This will just be a short note to accompany the release of my first book, Creating a Culture of Feedback, which is available in print form on Tuesday, November 23 and in ebook format right now. I’d love to be able to say that writing this book (or any book) has been a dream of mine for years. The truth, however, is more complicated.
I have spent much of the past ten years learning everything that I can about grading and assessment. As a classroom teacher, I’ve been able to put into practice many of the ideas that I’ve concocted and see the results. I get to talk to my colleagues and learn from them and then meld the best of what I’ve learned into powerful experiences for my students. Everything that I am as a teacher is a product of the conversations and experiences that have included many of the important educators that I know.
It’s one of these educators to whom I owe a tremendous debt. Bill Ferriter came into my life when I was just a few years into my career. It was just serendipity that we teach in the same district. But, it was more than luck that has made us friends. We have spent many hours—over beer, the occasional salad, or Moons Over My Hammy—talking about important issues like technology integration and reality television. Over that time, my respect for Bill has only grown.
So, a year ago, when he asked me to write a book with him, I jumped at the opportunity. Over the intervening months, he taught me so much about the process. He helped me craft my ideas into meaningful pages. He found ways to merge our voices into one coherent piece of work. He showed incredible patience with me and my incessant procrastination. In short, Bill was the perfect mentor and partner for a first-time author. I am enormously grateful.
And now the fruit of our efforts is available to the public, in the form of an 80-page book that lays out practical and effective strategies for putting actionable feedback front and center in your classroom. You should read it. And when you do, I hope that you recognize the value of what we do and can find ways to use these strategies in your own classroom.
New data shows that suicide attempts by middle school aged children is on the rise:
“There’s a perception that children don’t kill themselves, but that’s just not true. A new report shows that, for the first time, suicide rates for U.S. middle school students have surpassed the rate of death by car crashes.”
As a society, this problem should be a priority for our time, effort, and funding.
We all dread that moment when a well-planned review day before a big test fails to motivate our students to dig deeper into the concepts that you are teaching. It might be struggling students who need more review of fundamental skills. Or, perhaps it’s advanced students who are bored with reviewing material that they already know. Either way, the result is the same: students are not motivated to review because the activities are not matched to their needs. In these moments, I call on Secret Agent Code Name.
Secret Agent Code Name is what I call a fairly simple activity based on the idea of differentiated remediation. Using formative assessment data, I provide each student with activities that will push them to better master the standards that will be measured on an upcoming test. Rather than a one-size-fits-all review, students enjoy the personalization that comes from this exercise. It also ensures that the students who have already mastered a particular standard get to pursue more advanced learning.
Secret Agent Code Name works because it uses assessment data to match students with the best review for them. I prefer MasteryConnect for my formative assessments, but any data will do. You need the data to be arranged by topic/standard, and you need to be able to assign each student to one of two or three “levels of mastery”. MasteryConnect does this for me automatically as students finish the short formative assessments, so that’s one of the big reasons I use it.
The next step is to create or find activities that are designed to either remediate or extend learning for each of the learning targets/standards. I use Puzzlemaker and Quizlet for building vocabulary with those who need help. For the students who have already shown mastery, I often get them to create puzzles or quizzes for their peers. Paper-slide videos can be a great way to extend learning for the more proficient students by getting them to explain a difficult concept.
Even worksheets—the bane of every enlightened educator—can be a decent resource to focus additional learning time on those who need to make progress in a specific area before an upcoming summarize assessment. I find that I only use the materials that came with my textbook during these Secret Agent Code Name review days. They are a simple way to provide extra reinforcement to the kids who need it.
The overall goal of these activities is for students to make progress toward mastery or to extend their mastery prior to taking a summative assessment. So, I want them to understand that the activities that they are doing are designed to get them ready for that challenge. Their independent work time provide me with an opportunity to walk around the room and provide feedback and guidance as needed. A whole class review takes away my chance to help each student, and leaves them feeling like sheep herded into a pen. Secret Agent Code Name is a great way to make your students understand that each of them can improve and that you think of them as individual learners. #growthmindset #winning
I just finished reading Alison Gopnik’s brand-new book “The Gardener and the Carpenter: What the New Science of Child Development Tells Us About the Relationship Between Parents and Children” and it has my brain buzzing with ideas and questions.
Most of the thinking is around apprenticeship and the value that it brings to learning. Humans have learned through this process of repeated trials for millennia, and it is used in many specialized classrooms like music, art, and athletics. Yet, it’s clear we don’t do enough of it in core classes.
When I think about apprenticeship, the harsh experience of chefs on Gordan Ramsay’s reality shows always comes to mind. Apprenticeship is often a brutal and demanding way to learn a complicated skill. It requires the student to face the errors that they have made in real and tangible ways. It moves the learner along slowly as they master each part of the complex task. It demands from the student a high level of motivation.
Yet, this is not too different from the traditional grading system. Students typical try a simpler version of the final skill and build up to the final task. They often fail, and the best teachers give them multiple opportunities to succeed. But, it’s the inclusion of powerful—honest—feedback and repetitive practice make this a uniquely powerful way to learn skills.
I also like the way that this ties into Dylan Wiliam’s idea that feedback should be detective work for the student. If we give students multiple attempts and provide honest feedback in between, we are putting them in the driver’s seat of their own success. We force them to find what was lacking in their previous attempt and correct it. It’s the same routine as learning to play a level in a video game by playing it over and over again—dying each time—to eventually succeed.
The troubling aspect of apprenticeship for me is the idea that the teacher is a seasoned expert who alone determines whether the student has show proficiency. While this is how education has worked in the past, it is clearly not what is needed for a future where expertise can be found in myriad places online. We need to step away from positions of sole authority in the classroom and empower our students to assess themselves.
Can apprenticeship change learning in our schools without venerating old ideas about where knowledge comes from?
I talk a lot about grades. To friends. To colleagues. To random strangers at my second job. A lot.
And one of the biggest points that I try to make is that assessment should be a measurement of mastery that helps the learner and their “community of support” (parents, teachers, coaches, etc) to have the information that they need to improve mastery. We destroy the constructive potential of assessment when we give it too much importance. When students are driven to “succeed” on tests and grades and not to improve themselves, the effects can be devastating.
Linda Flanagan tackles the emotional toll of grades in a new piece for KQED’s MindShift blog and it’s a must-read for anyone who has an opinion about grades. Which is, you know, everyone. In the article, she cites recent research by scientists at USC that shows how grades become the motivator for students, robbing them of intrinsic motivation to learn. Students who once paid attention in class, and continued learning at home, begin to focus only on the work that affects their grade. This is obviously not the kind of behavior that leads to lifelong learning or independent learning.
The researcher, Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, writes that “students’ knowledge of a subject is tied to their experience of the grade”. The way that students perform is therefore directly connected to the effect of the grade. I think that more teachers need to understand the consequences of using grades as motivators. As Immordino-Yang puts it,
“Whether the grade is good or bad, you’re taking the student away from focusing on intrinsic interest and tying their experience to grades”
Add this to the list of reasons that we need to redirect our attention on meaningful feedback rather than high-stakes letters.
What’s your take? Put it in a comment.
photo credit: Flickr user anniferrr
The most oft-repeated response to progressive grading practices is that we need to “prepare students for college” where, it would seem, they will be battling one-on-one in academic arenas of combat. Or something.
In reality, even colleges and universities are starting to become more aware of the consequences of using a single letter (or number) represent student mastery. They see that developing responsible and productive citizens requires a culture of feedback and self-improvement. They recognize that this comes from providing students with more just a grade, but instead a more detailed “evaluation”. Case in point: Hampshire College.
In a recent opinion piece in The Hechinger Report, Hampshire President Jonathan Lash explains how his college got rid of meaningless grades. He lays out the case for this change, and explains some of the pushback from the school community. His most powerful statement, though, comes when he discusses the benefits of the “narrative evaluation” system that Hampshire College professor use,
“In narrative-evaluation systems, students never have to worry about accumulating a GPA. Instead, they focus on the quality of their work, with guidance from teachers who are often learning with them. Evaluations create closer relationships between teacher and student and enhance the teacher’s role as mentor.”
That’s a relationship that any educator—at any level—would love to have with his students. And grades prevent that.
How do you think that college grading will change in the next decade or two?
photo credit: Hampshire College
I am proud to say that I heeded the advice of my friend and colleague, Philip Cummings, to read Ron Richhart’s book “Making Thinking Visible” a few years ago. The best teacher books—in my humble opinion—are the ones that present practical strategies that straddle the line between things that make sense and things that you are already doing. Ritchhart’s book hit that sweet spot for me, and I found the ideas in it compelling. I’ve made many of them a part of my regular instruction in class.
Last month, I finally had time to read Ritchhart’s newest book, “Creating Cultures of Thinking: The 8 Forces We Must Master to Truly Transform Our Schools“. It is similar in many ways to Making Thinking Visible, but it’s the differences that really explain my mixed feelings about the new book.
First, while the first book was extremely practical and easy to implement in a classroom, Creating Cultures of Thinking seems aimed at a much larger scale. I struggled at times to see how I could use the ideas in the book to make a difference in my own classroom. The chapter about time management seemed to be simultaneously about abstract beliefs and institutional decision-making. His final chapter is entirely focused on the large-scale efforts that can bring about the cultural changes for which he advocates. These left me wishing for more power in my learning space.
On the other hand, his discussion of the hidden role of modeling in education and the four types of modeling really hit home. Ritchhart writes,
“[The four types of modeling practices] can be identified as:
- Dispositional apprenticeship: being a role model of learning and thinking
- Cognitive apprenticeship: making our thinking visible
- Gradual release of responsibility: modeling for independence
- Interactive modeling: learning from examples, practice, and reflection
Because modeling is almost a hidden dimension of teaching, understanding each of these practices more fully can be useful as we seek to create a culture of thinking”
I find this categorization of modeling to be very useful in helping me focus on the skills that I have and the ones that I need to develop in myself as a teacher. Overall, I was glad to have read the book and grateful for the thinking that it stimulated. But, I will continue to recommend Making Thinking Visible as one of my five favorite recent education books, and leave this one for the policy makers and school leaders.
Have your read this book? What’s your take? Leave a comment.