Do the Right Thing

12 March 2010

I listened to lots of stories at the 2010 ASCD Annual Conference. Some were shared by presenters. Some were shared by neighbor attendees. A few were things I picked up while eavesdropping at meals or walking behind people in the halls of the convention center. With 10,000 attendees, there are no opportunities for anyone to be lonely or private. (I was even treated to someone's deep meaningful cell phone conversation about the Common Core Standards while in the bathroom.) And really, that is the point of a conference---to be able to get together with others who have a similar interest and share ideas.

What I noticed most at this conference was the number of stories about teachers and administrators working their asses off to do the right thing---or, at least, the expected thing. While it is not a surprise to hear about the number of hours required to plan, prepare, instruct, assess, and/or remediate, what was a surprise was the lengths some people were going to. I am sure that the results can only be beneficial for kids, but I would not reach the same conclusion for the adults involved.

In fact, one of my big take-aways from the event was a collective sense of desperation about assessment, grading, and data. The educators present cared deeply for students and for doing the very best that they could for kids---but I had the impression that no one thought that they had the “right” answer or were doing things well. I find that hard to believe. I find it distressing that there is no “good enough” in these situations. I understand that no child should be left behind. I applaud the efforts that go into ensuring every student has the opportunity to learn. But what is missing from the whole equation is a way to honor progress. I talked with a teacher from Alaska whose Title I school has been in AYP for five years now. She mentioned the huge gains the school has made in that time…and yet in the eyes of the state and feds, it’s not good enough. It is apparently not even worth recognizing. I find that appalling.

Thomas Guskey and others have called for similar measures on report cards for individual students. That there is more that happens in a grading period than just the final mark---there is progress and growth along the way. A gifted student who is already above the standard should still be able to show progress. The same is true for a struggling student who may have made great gains, but is still not at standard by the end of the grading period. There are examples for every student in between---and yet almost no examples of reporting for students or schools for this factor. I hurt for them all.

I’m never sure what to do about things like this other than to just keep talking about them and hope that at some point, the people in the positions to do something will choose to do the right thing.

Labels: ,

Reporting Out

10 March 2010

As I sat in a session on progress monitoring at the 2010 ASCD Annual Conference, I started to wonder about a few new things in terms of report cards. The presenters were describing ways in which they used three different forms of data about students. One was the traditional form of scores on papers. The others are traditional in the sense that they represent data that is readily available in the classroom, it’s just rarely used for reporting: observations of and conversations with students. In my various bits of work with teachers and grading, these forms of data collection and use are the ones that make teachers uncomfortable because they rely completely on professional judgment. However, as the presenters at the session were quick to point out, when we visit a doctor, observation and conversation is the most common form of data gathering to make conclusions about our health. Certainly lab tests and vital stats inform the opinions, but we don’t think twice about physicians being unprofessional because they rely on their eyes and ears to reach a summary. Such forms should be no less valid in the classroom. I agree with this and think the key for most teachers is in finding and using data collection tools (running records or charts, for example) that are simple and meaningful to use.

But this brought me to another thought about report cards: Are letter grades “dumbed down” versions of reporting? Teachers have a rich opportunity in the classroom to gather all different forms of data---which we then expect to be crunched into a single representation. I’m not sure that even a standards-based report card would solve this, because summary progress on each target is still reduced into a symbol for that item. Do we use a single letter or number for a class on a report card because we don’t think families need or would use more meaningful information? Is the symbol good enough to represent all of the learning and evidence?

The presenters did not have to wrestle with this in their school. On the report cards, they were expected to report on three aspects: what were the learning targets for the grading period, a description of student progress toward those targets, and the plan for upcoming improvement/extension for the student. Because of the qualitative data collected throughout the reporting period, the end of term descriptions were a snap to write. I am sure this idea sends a shiver down the back of many a secondary teacher---but remember that these presenters were elementary teachers having to track and write summaries for each of 30 students in every subject (reading, math, writing, science, social studies…). The number of boxes to fill in is very similar.

I have to wonder how other stakeholders (e.g. college admissions) would view this sort of reporting. If the Carnegie unit goes away at some point (and it should in a standards-based system), what will colleges do with “transcripts” that are full descriptions of student strengths and needs as opposed to a simple list? Can they handle the truth?

Doing away with grades is not a new idea. I can think of plenty of people I’ve chatted with over the last few years who have told me about schooling where grades aren’t used and things move along just fine. I do think that an emphasis on qualitative data and more descriptive communications at secondary would shake a lot of trees. Maybe it’s time we did.

Labels: ,

Anonymouse Update

09 March 2010

A quick note before disconnecting from the airport wifi nipple and boarding the plane for home.

Before I headed to San Antonio, I mused about the being at a conference anonymous(e)ly...and wondered what would happen afterward. I no longer have to wonder.

I had someone in line at a Starbucks (at least a mile from the conference center) turn to me yesterday and tell me how much she liked my presentation. And someone on the shuttle over to the airport this morning knew me by name (even pronounced it correctly) and then complimented me and talked grading all the way here. Very sweet and unexpected events. And another couple of examples for me about the oddly public nature of sharing---when people know me and I don't know them at all.

The odd thing to me in all of this is that I only get these sorts of shout-outs from my presentations about grading. I have presented on differentiation, standards, using GoogleApps, data visualization, and a host of things in between. Somehow, only when I talk about grading practices do I make new friends. Who knew?

Life is full of wonderful surprises. Here's hoping I learn from them all.

Labels:

ASCD 2010: Parting Thoughts

Today is a travel day for me. In a few hours, I will be on a homeward bound plane. I am ready to be home and have a couple of days of "normal" before the next conference (now only 4 days away).

The ASCD annual conference was a fantastic experience and I highly recommend attending one if and when you can. There is an incredible amount of expertise available for access. I really appreciated that this conference is not specialized. I've been to plenty of science conventions...a couple of tech ones...gifted ed...and a few other boutique things. They were wonderful in their own ways---and I do believe that the science specific ones helped me the most early in my career. But now, it is much more valuable for me to see the big picture. I liked the smorgasbord of possibilities offered here.

As with any conference, the quality of the presentations was hit and miss. I had a couple of outstanding and engaging sessions to sit in on...a couple so-so...and two truly awful eye-bleach necessitating ones. There is always a roulette feel to picking a session. There were so many (seemingly) wonderful choices which you finally narrow down to one before hauling your cookies to the room and discovering if you're a winner or loser. Generally speaking, I would say that classroom teachers have the most difficulty with presenting to other adults. They are obviously very knowledgeable about a given topic and passionate about what they do. They are probably amazing in the classroom with kids. They have a lot to share---they just need some help in getting their message out in a way that connects with an adult audience.

One of the things that impressed me most about this conference is ASCD's commitment to social media and using that to help members connect with one another and have a voice. I did get to meet the two communications staff members who tweet for the organization. I was very impressed with their professionalism and their earnestness in listening to us. For example, it was nice to actually be involved with a conversation about the Common Core Standards (instead of being told what I should think about them...as I am at home). How refreshing to not be bullied into giving up critical thinking.

I have a couple of posts started that will pull out some of the larger take-aways for me. Thank you, ASCD, for allowing me to present and to learn. At the moment, I am physically tired, but my professional spirit is rejuvenated, refreshed, and ready to work even harder on behalf of students everywhere.

Labels:

The Big Show

07 March 2010


About this time last year, I tossed my hat in the ASCD Conference ring. It was not the first time that I had applied to present, but this was the first time my presentation was accepted. And since finding out that last July that I had made the cut, I have looked forward to today. Whether or not it's true, I have always looked at ASCD as The Big Show. This is the premier conference in education. It's where the experts come out to play. While I do not consider myself an expert, I do believe that I have things to share and can do it in a meaningful way. I like working with teachers.

The shot above was from my vantage point about 10 minutes before the official start of my session. And just like NSTA last year, they had to close the doors and declare the room full prior to my scheduled start time. We had at least 200 people in a room that had been scheduled for 160 (and I had prepared only 150 copies of my handout). This was far and away the largest group I have ever presented to and it was such an adrenaline rush that two hours later, I still have some butterflies and shakes. They were an amazing crowd to be with: fantastic energy.

I took my new powerpoint out for a test drive. I liked its look and flow, but I also tried to squeeze in too much for the 90 minutes. I had to rush a bit at the end. I think the other part of that was simply the size of the crowd. Getting 200 people to start and stop their conversations takes time, especially when the discussion is so rich. I will have to rethink things a bit if I have another opportunity like this.

Overall, feedback was positive. I had several people talk to me after the presentation to thank me and tell me how much they liked the session. ASCD has limited (as in 10) evaluations for each session and I was provided with a copy of each as I left. I scored all 3's and 4's and all but one "Yes" in terms of interest in learning more and attending a PD Institute on the topic. In terms of written comments, the most common theme was that they thought I had great technology skills. I used PollEverywhere and showed them my Delicious site and grading wiki. This was also the first time I put my blog and twitter handle next to my real name. It's a transition point for me.

Someone wrote that this was "one of the best presentations I have attended so far---articulate, knowledgeable, even-handed, informative." No negative comments, but a wish for "more examples on standards-based report cards and information on whether they improve student achievement." Point well taken, I think. It is something else I need to work on. I had one person ask me if there were any more evaluations because this was one session that she really wanted to give ASCD feedback about (in a good way). It was a very sweet thought.

On a personal note, I was delighted to have some friends in the room. One was someone I used to work with when I was in the Assessment division. She was a great help with handouts today and helped me celebrate afterward. There was also a science coach I worked with last year (total surprise to see him at the conference). I also met Joe Wood, whose blog I have enjoyed for awhile and have gotten to know a bit through Twitter and Facebook.

I feel like I can relax now (once the adrenaline rush wears off). Tomorrow is the final day of the conference. I am looking forward to the chance to continue to learn with others before folding up my tent and heading home.

Labels: ,

Anonymouse

05 March 2010

I consider myself to be a relatively private person. My personal life is quiet and uneventful for the most part. I am enjoying living alone (at least for now) and getting out to visit with friends when I can. I'm a rather nondescript little mouse.

My job, however, is a stark contrast to this. In that role, I have a very public existence. I was reminded of that earlier this week when I was approached at a conference by one person who referred to me as "the assessment guru" and by another who had to tell me about the various presentations she's seen me do and the impact it is having on her classroom. All good things---all very pleasant interactions---all made me grateful that these relative strangers made an effort to visit with me. However, for those two, there were probably several others who did not make the same choice. The thing is, when I look into a crowd, I never know who is looking back.

This weekend will be a little different. I am in San Antonio for the annual ASCD Conference. It is an event I have been anticipating since last July. A lot of the excitement has to do with seeing presenters I've only been able to admire from afar. For example, I have used quotes from Susan Brookhart's work in many presentations. And bright and early Saturday morning, I get to be the ultimate fangirl and sit in on her session. There will be other similar moments through Monday where I get to be anonymous.

The lone exception will be Sunday afternoon, when it will be my turn to get up and stare into the void once again. I wonder who will be peering back at me.

Labels:

Get It Together, Baby

01 March 2010

As we move forward with an assessment process for 21st century skills, some aspects are straightforward...and some are squirrely. For example, constructing a task can be something that follows a regular pattern. There are parts that should be included, ways to check for alignment, and so forth. It's the evaluation portion that isn't always predictable.

Let me give you a little piece that I'm wrestling with: Organize ideas.

What does that mean to you? What qualities come to your mind when you think about a student who has organized their ideas? Would your answer be different if I told you to just consider what an organized 8-year old would look like---or are organized ideas more universal in concept (you're either organized in your thinking or not, regardless of age)?

Suppose you were constructing a rubric for this...what would you include? Does organization need an audience---in other words, does your style only have to make sense to you...or do others have to be able to ferret out the method to your madness? Do there have to be levels of detail or an evident hierarchy, regardless of whether the organization is text-only or mindmappish? Are there any aspects to organization which transcend the medium used---if I organize using notecards, a task list in Outlook, or a flowchart in webspiration, can I identify the essence of organized ideas?

What would you suggest? What would you like to see?

Labels: ,

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.

21 February 2010

Conversations in education are so thick with references to the Common Core Standards these days that one can hardly swing a virtual cat and not hit a blog post about them. All but two states are currently dancing with the math and literacy standards. Kentucky has already adopted them without having seen the final version. And while the hoopla will continue throughout the spring, something else has quietly started: a new set of national science frameworks are underway. "Once the framework is final, it will be used as the basis for teams from three national organizations—the National Science Teachers Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and Achieve, a group formed by governors and business leaders—to collaborate on writing the standards." (from Work Begins on 'Next Generation' of Science Standards at Education Week)

Our state completely biffed its opportunity last year to do something positive with the state science standards. Instead of focusing on what was best for kids and the opportunity to deeply explore a set of fundamental concepts, we have a shotgun approach and an overwhelming amount of tediousness. This sad state should make me more excited at the prospect that we might get some "new" ones via the Common Core Standards initiative, but it doesn't.

First of all, the committee which is writing these new frameworks hasn't a single teacher. Scientists? Sure. People who actually understand what happens in classrooms and schools? Nope. I understand that there may be opportunity later for teachers to become involved, but if the process used to write math and literacy standards is any indication, there will be no educators included. Fail number two is simply the motivation behind this work. New standards will not lead to change in science literacy. You can only get there through instruction---and there is no money targeted for this.

If you live in a state where the Common Core Standards are on the table, be sure to ask your education leaders about the motivation in participating with this initiative. In our state, there has been no discussion about whether or not these standards and the ramifications of using them are in the best interests of children. Teachers participating on the review committees have told me that it has been made clear to them that the state is interested in the funding it might get by adopting these (or gaining funding freed up from other sources if the state doesn't have to create its own tests). Teachers in these groups feel the review committees are all for show---that neither state leadership nor the national groups are truly interested in feedback or comment about whether or not the state should move forward to adopting these. If this is true, I find this information deeply troubling.

I have to wonder if this is true in other states. Are we so out of balance in our education system, so overwhelmed with recession and unfunded mandates, so fixated on the bottom line, that the needs of kids have been completely pushed aside for the almighty dollar? I like the promise of a standards-based education---but it is useless without the needs of children being at the center of every decision along the way. From what I'm seeing and hearing, I'm very afraid that it isn't.

Labels: