Entry #14 - Dec. 7, 1998
"Discovering the ways to get our students to perform is at
the heart of the dilemma I raised last week, and the "10 Critical Qualities
of Student Work" raised by Schlechty has given me a new lens through
which to consider this task. I'm planning to write a student evaluation
form for the science fair process this weekend and these 'qualities' should
prove useful in that effort."
The first round of science fair judging has begun. By next Wednesday, my
classes will have selected the top three projects in each section, which
will then move to the next round. We got through about two projects in a
period. The students have asked some very good questions about the content
and the process of the experiments and most of the presenters have answered
thoughtfully rather than defensively.
My kids are warming to the use of the rubric
and they seem to appreciate our discussions about whether a particular project
"just meets the requirements" or "goes a step beyond."
Some of the students have rehearsed their presentations, and it's exciting
to see them so well prepared and serious about their work. I allow volunteers
to go first so I know I'm seeing the best work at the beginning. I'm hopeful
that these initial presentations will serve two purposes -- first, to buy
a few more days for the procrastinators to complete their work, and second,
to raise the bar in terms of what constitutes a successful project and presentation.
In the case of my eighth graders, it's exciting to see how much they've
grown in just one year. A pair of boys, Jose and Luis, who did very little
last year, are in a two-way tie for third place in a class of generally
high achievers. This year the boys chose a problem which tested different
types of salt or chemicals to see which melts ice best. They conducted their
research using texts and the Internet, and they even spoke to someone from
the city Streets Department downtown before conducting their experiment.
They stood tall in front of the class and spoke with authority about their
problem and their results. It was great to see them break out of their old
roles as class cut-ups!
While I must confess to a growing sense of relief that so many students
are presenting quality projects, I still want to explore the questions I've
been raising over the last few weeks -- questions about authenticity and
student buy-in, questions about meaningful learning vs. the mindless meeting
of deadlines.
I connected to my editor's note on my last
entry and just read the interview
with Phil Schlechty from the Center for Learning and School Reform in
Louisville entitled "Rethinking Educational Assumptions." On a
somewhat different note I'm also reading a collection of Anna Quindlen's
columns called "Living
Out Loud" and at the moment the jumble of ideas that are racing
through my mind has me positively humming. I'm either about to have one
of those "aha" moments or I'm going to short-circuit, it's too
soon to say which!
Quindlen talks about the essence of life being not in the answers, but in
the living, in the on-going questions that arise from the nitty gritty,
from the process, and her sentiments ring true to me. It strikes me that
this diary process is "Teaching Out Loud" and that leads me back
to Schlechty and his views about teachers as "leaders rather than performers."
In the interview, Schelechty says, "Rather than performing for the
students, the job of the teacher is to get the student to perform...teachers
are trying to engage students in working on knowledge...." Later in
the piece there's a discussion about the shift in our culture from a society
where a small elite was responsible for the "knowledge work" to
a "knowledge work century" (Drucker) where we must all rise to
the tasks of leadership and inquiry.
Discovering the ways to get our students to perform is at the heart of the
dilemma I raised last week, and the "10 Critical
Qualities of Student Work" raised by Schlechty has given me a new
lens through which to consider this task. I'm planning to write a student
evaluation form for the science fair process this weekend and these "qualities"
should prove useful in that effort.
I'm also going to copy the interview for my Critical Friends Group meeting
on Monday. I think a text-based discussion of this piece will deepen our
focus on student work in the next period.
Finally, I think I'll write something up about science fair for my colleagues
in our science department to consider at our next meeting. I want to share
the questions I've been grappling with before our next discussion so that
we can get beyond a rubber-stamp level of agreement and get to some of their
underlying questions as well.
At the end of the science fair process, we're all ready to agree to postponing
or even cancelling next year's requirement. We're tired and time or the
lack of it is our constant companion, but I'd like to see our science meetings
as more than pragmatic sessions where we order materials, adjust schedules
and vent -- although we do need to do all three. I know it's not a CFG group,
but I think we need to push the envelope in order to raise the level of
student science work.
My principal left yesterday and is being replaced by another Annenberg principal
in the interim. What a relief. She is a strong, reform minded leader, but
will she be permanently hired? Our School Council meets Tuesday night to
consider the applications for permanent appointment. I wonder who and how
many have applied?
--------------------------------------
(About the rubric: Two years
ago, I developed a scoring rubric that assesses each aspect of the science
project from "problem stated as a question" to "abstract"
and "presentation," using a four- point scale. A 4 indicates that
the work met all requirements and went a step beyond, for example, three
references were required so anything beyond three could receive a score
of 4. The rubric is posted here.)
Read next week's entry >>>
<<< Read last week's entry
Post a comment about this
week's diary entry
Find out more about Deborah
Back to Middle School Diaries index