It all started when Nancy Long from Corpus Christi wrote (in a message
about teams):
On Thursdays, we do Looking at Student Work, one subject a week, following
a strict protocol developed by our school district. Once or twice a month
curriculum consultants from downtown are on campus all day meeting with
each team to monitor our Looking at Student Work process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was interested in Nancy's comments about using protocols to look at student
work. My experiences with protocols and the examination of student work
have been very focused, but we, the participants, chose our focus. I support
teacher and student empowerment through the use of rubrics, protocols and
the like, but having things spelled out in a lock step fashion seems to
undercut the richness of the process.
I'm torn between the need for structure and accountability and the desire
to trust those involved to get to the heart of the work.
What do other folks think?
Deborah Bambino
Philadelphia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Three of us spent about an hour after school, talking about the challenges
we were facing this year. The animation teacher made the comment that we
needed to form support groups that we could meet with regularly and feel
comfortable discussing challenges we were facing in the classroom. We would
like to set it up so that it wasn't just another teachers' lounge complaint
session, but a forum to sound off and find solutions to our challenges.
I know the Critical Friends protocol is excellent, but none of us is trained,
and it's unlikely that our principal will pay for the training. I think
eventually we'd like to move into looking at student work, but initially
I think it would be more of a think tank on all aspects of teaching including
how to balance work and personal lives.
This other teacher made the observation that many of us feel frustrated
and isolated, and if we don't have a place to go to get support, many teachers
might just give up or leave the school. I think she's right. We have problems
as a staff, but I think most of us are good hearted people who really want
to do the best for children. We just need a non-threatening place to gather
and support one another.
My question (finally!) is, do any of you have similar groups in place? Do
you have a particular format/protocol in place? How often do you meet? We'd
like to introduce the idea at our next staff meeting on Monday, and I'd
like to have as complete a picture as possible.
Thanks in advance for your help!
Ellen Berg
St. Louis, MO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen,
I was trained as a Critical Friends' coach in 1996 and have been working
in this capacity ever since. There are some things you can do short of attending
a training, although that would be a great experience and support.
The National School Reform Faculty, home of CFG training etc., is now being
housed at the Harmony School and can be contacted for more information at
kkelly@harmony.pvt.k12.in.us
You can access the "Looking at At Student
Work" site at <http://www.lasw.org/>
I think both of these actions will help you with the use of protocols and
research to support your efforts.
In addition, you might want to start by setting norms for how you will interact.
Even though you know each other well, taking the time to consciously set
these guidelines can go a long way toward the promotion of successful behaviors.
Starting with a statement like, I do my best work in groups where...( all
voices are respected etc.)
Revisiting these norms and or gently reminding each other when they're not
observed will be important. When you are trying to "unpeel the onion"
and go beyond gripe sessions, trust building and consistency become critical
components.
For me, the examination of student work needs to happen early and frequently,
as it is the reason for going through all the other twists and turns. Learning
from looking deeply, has rewards for both the presenter and the outside
participants. Creating a comfort zone where warm and cool feedback can be
given and received with care requires committment to doing just that.
It sounds like the teachers in your group are sensitive, caring people,
but even "nice" people can hurt each other. I know from experience
that I need to be clear that I'm not an "expert on a mission to fix
someone else's work", but rather that I'm sharing observations and
questions to push all of our thinking.
Good luck! Making my own teaching and learning public has been the single
most powerful step I've taken in terms of professional development. I cannot
imagine going back to the isolation of trying to go it alone.
Feel free to continue this conversation privately, if you'd like. I hope
these comments help you to get started.
Deb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen,
After reading Deb Bambino's book Teaching Out
Loud last year and reading about her Critical Friends Group meetings,
I tried to implement an Idea-Sharing Group (ISG) monthly, at lunchtime,
at my site. We only met a couple of times (6-8 teachers who wished to share
"happenin'" ideas from their teaching) and good ideas WERE shared.
We now are doing monthly ISG meetings during lunchtime (in the teachers
lounge) and though the attendance has been modest, we who attend get to
share & hear about neat things being done in our classrooms. No real
agenda is set... It's just an informal "chit-chat."
On a related note, a "spin-off" of this idea is a Book Chat group
that happens after school monthly to discussion important "teacher
books" we are reading. Our entire staff was given copies of William
Glasser's The Quality School and we are using chapters in this book
as a "jump off point" to discussions about school - improvement
issues.
Hope this helps! :)
Ralph A. Thiel
Traeger MS
Oshkosh, WI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen wrote: "I know the Critical Friends protocol is excellent, but
none of us is trained, and it's unlikely that our principal will pay for
the training."
Do you think some or even one of your staff development days could be designated
for LASW (Looking at Student Work)? We have a designated day on October
20 for LASW. Some of our consultants are training key people at each middle
school campus and we in turn will train our assigned group of teachers (my
assignment is math). We had one training session one afternoon last school
year, but once was not enough. This time the training will be systematic.
Every teacher from every discipline, including the arts and PE will participate.
Melba Smithwick
Corpus Christi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have sat with my mouth open reading messages from those of you who have
CHOICES in your teaming! Our teams are very rigidly structured. Each team
consists of one or two math teachers, one or two reading/English teachers
(depending on the size of the team), one science teacher and one social
studies teacher who all have the same students. Very few students are cross-teamed.
Math and reading/English have 90 minutes a day; science and social studies,
P.E. and electives have 45 minutes a day. Each team has 90 consecutive minutes
for planning each day when our students are in P.E. and electives. We each
have roles in the team meeting, and each day we have a task to do in our
meeting.
On Thursdays, we do Looking at Student Work, one subject a week, following
a strict protocol developed by our school district. Once or twice a month
curriculum consultants from downtown are on campus all day meeting with
each team to monitor our Looking at Student Work process.
Nancy Long
Corpus Christi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen Berg wrote: "I know the Critical Friends protocol is excellent,
but none of us is trained, and it's unlikely that our principal will pay
for the training."
I would like more info on this protocol...any web sites..or books, ets.
that might be suggested???
Thanks, JACKIE RALSTON
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jackie and other List friends:
This set of articles from "Horace," the Coalition of Essential
Schools' magazine, was published in 1996 and continues to be one of the
best introductions to "looking at student work" I've seen:
http://www.essentialschools.org/pubs/horace/13/v13n02.html
The Coalition recently began posting a "Fieldbook" that includes
a lot of accumulated wisdom -- including the CES schools' experience in
this area. Check out this remarkable resource at:
http://www.essentialschools.org/fieldbook/fieldbook.html
May I also point you toward some material I helped write about a history
team in Long Beach, CA that had really "dug deep" into the collaborative
examination of student work (and their own lessons) and really used what
they learned to improve their teaching/learning? See the stories at:
http://www.middleweb.com/Hooverpromo.html
I've had the opportunity to watch teachers at a half-dozen schools edge
their way into the examination of student work (kind of a hot-tub, cold-feet
experience!). It's a highly sensitive process that takes time, lots of patience,
a thick skin, and plenty of front-office support.
And it's not unusual, alas, to see a team or dept. (it's often done around
a content area, where it may produce the most powerful results) get past
the touchy, prickly start-up process and then settle into a safe, arms-length
discussion that doesn't provide much real insight or growth. I think the
story above about the history teachers at Hoover Middle School speaks to
these issues.
It's worth noting that these teachers went out and got several grants to
support their own development in this area -- and even hired a college professor/colleague
to help them refine the process, including their own protocol or "rubric"
for measuring the quality of their own lesson plans.
John Norton
MiddleWeb
PS: I know some of the teachers on this list -- the Corpus Christi folks
come to mind -- are "doing" examination of student work. It would
be interesting to hear from them. Among other things, this process raises
interesting questions about what grades mean, from class to class and teacher
to teacher.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the "Horace" magazine resources I mentioned earlier,
several people have found this step-by-step guide in the Harvard Education
Letter useful when exploring the collaborative examination of student work:
http://www.edletter.org/past/issues/1998-ma/collaborative.shtml
This was developed by Harvard's Project Zero.
If enough people are interested, we could invite a teacher/coach onto the
list who's had a lot of experience helping teachers learn to do this work
and have a deeper conversation about it.
John Norton Listserv Meeting Manager Guy
PS: The Harvard Education Letter is a great resource. Check out the contents
of past issues at:
http://www.edletter.org/past/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, yes, yes! I would find it very helpful to learn how to take a group
from the inevitable surface issues dealing with schools and student achievement
to the more in depth areas. Invite away, John!
Ellen Berg
Turner M.E.G.A. Magnet Middle School
St. Louis, MO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John:
Along these lines, we are doing a good amount of work with funding from
the Clark Foundation to create a training video and supporting materials
focused on a specific model of looking at student work. The model is the
Standards in Practice process
created by the Education Trust. We've chosen this model deliberately because
it:
-- focuses on assignments (the premise of Standard in Practice is that "students
can do no better than the assignments they are given")
-- this look at assignments directs folks to look in-depth at "teacher
work" not just student work
-- relates assignments and assessment directly to standards (which the Annenberg
Critical Friends work does not do); and
-- involves teachers in the creation of a scoring guide (a process that
is new to many teachers)
We are working over the next couple of months, for instance, to do a Standards
in Practice training for all middle schools in Corpus Christi, TX, joined
by three Standards in Practice coaches from Cincinnati, a district that
is implementing the process districtwide.
The difference we see between the Standards in Practice process and the
Annenberg Critical Friends protocol (a difference that Warren Simmons, the
director of the Annenberg Institute cited at a recent Clark Foundation conference)
is that the Critical Friends protocol makes a case for teacher collaboration,
sorting of priming the pump for the Standards in Practice work; the Standards
In Practice process shows a deliberate step-by-step model to examine student
assignments and then, later, to examine student work from those assignments
in relation to standards.
If there's interest, you might consider inviting the Ed Trust folks who
designed this process -- or their counterparts in Cincinnati -- to join
your discussion.
And, as we develop tools and identify resources related to this process,
we're happy to share them on this listserve as well.
Kris Kurtenbach
Collaborative Communications Group
Washington, DC
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greta Heady wrote: "Have any of you participated in the National Board
of Professional Teaching Standards certification process? It gives you a
great chance to look at your student work. Just going through the process
allows you to shape & polish your teaching strategies and your activities.
You can learn so much by analyzing student work... well worth the effort!"
I want to ditto Greta's remark about looking at student work by going through
this process. I did go through the process and last November received the
news that I was a National Board certified teacher. I learned soo much going
through that process that I believe strongly that it was the most powerful,
valuable professional development that in which I have been involved. And
let me tell you I have been involved in a lot in the last 25 years or so.
I had to plan, teach and analyze student work in math, science, social studies
and writing. I did a portfolio entry for each of those subjects.
Just last week I went back and reread my portfolio. I thought to myself
that I needed to begin to look at student work that closely again. I would
give myself more time as that was a pretty intense period of my life.
What I should do is get out the requirements for each piece especially the
questions that you are asked to consider about each piece of student work
you include in your entry.
Kathy Renfrew
Vermont
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen Berg wrote: "I think eventually we'd like to move into looking
at student work, but initially I think it would be more of a think tank
on all aspects of teaching including how to balance work and personal lives."
Deb Bambino wrote: "For me, the examination of student work needs to
happen early and frequently, as it is the reason for going through all the
other twists and turns. Learning from looking deeply, has rewards for both
the presenter and the outside participants. Creating a comfort zone where
warm and cool feedback can be given and received with care requires committment
to doing just that."
To follow Deb's lead: for me, looking at student work is what everything
is based upon. It gives a strong foundation for building relationships (should
I call it "team building") and provides feedback for teacher change
and improved student learning. I think it is kind of like the water cycle.
Once you start it up and put the process in place, one part supports and
leads to the next.
This is how we have used it in my department. And it is working for us.
Unfortunately, the best laid plans can run awry. As an example: our school
was scheduled to share student work with another middle school. Both of
these schools have lots of experience looking at their own work, but this
was the first time we had met together by departments to share work with
each other.
It was obvious from the beginning that, for our department, each school
had a different agenda. My department brought lots of student work with
scoring guides and project descriptions. The other school's department brought
no work at all. It was as if someone had decided that all we would do was
"talk" and ask questions about each school. Even a little pontificating
was allowed. It was very disappointing.
I had not anticipated this problem since we had agreed that we would be
using a supplement called Looking at Student Work by Tina Blythe and David
Allen to guide the process. Now I think that we need to go back to the beginning
and make sure that we have common goals and work together to meet them.
Otherwise, I am concerned that we will have more disappointing days ahead.
Juli Kendall
Long Beach, CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris Kurtenbach wrote: "The difference we see between the Standards
in Practice process and the Annenberg Critical Friends protocol (a difference
that Warren Simmons, the director of the Annenberg Institute cited at a
recent Clark Foundation conference) is that the Critical Friends protocol
makes a case for teacher collaboration, sorting of priming the pump for
the Standards in Practice work; the Standards In Practice process shows
a deliberate step-by-step model to examine student assignments and then,
later, to examine student work from those assignments in relation to standards."
I was trained as a Critical Friends' coach through the Annenberg Institute.
As a coach I was exposed to many different protocols that could be used
to look at student work, focus on dilemmas, refine teacher work etc. I am
not aware of a particular protocol that is called "Critical Friends."
Critical Friends Groups (CFG's) develop goals, practice giving and receiving
constructive feedback, study current educational research, engage in peer
coaching and generally support reflective teaching practices in order to
promote student achievement.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I was exposed to many techniques,
the process of building a CFG was more than just choosing and using, this
or that activity or tool. Joining a CFG, meant making a conscious decision
to become part of a national organization of educators, who were committed
to reform. I'd hate to see the process of learning from student work divorced
from its overall context, as I think it would lose its deeper value.
This past summer I was involved in the training of new coaches in Princeton
and one of the tools that we distributed was the Standards in Practice protocol.
I will be acting as an external coach for teachers and administrators in
Lancaster County over the next three years and they are committed to using
this tool. While I have not used this particular approach yet, it strikes
me as the logical extension of the work I/we have been doing. I especially
like the alignment with standards and the regular reflection upon the purpose
of teachers' assignments.
For those of you, who may not have seen this protocol, the steps are:
1. We all complete the assignment or task.
2. We analyze the demands of the assignment or task.
3. We identify the standards that apply to this assignment.
4. We generate a rough scoring guide from the standards and the assignment.
5. We score the student work, using the guide.
6. We ask: Will this work meet the standards? If not what are we going to
do about it? We then plan action at the classroom, school, district and
state levels to ensure that all students meet the standards.
( Ruth Mitchell, Education Trust 1997 )
As I prepare to use this protocol, I question the review of the assignment
and development of the rubric after the student work is done. I think it
would be preferable to refine the assignment and develop the scoring criterion
before the students complete the task. In my experience, having a rubric
in advance can greatly enhance the students' understanding of the work at
hand.
How has this worked in your experience? Does the reordering that I'm indicating
seem workable to you?
Before closing, I would encourage everyone who's considering looking at
student work to take the time to visit the "Looking
At Student Work" website.
Deb Bambino
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree, John - this is a fascinating discussion which I am learning a great
deal from - confessing ignorance of the Critical Friends Group process is
a little embarrassing, but how else do we learn??!! When told to evaluate
student work within the CA PQR process (a state-developed school assessment
program), the guidelines are vague and my teachers and I struggled. The
"Standards in Practice" also helps to clarify for me what we are
all being asked to do, but without training. So, I am eager to lurk and
listen to this conversation.
Betsy Burch
California
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen Berg wrote to clarify her original query about developing a collaborative,
"think tank" process with her teacher colleagues:
I feel I may need to clarify the initial purpose of this group. Although
I think eventually we will be able to shift our focus to student work, the
main purpose for starting this group is more of an emergency (I'm not sure
that's the right word...mostly the sense of urgency?) measure to provide
support to those who feel like they're drowning.
For example, we've been swamped by paperwork, many of us are facing challenges
with discipline, students tore up the room of my colleague's room while
she was out for a week when she had to have her gallbladder removed and
she's feeling disillusioned, etc. Beliefs about city students and/or city
schools are being developed, and they will continue to be formed unless
we can come together and look at some of our issues calmly and clearly.
Although I think we will get into a lot of very deep educational issues,
the initial point of the group is to support each other and keep people
from giving up. Looking at student work and creating and implementing strategies
to address our concerns will (I think) naturally result from our sessions.
I know, however, that if we bill ourselves as a group whose focus is on
examining student work, we will recruit only the teachers who are already
involved in their own reflective practice. If we bill ourselves as a group
who wants to meet to problem-solve, support each other, and talk about some
of our ideas, we might reach those teachers who have been afraid to try
anything new or even ask for help. There's a real "star" system
at our school, and I think that keeps some of our staff from wanting to
collaborate on anything too "official" sounding.
Does that make sense? I guess it's kind of like how we sell things to the
kids to get them involved. To emphasize what I'm talking about, read the
following quote from a colleague of mine from an email she sent me this
evening:
"Have you been able to get the support group thingy together? I mean,
will you pitch hte idea at the faculty meeting? I REEEEEALLY need it. I'm
going through this spell where I don't give a rip anymore."
She's a fabulous teacher who is doubting herself under the pressures and
challenges she's facing. She's pretty vocal about her needs, and she is
one of the people who always tries new things and asks for help. How many
other people are there in our buildings who feel too shy or too isolated
or too scared to ask for help?
I hope I clarified my position. I completely agree with Deb and YAMES that
looking at student work early is essential. We just have to get past the
stresses and build our relationships.
Ellen Berg
St. Louis, MO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I worked with establishing middle school study groups last year. One of
the things that helped to make the study groups successful was structure--
especially ongoing research and focused conversations around data-driven
student needs.
The critical friends groups seem a bit more relaxed and casual, based on
what I read. Is that just my "take" on things? How do they differ
from study groups?
Thanks!
Anne Jolly
Alabama
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen wrote: "Although I think eventually we will be able to shift
our focus to student work, the main purpose for starting this group is more
of an emergency (I'm not sure that's the right word...mostly the sense of
urgency?) measure to provide support to those who feel like they're drowning.
Looking at student work and creating and implementing strategies to address
our concerns will (I think) naturally result from our sessions."
My responses weren't meant to imply that you or anyone needed to immediately
look at student work, rather I was trying to address your desire to form
something other than a gripe session.
I think that it is the work and the structured approach that signals a "different"
kind of group and keeps folks coming. Even though we all need to vent, the
benefits are not really that satisfying and folks will not return if they're
not getting some sense of results.
As the coach of my group, I had to take the lead in sharing my work first,
as others were somewhat more cautious, having not had the training. Initially,
it was a balancing act between focused discussion of text, team building,
looking at student work etc., but it began to grow, slowly, but surely.
I was very anxious the first year, because I thought we should have accomplished
more. As I talked to other new coaches, I learned that they too, were spending
a great deal of time building trust. Chipping away at the isolation, learning
to open up our teaching to others takes time and cannot be rushed.
I apologize for glossing over the important first steps. I admire your willingness
to take these steps and hope you will continue to share your progress and
questions here.
Deb Bambino
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Norton wrote: "We could invite a teacher/coach onto the list who's
had a lot of experience helping teachers learn to do this work and have
a deeper conversation about it."
Then Ellen Berg wrote: "Yes, yes, yes! I would find it very helpful
to learn how to take a group from the inevitable surface issues dealing
with schools and student achievement to the more in depth areas. Invite
away, John!"
Along these lines, we are doing a good amount of work with funding from
the Clark Foundation to create a training video and supporting materials
focused on a specific model of looking at student work. The model is the
Standards in Practice process
created by the Education Trust. We've
chosen this model deliberately because it:
-- focuses on assignments (the premise of Standard in Practice is that "students
can do no better than the assignments they are given")
-- this look at assignments directs folks to look in-depth at "teacher
work" not just student work
-- relates assignments and assessment directly to standards (which the Annenberg
Critical Friends work does not do); and
-- involves teachers in the creation of a scoring guide (a process that
is new to many teachers)
We are working over the next couple of months, for instance, to do a Standards
in Practice training for all middle schools in Corpus Christi, TX, joined
by three Standards in Practice coaches from Cincinnati, a district that
is implementing the process districtwide.
The difference we see between the Standards in Practice process and the
Annenberg Critical Friends protocol (a difference that Warren Simmons, the
director of the Annenberg Institute cited at a recent Clark Foundation conference)
is that the Critical Friends protocol makes a case for teacher collaboration,
sorting of priming the pump for the Standards in Practice work; the Standards
In Practice process shows a deliberate step-by-step model to examine student
assignments and then, later, to examine student work from those assignments
in relation to standards.
If there's interest, you might consider inviting the Ed Trust folks who
designed this process -- or their counterparts in Cincinnati -- to join
your discussion.
And, as we develop tools and identify resources related to this process,
we're happy to share them on this listserve as well.
Kris Kurtenbach
Collaborative Communications
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris and Deb Bambino,
I have been following your discussion of the various methods for looking
at student work. I am very interested in finding out more about each of
the models you have discussed. I am hoping to put in place an all-faculty
Common Planning time for my next school year (2 hours before school, every
other Wed. with students arriving late). It seems to me that training my
teachers (and myself!) in one of these methods would provide a sound structure
on which to conduct our Common Planning sessions.
So, whatever additional information that either of you can forward to me
would be greatly appreciated. If there are funding sources for grants, etc.
to pay for the training of my teachers, that too would be appreciated. The
more specific the information the better! Thank you for your help!
Betsy Burch, Prin.
Woodbridge Middle School
Lodi Unified School District
Lodi, CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Besty's query regarding information on methods of looking
at student and teacher work, here are two Web links that are helpful:
The first -- http://www.edtrust.org/sip.html
-- describes the Standards In Practice process, which shows a deliberate
step-by-step model to examine student assignments and then, later, to examine
student work from those assignments in relation to standards.
The second -- http://www.lasw.org --
describes the work of the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at its collaborators
in looking at student work -- a process which makes a case for teacher collaboration.
Beth Bacon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As a possible jumping-off place for a group beginning to look at student
work, I recommend a book called "Eyes
on the Child" by Kathe Jervis.
It is about portfolio assessment and--overall--the relationship between
teaching and assessment, told through classroom stories. It is one of the
most beautiful and fascinating books I have read that really delves into
the life of a classroom, and as such, it draws the reader right in.
The trouble is that it is hard to get. I could not order it from the Teachers
College Press website so I tried Amazon.com, and it took me several months
to get it. Has anyone else read this book?
Faith Schantz
NOTE: Amazon now says it can get this book in 2-3 days.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Jolly wrote: "How do you motivate teachers to look at student
work? How do you help them understand the importance and benefits of doing
so?"
Hi Anne,
I can understand the frustration that comes from this particular concern.
At our school, we have common planning time for each grade so that teachers
will be able to focus on curriculum issues and student work. Using a rubric
system, teachers are able to each have a copy of the student's work, look
at it, discuss it, grade (if need be) using the rubric and offer suggestions,
etc.... The best feature about this is that each curriculum area is involved...that
way, the English teacher works with all the others and each teacher can
see the importance of integration of their lessons and the effects they
have on the learning (or not) of the student.
I also sit in on as many meetings as possible. The teachers know that this
is important and I feel it helps motivate them to do the best they can.
Janice Biscoe
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some weeks later, listserv members returned to the topic of student
work, as a spin-off of their discussion about critical
friends groups:
Mary Anne wrote:
Our teachers are also following a strict protocol wiith time limits for
Looking at Student Work. One of the adaptations we have made is looking
at a students work in several classes and comparing and contrasting what
works for that particular child. Teachers have begun to branch out--bringing
both assignments and results to the table. The result of these conversations
is becoming--am I asking the right question? The discussion is rich and
we are all learning alot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mary Anne --
Would you be willing to share this protocol?
Jackie Ralston
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And Mary Anne replied:
We use variations on the protocol developed by the Annenburg Institute.
(http://www.lasw.org) We reserve a 30
minute block for looking at student work. Each team has a facilitator who
begins the meetings by greeting everyone and stating the groups objective
for that day. There are basically two objectives: To look at the work of
a particular student so we can design instruction to meet that child's particular
needs, or to look at a series of student work done for a particular teacher
to support his/her work in designing instruction.
If we are looking at the work of a particular child, two teachers present
that child's work --usually two or three assignments over a period of time.
Teachers who have the student then remain quiet for the next ten-15 minutes
while teachers at the table read and analyze the work. The facilitator uses
questions like--What are the student's strengths and weaknesses? Which of
the assignments is the strongest? Why? etc. They also look at the tyoes
of assignments the child was given and again analyze them for effectiveness.
In the last ten minutes, the student's teachers rejoin the table and participate
in a discussion on how to improve the students work. If we are looking at
the work of a particular teacher, the teacher prepares copies of several
student papers from the same asignment. He/she catagorizes them as strong,
medium and weak. The rubric used for assessment is also presented. Then,
the teachers at the table again discuss the student work--often categorizing
it differently than the origninal teacher--It is amazing how we can see
the strengths in others but have a hard time seeing them in ourselves! The
team discusses the rubric and how it supported the assignment.
Finally, the facilitator creates an agenda for the next meeting.
This has become an effective tool for working with student assignments again
with the goal of improving student achievement. Even the kids have started
asking--Did you talk about my essay today?
Have fun--
Mary Anne
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And then "Jmberrid" wrote:
Our school district has adopted protocol for Looking at Student Work (for
the middle schools), and a few have been in the process for two years, with
others engaging this year. Our school happens to be one of the latter. Last
week, the dept. chm. visited a middle school that has been developing LASW
for two years. We got some helpful ideas. A group meets weekly and the teachers
rotate bringing in work. They try to bring in samples from low, middle,
and high quality. They follow the district adopted protocol, with designated
time limits for each step. At first, they said teachers were intimidated
because they felt that it was a criticism of their work--not the students.
They are very comfortable with it now.
hi everyone! I've been away at 6th grade camp! Concerning teachers sharing
student work: I really can't see any other way for us, as teachers, to grow.
We must see what other students are producing and how teachers are helping
them. I think one way to help all teachers feel comfortable with this is
at the very beginning of the year, all students complete the exact same
assignment with the same "canned" directions. You can do this
with a writing prompt or response to a specific text and even in math or
science. Then the teachers meet and score everyones papers with the same
rubric. Each paper should be scored by at least 3 teachers. That way the
staff can see if their grading rubric is across the board. Then analyze
the work and decide what needs each student has. Oh yea, same grade levels
work together. Then it is up to the teacher. Most teachers will have several
levels of needs .
Teachers can share ways that they have been successful or become successful
as the year goes on. We have done midyear Benchmarks ....that way we see
where we are lacking and where the successes are. Then the end of the year.
The teachers all go through the same process of grading everyone's paper.
My school did this for several years. The first year we were all very nervous.
Especially at the end! But what we found out is that almost all students
showed growth, some more that others, and some didn't show any. And as a
middle school teacher we all know that those hormones kick in midyear for
6th graders so some students just don't care about growth and their scores
go down. Luckily that didn't happen often. But after we all saw we were
in the same boat with the same kids we weren't nervous about it anymore.
It's a great way to learn.
Many great lessons came from those meetings. Then all grade levels can meet
and share .
Jeanne Seiler-Phillips
6th grade - Mann Middle School
San Diego, CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeanne wrote: "We must see what other students are producing and how
teachers are helping >them. I think one way to help all teachers feel
comfortable with this is at >the very beginning of the year, all students
complete the exact same >assignment with the same "canned"
directions."
We did this at our school a few years ago too. We scored a high, middle
and low writing assignment from each teacher's class, but we were not told
the presenting teacher's opinion before we started. We used a rubric too
and then we discussed the whole process, including the rubric.
I agree that this was a useful first step, but it did not begin to deal
with the issues of how and why we make the assignments that we mnake. When
I was a first year teacher, I attended a seminar sponsored by our local
education fund. The topic was assignments and it was a real eye opener.
We developed assignments and directions that we then tried to follow. It
was almost never as clear as we had previously thought it was. This experience
helped me to realize that my assignments needed to be more fully thought
out in advance and that I needed to check for understanding along the way,
not just at the end, when grades were due.
Now, I'm at yet another place, where I'm questioning why we assign the things
we do and why we test the way we're used to being tested. Put another way,
do our assessments match the higher order thinking abilities that we claim
to want for our kids?
What do your tests and writing prompts look like? How are research projects
assigned in your school or class? Are science classes inquiry based and
are the tests in line with the program or not? I'd really like to know how
this works at your schools. I'm seeing a gap between instruction and testing
here.
Deb Bambino
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having taught under the Kentucky Education Reform Act for several years,
my outlook on student assessment has evolved from a collection of data addressing
math computation skills into a well-rounded group of tests which require
students to not only compute but also think, predict, test, and generalize
observations.
My 8th grade students quickly come to realize that knowing rules to solve
problems is just not enough to satisfy me. Soon, it is not enough for them
as well. I use multi-task, "real world" grounded situations to
assess students. They are given opportunities daily to "show off"
their skills and demonstrate their understand to their peers. I never present
a concept or skill without addressing "why this is important"...
simply because my students will not allow me to! I require them to think,
to explain, to use facts to prove their understanding and I model my teaching
in the same manner.
The changes in Kentucky's testing, has allowed teachers to assess using
open ended, writing responses (even in math and science). For many teachers,
using this type of assessment has required teachers to take a deeper look
into our daily assessment tools.
For example, our assessment task for today:
Every time Mr. and Mrs. Coomer go to the movies, it costs them $15. They wonder whether they should invest in a top of the line DVD for $350 and rent discs for $3 instead. Write a letter to the Coomers to give them your advice. Include a table or graph in your letter that will support your reasoning.