Today was a most interesting day of most amazing professional development. The day was presented as an unconference, no key note speaker, nothing lavish, just a bunch of dedicated people who are passionate about education. It was representative of most stakeholders: parents, teachers, principals and some students. It is hard to describe the day in a way which accurately would reflect the conversations that were held today.
The beauty of the day was the respect for the knowledge of the group that was there, the fact that everyone had something to offer, something to share, something to reflect on, a question to pose and a desire to learn. These were not sessions that were being offered by someone looking to pad a resume, someone who had not been in a school in years and was preaching nor was it someone who had already done the same presentation 25 times in the year and did not adapt it to the group present. These sessions were lead by questions from people within the room. I was looking at the board of potential topics with people putting sticky notes on them to show which ones were of interest.
As we were looking at the board of topics there were other conversations that started and new topics were posted. As new topics were posted some stickies migrated, others added their stickies to the new topics and 16 topics were chosen for the day. 4 sessions per time slot, 4 different time slots. There were conversations around assessment for learning, bringing English LA into the 21st century, Social Media 101, moving away from letter grades, engaging all partner groups, moving away from awards ceremonies, creating online communities as well as many other great subjects. We were there from 9 am to 4 pm, and then some of us went to a pub to continue the conversation afterwards, those who had the long commute home had their continuing conversations in the car, the #edcampvan hashtag continued to be used long after the day was over. It is now 10 pm and that hashtag is still showing up and being used! Talk about powerful pro-d!
I took in 4 amazing sessions, each one passed quickly, with conversations continuing long after the session was over. The discussion were so rich, provocative and reflective. The varying points of view from different districts, levels, stakeholders and experience was so enriching. I honestly feel that I would have happily attended each session for a day instead of just the 45 minutes sessions (which often continued well after the time elapsed unlike other sessions where people were packing up their bags before presentations were over). It just felt as though we were just warming up. To have that many people together is powerful pro-d. There was so much to listen to, so much to share, so much to think about and so much to bring back to schools. As I was driving home I started to wonder how we could make our pro-d days much more like this. Good solid conversations, professional dialogue and getting to the meat and potatoes. Let's get it all out on the table.
I would have loved to have school boards and Ministry of Education representatives there. They need to hear our thoughts without the bureaucratic red tape that can exist when meeting with govenment representatives. Open honest conversations without politics so that they can hear what it is that we are trying to do, hear what our barriers are, understand how it would be better for students and we could hear what their vision is without a podium and a rehearsed speech, what their concerns are, what their barriers are. If we can truly have all stakeholders represented then we can really begin to make magic happen.
There is much to bring home to our schools and a lot to think about how the day was shaped and how we can use this format. Is this the future of pro-d?
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
The Making of a masterpiece
Too often we show students completed work, the final product. Students may look at it, read it or hear it and think that it is fantastic, but then they think that they never could do it themselves. We may try to break it down for them, but we rarely show how they got to the final product. We try to encourage them, give them positive feedback and tell them that they can do it. Rarely are students ever shown what the rough copies looked like, how many models or sketches were done nor how many pieces of crumpled up paper ended up the waste basket (and of course properly recycled). Today I spent a good part of my morning in the Musee D'Orsay in Paris, one of my favourite museums of all times.
As I was walking through the museum admiring the work of the artists and been mesmerized by some of their creations, I was thinking to myself that I wish I could paint like that, or sculpt like that. The works are amazing. I was looking at a painting by Gustave Courbet called A Burial at Ornans. It was not so much the painting as it was the size, roughly 10ft by 20ft. The people are life-sized in the painting and the detail is impressive. The reason that I bring this up is because I started wondering how many sketches he must have done prior to doing the painting. There are many paintings of this size in the museum and I kept thinking that they had to have planned it out and did not just start painting.
As I continued around the museum there was a section on Gustav Mahler. The reason that I bring this up is because the display contained some of his sheet music. When you start to look at the sheet music you realize that they are drafts of some of the music he composed. There are sections crossed out, times changed, notes changed and titles changed. Sometimes there are whole sections that have been taken out, and other times just a few bars (I have not taken a music class in years so my terminology might be off). As I was looking at this I kept thinking that this is what kids need to see, the rough drafts with changes and editing that had been done. Mahler made mistakes, he changed parts of it, he did not get it right the first time round. This would have been a great lesson for students to see, even world famous composers don't get it right the first time. Too often we focus on the genius of the work and not the time and effort that went into it.
I think it would be of great use to our students if we could find more collections like the Mahler one so that they could see the editing process and realize that even great artists needed to review and change their work. I feel it makes them realize that these great artists are human and had to take their time, a very important lesson for students to learn. The next time you are featuring some great artist, see if you can find some roughs, I think it will make the lesson richer.
As I was walking through the museum admiring the work of the artists and been mesmerized by some of their creations, I was thinking to myself that I wish I could paint like that, or sculpt like that. The works are amazing. I was looking at a painting by Gustave Courbet called A Burial at Ornans. It was not so much the painting as it was the size, roughly 10ft by 20ft. The people are life-sized in the painting and the detail is impressive. The reason that I bring this up is because I started wondering how many sketches he must have done prior to doing the painting. There are many paintings of this size in the museum and I kept thinking that they had to have planned it out and did not just start painting.
As I continued around the museum there was a section on Gustav Mahler. The reason that I bring this up is because the display contained some of his sheet music. When you start to look at the sheet music you realize that they are drafts of some of the music he composed. There are sections crossed out, times changed, notes changed and titles changed. Sometimes there are whole sections that have been taken out, and other times just a few bars (I have not taken a music class in years so my terminology might be off). As I was looking at this I kept thinking that this is what kids need to see, the rough drafts with changes and editing that had been done. Mahler made mistakes, he changed parts of it, he did not get it right the first time round. This would have been a great lesson for students to see, even world famous composers don't get it right the first time. Too often we focus on the genius of the work and not the time and effort that went into it.
I think it would be of great use to our students if we could find more collections like the Mahler one so that they could see the editing process and realize that even great artists needed to review and change their work. I feel it makes them realize that these great artists are human and had to take their time, a very important lesson for students to learn. The next time you are featuring some great artist, see if you can find some roughs, I think it will make the lesson richer.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Allowing kids to fail without feeling like a failure
Between the jet lag and not having slept in over 30 hours, waking up at 3am in France is an interesting time to reflect. For some reason I started thinking about the magic of children's beliefs and the profound sadness of those who are struggling.
A couple of reasons probably led me to these thoughts. We recently had the students complete a survey for a local university. The students had been told that if at any time they became uncomfortable with the questions they could just stop. When the questions got to self-esteem, a number of students that we worry about decided that they did not want to continue, which was quite sad that at a young age they already had that image of themselves.
The second reason was that a friend and colleague had tweeted about the incredible passion of students and their desire to change the world. She had shared an example of the student wanting to do something for the victims of the earthquake in Japan. The question was then posed, when do children stop believing that they can change the world? I had replied with "When adults tell them too many times they cannot do it". Why do so many of us adults tell kids they can't do something rather than letting them try. Hopefully they are successful, and if not, can there not be a rich conversation around the why, rather than a "I told you so" conversation?
With the debate around moving away from letter grades, some of the talk was around the life lessons around failing. I am not sure if there are life lessons in failing but there are amazing lessons to be learned from failed attempts. When a baby is learning to walk, there are going to be moments of teetering, there are going to be times of falling flat on the butt (thank goodness for the extra padding in the nappies) and perhaps the occasional set of tears when they completely lose their balance. The vast majority of adults would not try to stop them from trying to walk until they felt the child was ready for the experience. We let them experience failed attempts as a natural part of their development.
When children first begin to speak, we listen to what they say, we do our bet to understand them and there are a lot of hand gestures, pointing and guessing involved. We do not stop them when their utterances are incorrect. We let them try to explain themselves, we ask them to repeat. We model the language for them, they listen, they mimic and they keep trying. There are many failed attempts that might occur, but the key is that they are encouraged to keep on trying.
One of the parts of my job that I really love is when I watch the kindergarten students build with blocks or lego. Their imagination is inspiring and their thought process is so verbal and remarkable. You listen to them talk to one another as they attempt to build the largest tower in the world. It will fall over and they try again. They talk about what they felt went wrong, they make adjustments and they try again. That tower may fall 10-15 times, but each time they try with a new idea and gradually they are more successful. If we were to intervene and show them what they are doing wrong, would they be as interested in trying again or will they become passive as you show them what to do. Would they still be interested in hypothesizing on their own and lose the desire to continue? When they ask for help, do you push them aside, build a large tower or do you ask them questions, listen to their ideas, and then maybe ask a few guiding questions and let them try again.
This is not to say that we should not be limiting some of their ideas. I remember when I was on supervision watching two boys with large golf umbrellas running up to the playground. Somehow intuitively I knew what they were up to and I stopped them before they climbed to the top of the playground to do around a 10-12 foot jump to test out the parachute abilities of the umbrellas. This does lead me to pose the question, when should we intervene, when do they need our protection?
We try to protect the children by not letting them make the same mistakes we made, but is that the right thing to do? By limiting their exposure to making mistakes, trial and error and failure, are we preparing them for what to do when they encounter difficulties? Are they given as many problem solving opportunities as they need? Think back to the conversations that are had when the child makes a mistake, when their attempt to do something ended up in failure. Were they told that it serves them right for trying? Were they told that they should never have tried it in the first place? When do those conversations need to take place?
In “protecting” students are we stunting their growth, limiting their development and diminishing that spirit that they can be whatever they want, that they can change the world around them and that they can be a difference maker? When do they start worrying about red tape, policies, whether or not it is worth trying? Why are there so many adults who intentionally, or accidentally, correct students until they no longer want to try?
It seems that in the school system, as the students get older, we move more from experimenting, trial and error and problem solving to one of rigidity, compliance, and focussing on what is wrong versus what is right. To fail at an attempt is considered unacceptable, and then we fail the students when their failures exceed their successes. Students are then assigned a failing grade. Nothing like reinforcing what they are not getting to motivate them to try again.
We can have a later conversation about how to differentiate between the student who gets it right away and the one who gets it on the 20th attempt, but if on the 20th attempt they get it and really understand it, why are they then given a failing grade? They may have struggled on their homework and quizzes, they may have needed extra tutorials and they may have stayed after class to get extra support, but if on their last assessment they have clearly demonstrated that they understand what was taught, why are they being punished or diminished for having failed in their first attempts? Are we teaching or are we sorting?
One of the biggest disservices we can do to our kids and students is knock that spirit out of them by constantly correcting, limiting, condemning failure and not letting them experiment. If they are not likely to be seriously hurt, should we be stopping them?
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Changing the Face of Reporting Through Assessment Practices
A little while ago I wrote about how a number of schools in my district were looking at changing our reporting practices, moving away from letter grades to standards based reporting. Based on the recommendations of @tomschimmer and @birklearns when it came to re-examining our assessment and reporting practices, I picked up two books by Ken O'Connor: How to Grade for Learning and A Repair Kit for Grading; 15 Fixes for Broken Grades. I have just started reading A Repair Kit and already in the first chapter there is a great list which would be a very good conversation starter for any staff. The discussions on these points alone could take a while.
15 fixes for Broken Grades
Grades are broken when they -
• include ingredients that distort achievement
• arise from low quality or poorly organized evidence
• are derived from inappropriate number crunching, and when they
• do not support the learning process
Fixes for ingredients that distort achievement
15 fixes for Broken Grades
Grades are broken when they -
• include ingredients that distort achievement
• arise from low quality or poorly organized evidence
• are derived from inappropriate number crunching, and when they
• do not support the learning process
1. Don’t include student behaviors (effort, participation, adherence to class rules, etc) in grades; include only achievement.
2. Don’t reduce marks on “work” submitted late; provide support for the learner.
3. Don’t give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
4. Don’t punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
5. Don’t consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
6. Don’t include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence
Fixes for low quality or poorly organized evidence
7. Don’t organize information in grading records by assessment methods or simply summarize into a single grade; organize and report evidence by standards/learning goals.
8. Don’t assign grades using inappropriate or unclear performance standards; provide clear descriptions of achievement expectations.
9. Don’t assign grades based on student’s achievement compared to other students; compare each student’s performance to preset standards.
10. Don’t rely on evidence from assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
Fixes for inappropriate number crunching
11. Don’t rely only on the mean; consider other measures of central tendency and use professional judgment.
12. Don’t include zeros in grade determination when evidence is missing or as punishment; use alternatives, such as reassessing to determine real achievement or use “I” for Incomplete or Insufficient Evidence.
Fixes to support the learning process
13. Don’t use information from formative assessments and practice to determine grades; use only summative evidence.
14. Don’t summarize evidence accumulated over time when learning is developmental and will grow with time and repeated opportunities; in those instances, emphasize more recent achievement.
15. Don’t leave students out of the grading process. Involve students; they can - and should - play key roles in assessment and grading that promote achievement.
The first chapter resonated with many of the thoughts that I have had, namely around the punishment/rewards aspects around letter grades and what they represent. O'Connor writes that grades have served a variety of purposes including: to communicate student achievement to students, parents, school administrators, post-secondary institutions and employers as well as sorting and selecting, motivation and punishment. These purposes are in conflict with communicating their successes and ranking and sorting. The first chapter is a lot to chew on.
Which ones are the most important? which ones resonate the most with you?
Which ones are the most important? which ones resonate the most with you?
Monday, February 28, 2011
Education Finances
Education finances are a tricky thing. I don't claim to be an expert in the field, but as the Liberal leadership campaign came to a close, it is time to wonder what will happen with public educational in British Columbia as a result of the new Liberal Party leader. The new leader of the Liberal Party, and Premier of the province, Christy Clark has had a tumultuous relationship with teachers in the past and has pledged to re-examine the funding formulas. As to what exactly this means, I am not sure. Over the past few years as education finances debates continue in BC with the Liberals, the cost of public education continues to rise. There are costs to move forward and there are additional costs just to maintain status quo.
Trying to have a 21st century school is trying. Districts are struggling with bandwidth, and our district is no exception. At this point I am not even talking about the additional hardware necessary. There is no point in adding hardware if the system cannot handle what we currently have. From my understanding BC was one of the first to have Internet in the schools, meaning that the problem is that BC was one of the first to have Internet in the schools and needs to seriously upgrade the infrastructure. Our Provincial Learning Network is outdated and maxed out. In order to deal with this problem our district has had to examine different possibilities. It was mentioned in an article that for the Coquitlam School District "A middle-of-the-road option that costs less than putting fibre at every school site but would still require a one-time $2.5-million investment plus $290,000 a year, or $785,000 annually to lease fibre over 20 years and the tools for five years."
The district can either wait for additional funding to deal with this or take it on by itself. To the best of my knowledge there is no additional funding coming. That means that just to be able to have a manageable system the district needs to come up with nearly $3,ooo,ooo. I just do not understand how the reigning provincial party can be talking about 21st century schools without providing the money necessary for the required infrastructure to make it possible.
Another finance piece that has confused me is how money is taken away. Over the past few years taxes have been added, green initiatives have been put forth and schools have been footing the bill. Perhaps it is just me, but I fail to understand why it makes sense to give schools $ and then take them back. Here are a couple of examples. This year, School District 43 will pay $232,000 to Pacific Carbon Trust to offset its energy, fuel and paper consumption but will get no money back for innovative projects, such as composting or recycling, that are cutting waste and dealing with climate change. The second example is last year districts were saving money for required major renovations and yet had the money taken away because it was deemed to not be necessary because it had not been spent. Since when is it prudent to spend your annual budget when you are not sure what renovations or major work might be necessary.
These renovations would have replaced old and outdated boilers and made the schools heating systems more efficient, provide better air quality and make the schools "greener". Better air quality, I would think, would result in fewer people being sick, another cost. The great part of the Carbon taxes is that the money taken back was money school districts were going to use to make renovations and alterations that would have allowed the school districts to become more carbon neutral and now have to pay the Carbon tax because they were not compliant with the Green Goals. To me it does not make sense to essentially fine a school district $232,000 because of a law that was enacted by the provincial party and then not giving the funding to the schools to make the necessary changes.
Budget times are always interesting as districts have many difficult decisions to make. It would be nice if there were not additional cost pressures added, but perhaps that is not reality.
Trying to have a 21st century school is trying. Districts are struggling with bandwidth, and our district is no exception. At this point I am not even talking about the additional hardware necessary. There is no point in adding hardware if the system cannot handle what we currently have. From my understanding BC was one of the first to have Internet in the schools, meaning that the problem is that BC was one of the first to have Internet in the schools and needs to seriously upgrade the infrastructure. Our Provincial Learning Network is outdated and maxed out. In order to deal with this problem our district has had to examine different possibilities. It was mentioned in an article that for the Coquitlam School District "A middle-of-the-road option that costs less than putting fibre at every school site but would still require a one-time $2.5-million investment plus $290,000 a year, or $785,000 annually to lease fibre over 20 years and the tools for five years."
The district can either wait for additional funding to deal with this or take it on by itself. To the best of my knowledge there is no additional funding coming. That means that just to be able to have a manageable system the district needs to come up with nearly $3,ooo,ooo. I just do not understand how the reigning provincial party can be talking about 21st century schools without providing the money necessary for the required infrastructure to make it possible.
Another finance piece that has confused me is how money is taken away. Over the past few years taxes have been added, green initiatives have been put forth and schools have been footing the bill. Perhaps it is just me, but I fail to understand why it makes sense to give schools $ and then take them back. Here are a couple of examples. This year, School District 43 will pay $232,000 to Pacific Carbon Trust to offset its energy, fuel and paper consumption but will get no money back for innovative projects, such as composting or recycling, that are cutting waste and dealing with climate change. The second example is last year districts were saving money for required major renovations and yet had the money taken away because it was deemed to not be necessary because it had not been spent. Since when is it prudent to spend your annual budget when you are not sure what renovations or major work might be necessary.
These renovations would have replaced old and outdated boilers and made the schools heating systems more efficient, provide better air quality and make the schools "greener". Better air quality, I would think, would result in fewer people being sick, another cost. The great part of the Carbon taxes is that the money taken back was money school districts were going to use to make renovations and alterations that would have allowed the school districts to become more carbon neutral and now have to pay the Carbon tax because they were not compliant with the Green Goals. To me it does not make sense to essentially fine a school district $232,000 because of a law that was enacted by the provincial party and then not giving the funding to the schools to make the necessary changes.
Budget times are always interesting as districts have many difficult decisions to make. It would be nice if there were not additional cost pressures added, but perhaps that is not reality.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
My struggles with the FSAs
Earlier this week I was sitting in the computer lab watching the students complete the grade 4 numeracy portion of the FSA (Foundation Skills Assessment - British Columbia's standardized tests for grade 4 and 7). There were many thoughts going through my head during this time. I had looked at the rankings that the Fraser Institute published and saw that my school had jumped significantly in the standings. I knew that we would be moving up from where we were last year, our focus has been on writing for the past few years. We have enjoyed some rich professional development, had great discussions, found different ways to emphasize and promote writing in the school and continued to work with different writing programs. These have all lead to improvements. I do believe that the students have improved in writing because of these changes, but that does not tell the whole story.
Our results are directly impacted by the number of eligible students who write the different tests and the number of students who have been excused from writing it for a variety of reasons including parental request that their child not write the tests. If a number of very strong students are excused from writing the test, our results will drop, conversely if the number of students excused from writing are struggling learners our results will rise. If there is not a flu bug running through the school around that time then the results go up, if there are a few kids who families all go on vacation at that time our results could drop. There are so many external factors that impact the results of the test beyond the teaching that if they fall in your favour as they mostly did last year, the result is a rise in the rankings, if they do not, as was the case two years ago and this year, they will drop.
To give you some insight as to how it works I will include a brief description. We received the package a few weeks earlier and I decided to wait to start. Over the past few years the system has had problems where students will be kicked out of the electronic portion and have to log back in. For some students this would happen 3-4 times over the course of the time they were working on one portion of the test. This caused a lot of stress and caused some to panic and become very anxious, worried that they would have to start again. (I cannot even begin to imagine what would be going through a high school student's mind when writing a provincial test and this happens!). I hoped that by waiting there would be fewer students using it at the same time, thereby reducing the possibilities of crashes.
During the couple of weeks leading up to us starting I had some conversations with other schools, people on my soccer team and elsewhere discussing the FSAs. A couple of friends with students at schools outside of our district were telling me that the kids had been practicing the tests for a couple of weeks and were a bundle of nerves because they were told how important these tests are and that they had to do well to represent the school. One of my colleagues was telling me that she had 3 different parents come to her and ask whether or not their child should be writing the test because they were worried that their kids would not be successful because of their IEPs (individual education plans) and would therefore bring the school results down. She told the parents that it was their choice, but that they should not be excluding their children for that reason. Would all principals have said the same thing? At our school all students write the test unless we are concerned about the impact that this could have on the student, and we do not spend any time practicing.
I had a few parents come to me a little before we were going to start wondering why we had not started our tests when when some of the neighbouring schools had. I explained my rationale and they felt that it made sense. One then asked me if we all received the tests at the same time and I let her know that I believed that to be the case. The next questions caught me off guard as it was not something that had entered my mind. If you held onto the tests for a couple of weeks, is there anything stopping schools from practicing with the actual tests before starting? Could they all do a rough draft and then copy the good draft into the booklet? If they were not all doing the electronic portion at the same time, would it be possible for a class to begin the reading portion and then copy the stories, print them and be able to go over them with the other students to prepare them for the questions? When I answered that hypothetically speaking this was possible she was stunned. How was this standardized? In order for it to be standardized should all the kids in the province be doing the tests at the same time, or at the very least, all of the kids in the same school at the same time?
There are other factors that concern me as to how the data is used. Two years ago our school received additional staffing partly due to the fact that we had a larger number of students with learning challenges than we normally had. That year, when the students were writing the FSAs, the flu went through the school and some got sick, 1 missed a lot of time from school so I decided to not have that student finish the FSA. Result, not meeting expectations in all areas. 2 students went on vacation part way through the test, result, 2 students not meeting expectations. 2 students broke down in tears because they were frustrated so we took the tests away, result, 2 students not meeting expectations. I believe that 4 of those 5 students would have fully met expectations. I had two students who would not be writing the tests for a couple of reasons and I used their identifications to show the students to log on. Result- 2 more students not meeting expectations because I had logged them in and answered 1 question but did not click on submit thinking the results would not show, this was a boneheaded moment which I did not repeat. When you have a cohort group of about 50 kids and 7 are not meeting expectations for reasons other than the results of the test itself is one thing that a school can address and explain to its community, when an outside agency is ignorant of what happens in the schools and publishes results is another.
Four years ago we had the exact same number of identified gifted students as student with learning challenges two years ago. The school went from double digit number of students who were gifted to double digits with learning difficulties. The cohort was completely different and something outside the control of the school. The result was a huge drop in the number of students not meeting expectations. I go over the results with the parents, give them the numbers as well as some background information. I am able to explain why we have gone up or down. Our community is aware of our context, an outside agency examining and working with the data is not. When a school has their test data compromised because their electronic results have gone into an Internet abyss and suddenly 10 students results are automatically not meeting expectations and those results are published, the public perception of the school can be compromised.
From my vantage point, the FSAs can provide useful information for a staff to look at and plan our school goals. We can use it as a measuring stick to chart our progress, knowing our context. This is not shirking responsibility. I still stand in front of our parents and share the data and listen to concerns that they may have. My concern is that when a non-informed group that ignores or does not care about the contextual situations that can arise in schools, and publishes results that are challenged statistically it impacts the perception of the school. Why are schools punished because H1N1 hit their schools hard one year? Why are schools punished for not practicing for the tests for weeks and choosing to focus on the curriculum and using the FSAs as a snapshot as they were intended to? Why are schools punished because the cohorts each year can be significantly different from year to year and give a false increase or decrease in the students' perceived success? The number of students writing is also compromised, based on parent willingness to have their children write the tests. There are some schools where only 30% of the eligible kids are actually writing the test.
If everybody is not writing the test at the same time, in the same way, under the same conditions, with the same number of kids in a room writing it together, with the same preparation, with ALL students writing the test regardless of abilities, with one large group of independent markers marking all of the tests in the same way and removing the possibilities of possible manipulation of the testing situations, intentionally or accidentally, the test is no longer standardized even if all of the questions are the same. There are just too many outside factors possible to make this testing equitable. Let schools use the information for the way that it was intended and not let outside agencies compromise the validity of a non-standardized standardized test.
Our results are directly impacted by the number of eligible students who write the different tests and the number of students who have been excused from writing it for a variety of reasons including parental request that their child not write the tests. If a number of very strong students are excused from writing the test, our results will drop, conversely if the number of students excused from writing are struggling learners our results will rise. If there is not a flu bug running through the school around that time then the results go up, if there are a few kids who families all go on vacation at that time our results could drop. There are so many external factors that impact the results of the test beyond the teaching that if they fall in your favour as they mostly did last year, the result is a rise in the rankings, if they do not, as was the case two years ago and this year, they will drop.
To give you some insight as to how it works I will include a brief description. We received the package a few weeks earlier and I decided to wait to start. Over the past few years the system has had problems where students will be kicked out of the electronic portion and have to log back in. For some students this would happen 3-4 times over the course of the time they were working on one portion of the test. This caused a lot of stress and caused some to panic and become very anxious, worried that they would have to start again. (I cannot even begin to imagine what would be going through a high school student's mind when writing a provincial test and this happens!). I hoped that by waiting there would be fewer students using it at the same time, thereby reducing the possibilities of crashes.
During the couple of weeks leading up to us starting I had some conversations with other schools, people on my soccer team and elsewhere discussing the FSAs. A couple of friends with students at schools outside of our district were telling me that the kids had been practicing the tests for a couple of weeks and were a bundle of nerves because they were told how important these tests are and that they had to do well to represent the school. One of my colleagues was telling me that she had 3 different parents come to her and ask whether or not their child should be writing the test because they were worried that their kids would not be successful because of their IEPs (individual education plans) and would therefore bring the school results down. She told the parents that it was their choice, but that they should not be excluding their children for that reason. Would all principals have said the same thing? At our school all students write the test unless we are concerned about the impact that this could have on the student, and we do not spend any time practicing.
I had a few parents come to me a little before we were going to start wondering why we had not started our tests when when some of the neighbouring schools had. I explained my rationale and they felt that it made sense. One then asked me if we all received the tests at the same time and I let her know that I believed that to be the case. The next questions caught me off guard as it was not something that had entered my mind. If you held onto the tests for a couple of weeks, is there anything stopping schools from practicing with the actual tests before starting? Could they all do a rough draft and then copy the good draft into the booklet? If they were not all doing the electronic portion at the same time, would it be possible for a class to begin the reading portion and then copy the stories, print them and be able to go over them with the other students to prepare them for the questions? When I answered that hypothetically speaking this was possible she was stunned. How was this standardized? In order for it to be standardized should all the kids in the province be doing the tests at the same time, or at the very least, all of the kids in the same school at the same time?
There are other factors that concern me as to how the data is used. Two years ago our school received additional staffing partly due to the fact that we had a larger number of students with learning challenges than we normally had. That year, when the students were writing the FSAs, the flu went through the school and some got sick, 1 missed a lot of time from school so I decided to not have that student finish the FSA. Result, not meeting expectations in all areas. 2 students went on vacation part way through the test, result, 2 students not meeting expectations. 2 students broke down in tears because they were frustrated so we took the tests away, result, 2 students not meeting expectations. I believe that 4 of those 5 students would have fully met expectations. I had two students who would not be writing the tests for a couple of reasons and I used their identifications to show the students to log on. Result- 2 more students not meeting expectations because I had logged them in and answered 1 question but did not click on submit thinking the results would not show, this was a boneheaded moment which I did not repeat. When you have a cohort group of about 50 kids and 7 are not meeting expectations for reasons other than the results of the test itself is one thing that a school can address and explain to its community, when an outside agency is ignorant of what happens in the schools and publishes results is another.
Four years ago we had the exact same number of identified gifted students as student with learning challenges two years ago. The school went from double digit number of students who were gifted to double digits with learning difficulties. The cohort was completely different and something outside the control of the school. The result was a huge drop in the number of students not meeting expectations. I go over the results with the parents, give them the numbers as well as some background information. I am able to explain why we have gone up or down. Our community is aware of our context, an outside agency examining and working with the data is not. When a school has their test data compromised because their electronic results have gone into an Internet abyss and suddenly 10 students results are automatically not meeting expectations and those results are published, the public perception of the school can be compromised.
From my vantage point, the FSAs can provide useful information for a staff to look at and plan our school goals. We can use it as a measuring stick to chart our progress, knowing our context. This is not shirking responsibility. I still stand in front of our parents and share the data and listen to concerns that they may have. My concern is that when a non-informed group that ignores or does not care about the contextual situations that can arise in schools, and publishes results that are challenged statistically it impacts the perception of the school. Why are schools punished because H1N1 hit their schools hard one year? Why are schools punished for not practicing for the tests for weeks and choosing to focus on the curriculum and using the FSAs as a snapshot as they were intended to? Why are schools punished because the cohorts each year can be significantly different from year to year and give a false increase or decrease in the students' perceived success? The number of students writing is also compromised, based on parent willingness to have their children write the tests. There are some schools where only 30% of the eligible kids are actually writing the test.
If everybody is not writing the test at the same time, in the same way, under the same conditions, with the same number of kids in a room writing it together, with the same preparation, with ALL students writing the test regardless of abilities, with one large group of independent markers marking all of the tests in the same way and removing the possibilities of possible manipulation of the testing situations, intentionally or accidentally, the test is no longer standardized even if all of the questions are the same. There are just too many outside factors possible to make this testing equitable. Let schools use the information for the way that it was intended and not let outside agencies compromise the validity of a non-standardized standardized test.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
The Twitter Effect and Standards Based Reporting
What has started off as a few innocuous questions is gaining huge momentum. Who knew that responding to a tweet could have a potentially large impact on an entire district? A simple twitter conversation around eliminating letter grades led to me sending an email to an assistant superintendent which then led to a conversation in person between the 3 main participants of that conversation. From there it grew to a potential committee of about 9 schools, which then led to an email to the 70 some odd schools in the district to which about another dozen or so schools have responded that they are interested in taking this on.
I have to admit that I am borderline freaking out right now because I thought this might be a small group. I was wrong. My assistant superintendent is lining up potential facilitators, using connections to bring in some amazing people and looking for a way to get this project subsidized. My superintendent is sending me references for material that I should be looking at. We had our district volleyball tournament and teachers are coming up to me and telling me how excited they are to be a part of this. I am stoked, but also quietly shaking in my boots.
I guess we are going to have to call this the "Twitter Effect" rather than the "Butterfly Effect". If someone tweets in Coquitlam, BC, what can happen? Now I guess I get to the point of my post. Help!!!!! I had the opportunity to virtually take part in the Educon session Standards Based Grading: Is it fair? by Kristen Swanson and Mike Ritzius. I loved the presentation and the conversations that I could overhear, but I really enjoyed the virtual chat that I was able to take part in. Through that chat I was given 4 great resources as a starting point:
I have to admit that I am borderline freaking out right now because I thought this might be a small group. I was wrong. My assistant superintendent is lining up potential facilitators, using connections to bring in some amazing people and looking for a way to get this project subsidized. My superintendent is sending me references for material that I should be looking at. We had our district volleyball tournament and teachers are coming up to me and telling me how excited they are to be a part of this. I am stoked, but also quietly shaking in my boots.
I guess we are going to have to call this the "Twitter Effect" rather than the "Butterfly Effect". If someone tweets in Coquitlam, BC, what can happen? Now I guess I get to the point of my post. Help!!!!! I had the opportunity to virtually take part in the Educon session Standards Based Grading: Is it fair? by Kristen Swanson and Mike Ritzius. I loved the presentation and the conversations that I could overhear, but I really enjoyed the virtual chat that I was able to take part in. Through that chat I was given 4 great resources as a starting point:
I am going to put together a quick google doc to try and collect as much information and resources on standard based grading/assessment. Any help you can offer would be greatly appreciated! Please find the document here:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)