REVISITING WOW!

During my recent participation at the European Council of International Schools (ECIS), I did a presentation on Wow! Adding Pizzazz to Teaching and Learning and decided I should pass on some of the new examples folks have been sharing with me. A principal at West Long Branch Schools in New Jersey shared the following social studies example:
Several days before the wow lesson, the teacher placed a large empty box in the front of the room. A few days passing it no longer drew any student attention. Then, in the opening moments of the period, noise from the box was followed by Henry Box Brown emerging (actually a colleague of the teacher) who went on to tell his personal story to a startled, attentive class.

Henry Box Brown was born a slave in 1816 in Louisa County, Virginia and lived there for thirty-three years. After a childhood of relative ease, he was bequeathed to his master's son, who sent him to work in his tobacco factory under the authority of an unfair, hypocritical overseer. Brown was not content to be a slave and decided to escape. He had himself sealed in a small wooden box and shipped to friends and freedom in Philadelphia. Click here for more on Henry Box Brown.

Principals have to WOW teachers from time to time so the principal from West Long Branch NJ shared this example:

The faculty entered a meeting finding the video of the March of the Penguins playing on the screen as they got their coffee and snacks. When everyone was gathered and watching the video and commenting in walked two live penguins followed by a zoo specialist who gave the teachers a short lesson on penguins emphasizing how they cope with the changing conditions of their environment.

As the lesson ended and the penguins exited, the principal started his presentation to very attentive teachers on changes that would be impacting the school and their students.

Sometimes students decide to WOW! their teacher….

At the ECIS conference I met Sandy Kish who teaches at the American International School in Budapest. He got student attention for an economics lesson using pizza stools that prevent the box lid from touching the pizza.

Sandy went on to describe the value of the invention of the little stool… how it impacted the delivery business… the jobs created. He wished for students that they might find/invent that kind of key of economic impact. The stool becomes a sign of value in his classroom and from time to time he recognized students hard work or success by awarding them a pizza stool.

His students who often travel extensively for sports began collecting different types of pizza stools so that Mr. Kish now has a first class collection.

As students prepared to graduate, they wowed Mr Kish with 4500 pizza stools strategically placed in his car. See the video below which played at graduation.

RIGOR

As I have spent a substantial number of days recently observing in K12 classrooms, I’ve looked to identify examples of students engaged in rigorous learning.

Oregon’s Small School Initiative website provides the following description of rigor:

“When instruction is academically rigorous, students actively explore, research and solve complex problems to develop a deep understanding of core academic concepts that reflect college readiness standards.

Increasing rigor does not mean more and longer homework assignments, rather, it means time and opportunity for students to develop and apply habits of mind as they navigate sophisticated and reflective learning experiences. Students with strong habits of mind weigh evidence, consider varying viewpoints, see connections, identify patterns, evaluate outcomes, speculate on possibilities and assess value. They find creative paths to resolve problems when they don’t immediately know the answer.

Through an academically rigorous program students not only gain knowledge and skills to achieve at high levels, they also gain ways of thinking and doing that prepare them for college, work and citizenship.”

I saw an example of rigor in a first grade classroom where students were working to solve the following problem:

If five children were practicing fair sharing with 25 games, how many would each child receive?

The teacher working with the whole class at the overhead created a drawing of the five students (using names of children in the class). She then began distributing games among each student in the drawing. Initially, she placed a game by each individual before giving a second to each. After three had been given to each, she gave the next individual three additional games, and continued giving three, thus “running out of games” before each had an equal number.

Students immediately yelled, "Unfair!". She then began asking for volunteers to describe, “What she had done wrong?” and “How it could be fixed?”.

Listening to student responses to each other and to individuals who stepped to the overhead, it was clear that possibilities, patterns, and connections were present in their thinking. Fixing the teacher’s mistake created more rigor than just solving the problem.

In the November 2009 issue of Kappan, James Stigler and James Hiebert in Closing the Teaching Gap, identify that high student achievement is not the result of a single best teaching practice but the result of students attending to important mathematical relationships and doing serious mathematical work.

“They (teachers) also must learn to monitor what students are experiencing, thinking, and learning during a lesson and be able to constantly readjust their strategies in order to capitalize on every opportunity for students to learn.” (page 36)
So my read is that teachers need to look for rigorous learning and continually shift practices to gain rigorous learning responses.

In the following video clip,


Larry Rosenstock the CEO of High Tech High provides this definition of rigor….

"being in the company of a passionate adult who is rigorously perusing inquiry in the area of their content and inviting students along as peers in that adult discourse"

I think that is what I saw in the first grade math classroom. When I met the first grade teacher later in the day and mentioned that I saw the students rigorously engaged in math thinking, she shared that the “mistake” was a mistake, not planned.
So her inquiry with the students, “What did I do wrong?” was an invitation to an adult discourse.

During an interdisciplinary project, High Tech High students use the power of media in Humanities and the knowledge of scientific data in Biology to educate the public about the water quality at local beaches in San Diego. You’ll find the elements of rigorous learning as you listen to students describe their work in this clip:




What patterns emerge in the classrooms where you find rigor most often?

QUESTIONS FOR LIFE AND BLOOM'S TAXONOMY

When presenting PLS’s work Questions For Life (QFL) (featured in my new book) , I am often asked how QFL compares to Bloom’s Taxonomy. My usual response is that I’ll explain QFL and then let you tell me the comparison. My reason is that QFL doesn’t fit into levels of thinking.

QFL presents 11 types of questions that we ask others and our selves, grouped into three categories:
Click pic to enlarge...

The categories are not sequential. Patterns of question groupings often emerge though when different types of problem solving, critical thinking, or creativity are tackled. Studying successful people or experts in a particular field will often allow a new learner to discover patterns that the experts are using. This is why a new teacher is interested in what questions an experienced teacher has in mind as she looks at students’ body language during class. ‘Think-Aloud’s in classrooms allow teachers and students to model for others how answers were formed or ideas generated.

I found an article by Sam Wineberg and Jack Schneider, Inverting Bloom’s Taxonomy in the Oct 7 2009 (page 28) issue of Education Week that shed some light on my “comparison dilemma”.

Wineberg and Schneider note that Bloom never used the pyramid with “knowledge as the wide stable base and evaluation as the terrain of intellectual mountaineers" as the explanation of the taxonomy. They suggest turning the pyramid upside down.


The authors cite an example comparing a 17 year old AP History student’s work with that of graduate history students when asked to read and respond to a historical document. The AP student starts at the knowledge base and using known knowledge, makes some application of the knowledge and arrives at an evaluation of the document and its author, BUT misses the historical significance of the piece. The grad students after reading had new questions and were ready to being learning: (Gathering Information)
What am I looking at?
When and by whom was it written?

Wineburg and Schneider conclude:

“For the history classroom, the pyramid posters need to be turned upside down, locating knowledge at the peak of the pyramid and not its base. That’s because in history, as in other disciplines, the aim is not merely to collect what is known, but to learn how to think about problems in a new way. Students who think historically know that they need to begin with analysis: What is this? Who wrote it? What time does it come from? And, just as important, they know that their destination—new knowledge--- isn’t critical thinking’s base camp. It’s the summit."

List the questions you ask yourself when approaching a particular task, label the questions from QFL, and identify any pattern.

LEARNING STYLES AND COACHING

I recently conducted a workshop session for instructional coaches looking at how their personal learning styles influenced their coaching approach. Everyone began by completing the Kaleidoscope Learning Styles Profile for Educators.

Coaches identified their range and degree of preference in the areas of sensory preference (kinesthetic, tactual, auditory, visual) perceptual preference (abstract, concrete) and organizational preference (sequential, global) and temperament preferences (NF NT SJ SP)

Intuitive Feeler (NF)—these teachers value personal integrity. They are relationship oriented, focusing on personal values – their own and others. A coach working with an NF teacher would do well to focus on the relationship aspect of the coaching process. In learning, personal significance and emotional content are important. They do not like being labeled because they value being unique individuals, not types. The NF may have difficulty viewing a learning experience or making a decision from any but a personal, subjective, or empathic position.

Intuitive Thinker (NT)—coaches or coachees with this temperament style tend to be rational in their approach to life. They need (and give) logical reasons for their learning, being very concerned about competence and “doing it well.” They enter into conversations to analyze information, gain knowledge and problem solve. Living in the intellectual sphere, a coach or coachee may at first appear cold or unemotional and have difficulty limiting a learning task or question to the issue at hand, relating it instead to larger complexities of life. Knowing this trait goes a long way in shoring up the coach-coachee relationship.

Sensing Judgers (SJ)—SJ teachers and coaches have a strong sense of order and correctness, particularly in the way communication is carried out. They value organization, predictability, and usefulness in the here and now. SJ’s want to "do it right!” Having things go smoothly is very important to them. When working with a teacher who is an SJ, a coach may focus on those aspects of order. Loyal and committed, Sensing Judgers often take on more responsibility than they can handle.

Sensing Perceivers (SP)—The Sensing Perceiving teachers value variety and excitement in learning and in life. They are after the thrill of learning and competency over predictability. Practical, an SP coach or coachee will enjoy the immediate and can often be competitive. SP coaches may want their coachees to take on more risk. They tend to appreciate style and performance. They are not planners as much as they are responders—the “firefighters” of the school or organization.

In a coaching relationship, conflicts might arise if, for example, the Intuitive Feeling person wants a friendly relationship with his or her coach. If the coach’s style is different, that desire may get missed and misunderstanding can occur.

If a coach is an Intuitive Thinker, he or she may build more thinking and analyzing into the coaching session, and the Sensing Judging coachee may not relate to it. Or, the Sensing Judging teacher may be taken back by a Sensing Perceiving coach’s desire to take risks. In turn, the Sensing Perceiving teacher may be frustrated by an overly cautious Sensing Judging or Intuitive Feeling coach.

But wait! Coaching is not meant to be frustrating—on the contrary. Because coaching derives its power from clear communication, knowing the styles of both the coach and the coachee greatly enhances the relationship, as each can appreciate how the other takes in, perceives, organizes, and communicates thoughts, beliefs, feedback and other information vital to the coaching process. If the style is not known precisely, being aware of style differences and discussing them can be the starting point to defuse any potential conflicts or misunderstandings.

As an auditory, abstract global, intuitive thinker I know that my coaching style leans toward extended conversations (auditory) thinking through the meaning and possibilities….enjoying my natural curiosity for the teaching/learning process. I must be aware that the Tactual, Concrete Sequential, Intuitive Feeler is more interested in how do we do this…and the Kinesthetic, Concrete Global Sensing Perceiver has left my coaching session at least mentally if not physically before I’ve gotten to the “interesting” (for me) part.

What do you know about your style? What must you be conscious of?

PLATOONING

How do coaches’ and principals’ work with elementary teachers using departmentalized structures?

The November/December edition of the Harvard Education Letter titled “Platooning” Instruction: Districts Weigh Pros and Cons of Departmentalizing Elementary Schools examined the practice of elementary teachers departmentalizing.

Platooning (or departmentalization) is nothing new. It’s what middle and high schools have been doing for ages—divvying up instruction according to subject area, with students rotating to different rooms headed up by different teachers for different subjects. What is new is applying that idea to elementary schools, long the bastion of a one-teacher-per-classroom model.

Elementary school teachers are trained to be generalists who spend the entire year with one group of about 25 kids and teach them the gamut of subjects—math, science, social studies, and language arts. The conventional wisdom has been that younger students benefit from the stability and continuity provided by having the same teacher every day all day for the whole year.

In an example shared in the article, third and fourth grade students have three teachers- one for writing and language arts, one for reading and social studies, and one for math and science.
Opinions of those favoring the platooning strategy identify the raising standards especially in math and science as requiring teachers to receive more specialized professional development in one or two content areas versus trying to develop the expertise to teach all the content areas. Some fear teachers make individual choices when teaching all subjects to emphasize some ”favorite” contents areas over others.
Opposing views are those that feel that developing relationships with students, which is easier done with a smaller group all year, trumps the specialized content approach. (Whole Child)
I am currently working with the staffs of several elementary schools who have begun varying degrees of departmentalizing in grades 3-4-5.Building collaboration among the teachers sharing students is key to maximizing student achievement.
Principals and instructional coaches working in these settings need to consider how they conduct their work in ways that build that collaborative environment and spirit:
• Planning—there is no escaping that more joint planning has to occur in a departmental structure. More planning must occur at school with teammates than when a teacher is planning for her own class group.
• Knowing Students- to know my students I must dedicate conversation time with my colleagues who observe and know my students from a different perspective. I need to uncover how students’ approaches to learning are similar and different as they move from reading to science.
• Trust- teammates must know each other and each other’s work well enough to support each other with students and parents. My morning with a group of students need to include getting them excited about the afternoon with my colleague. Parents need to see our confidence in each other when they meet with us individually and collectively.
• Shared Responsibility- all teammates must accept responsibility for student success in all content areas. While I teach reading and social studies, the students’ math scores are mine.

Principals must continually consider that they are dealing with a team more than an individual teacher. They should be meeting with the team discussing student concerns. In other words, a meeting about reading scores should be held with the team, not the teacher instructing reading. A principal should be asking questions of individual teachers that communicate his/her expectations that they are functioning as a team, such as asking the social studies teacher how the writing students do for her match the writing teacher’s assessment?
Coaches should work with the team in professional development such as using the students’ science text when modeling a reading strategy for the reading teacher and taking the writing teacher’s strategies into the other classrooms.
The team of teachers should be observing in each other’s classrooms to see student similarities and differences in each content area and with each teacher. Since teaching teams will often have common planning times, you might arrange for teams to cover for each others so that learning activities can be observed. (Third grade covers for 4th grade teachers to observe and then 4th covers 3rd.)
I’ve written before that teaching is a TEAM Sport… a must with platooning!
Let me know your thoughts.