we need to do to cross those NTK's off. Effectively put into practice with students the meta-cognitive processing becomes a habit of mind that permeates outside of classroom walls in a way that can transfer to handling of stress and I might argue aid in the journey toward Maslow's ideal of self-actualization.

Just as with PBL, the idea of Need to Know's isn't new. KWL charts have been around for years and even in the most traditional school environment can be very helpful. In a classroom where students are only doing worksheets or questions with a test at the end students could generate a list of things they Need to Know to perform on the test. And while I often don't agree with their methods, school districts are doing just that with their intentional planning to raise their test scores. Generation of the Need to Knows list in a PBL setting is powerful but without the followup they are reduced being just another list.

Continually asking students what they Need to Know (and what they now Know) usually means there must to be some question or challenge that they are responding to. NTK lists as a formative assessment can help teachers and students identify what work is left to prepare for the summative assessment and help identify scaffolding strategies. As students add and remove items from things they Need to Know teachers can connect them to instruction. If the items on the list are not aligned with the content that's a great sign that perhaps your instructional design needs some tweaking. After all if the student's work is not helping them build the knowledge, understanding and skills they're responsible for in the summative assessment then what is the point? 

The generation of a NTK list almost forces a you into a culture of inquiry that would be a great start for so many of our classrooms on the journey to authentic and purposeful teaching and learning but it's vital to not lose sight of that list. Making the list is a great start but not continuing to use it throughout your lesson or unit, PBL or not, means you're missing out on a great opportunity to understand student thinking and how to meet their um, needs.

So what do we Need to Know to answer a Driving Question like this? 

How can we help schools rethink their purpose to ensure students gain the 21st Century Skills necessary to be college and career ready?

New Tech Vision?

As part of my work with the Collaborative for Teaching and Learning and the Buck Institute for Education I've recently had the opportunity to visit two radically innovative yet different schools. A few weeks ago I spent a day at ACE Leadership Academy, a charter school in Albuquerque, NM, and shared my thoughts in a post. Earlier this week I joined the CTL staff for an Executive Tour at Columbus Signature Academy, a New Tech Network public school in the heart of Indiana.

Upon entering CSA the first thing you notice is the radically different physical space. This former auto parts warehouse has been redesigned by an architectural team that listened to the needs and wants of the leadership team. There are classrooms but they tend to be more open than the traditional pillboxes where most teachers ply their craft. That openness extends to the culture that has been created for and by staff and students using the basic tenets of project based learning. 

Our tour started in a conference room with a generation of Knows and Need to Knows as well as a Driving Question all led by two female students who were very well spoken and confident in dealing with this small group of adults. The importance of that process became more evident as we walked the school and talked with various students and facilitators (the artists formerly known as teachers) about their learning. As students worked we observed these Need to Know lists being put to good use as a guide for the learning necessary to complete the project. For teachers and students these lists serve as a formative assessment and the meta-cognition is invaluable. Our group loved the "feel" of the school as we noted the sense of calm and purpose that students approached their work. 

As a part of the New Tech Network technology certainly was an integral part of what goes on at CSA but surprisingly it doesn't really feel like a "tech first" school. Yes, it's a 1:1 environment where students have access to more tech tools than many traditional school students but it's an embedded, organic part of the process instead of a dog and pony show where tech was used for tech's sake. 

Having visited other New Tech Network schools the similarities of authentic and purposeful student work and technology were evident but this school has placed an emphasis on culture and it shows. Schools engaged in PBL tend to have a positive culture but CSA intentionally teaches and assesses the building blocks of culture as school wide learning outcomes. I noticed some differences in their application of PBL from my ideal but they were not far from it and the embrace of systems and protocols like Critical Friends ensures that they will continue to make great progress in their teaching and learning.

I did wonder why New Tech Network suggests math be taught in more of a problem based learning context.  I'm not a math expert but it seems math as a subject area fits with projects as well as any other. I also noticed some activities that did not seem as tightly connected to the actual Need to Knows of the projects and at least one project where the teacher was to be the audience. Knowing that this was a snapshot without extended information jumping to conclusions is not fair but in the design of schools and instruction learning is the top priority and I see those elements as key components in that learning. It could be argued that because of their innovation they are under more scrutiny and it's more important that students are getting what they need to be college and career ready otherwise they'll be easy targets for detractors. Designing for student engagement is of utmost importance to me so I did wonder about the level of voice and choice students at CSA had in their projects. They certainly were able to approach the projects from different angles but what if the project topic was not particularly interesting? PBL is inherently more engaging but on an intellectual level, I wonder how we might design and plan for the emotional attachment...how do we include student's passion in their work?

I came away from this visit energized and excited. I would love to see more schools embrace this type of vision, including the school my daughter attends, and I wonder how to make that happen. It's not enough to merely be innovative, which in itself is no small task, it's about a vision that includes a long term plan where any innovation is purposeful in addressing a need in that plan. While I might tweak a few things if I were designing a school, New Tech Network does a good job of helping schools with the planning and support for intentional innovation centered on meaningful and rewarding work for students and staff.

I'll end this post with a Driving Question of my own and invite you to suggest revisions:

How can we, as education leaders, move our education systems to better meet the needs of 21st Century students?

What are your Need to Knows?  

Socially (un)Civil Discourse?

How important is it to teach "21st Century Skills" like communication and collaboration? Ask Denise Helms of Turlock, CA. Recently she was so upset about the Presidential election results that she posted this racist and potentially illegal comment on her Facebook page: “Another 4 years of this (N-word), Maybe he will get assassinated this term.”. She has since lost her job and has had to defend herself in the public eye. 

Presumably Ms. Helms was not taught the value of working with others in a way that includes "respect for others" as this Collaboration Rubric includes. While this might seem like common sense, the power of social media to amplify thoughts has increased the importance for schools to explicitly teach and assess good communication and collaboration that falls into the fold of civil discourse. Movement of classrooms towards a model that requires students to collaborate and communicate with one another and a real-world audience facilitates travel in these intellectual circles. While many schools seek to limit access to social media it's essential that students are allowed to use these tools of the present and future in a way that is appropriate. Allowing students space to fail and learn from mistakes in a low stakes environment provides the scaffolding necessary to build the skills that might have helped Mr. Helms keep her job. 

With this in mind perhaps teachers could use Ms. Helms inflammatory comment as a teaching tool. A quick think-aloud; students could clearly address several of the Common Core Anchor Standards for speaking and listening while incorporating some of the ISTE NETS for Students by teaching this in a social studies context of government (rights and responsibilities). Clearly there are other avenues to explore here, feel free to communicate and collaborate!