This week I read a book by Mark Overmeyer called What Student Writing Teaches Us: Formative Assessment in the Writing Workshop. And I was inspired, truly moved to experiment with some of the strategies and ideas Overmeyer suggests, but I can't. Well, at least I can't right now, but I will some day, when I get a new teaching job! (The search for a new job in my new town is not working out in my favor, but, alas, I must never give up hope!) Since I can't try out the new "hot stuff" I learned from Overmeyer, I thought I would make a list to serve as a reminder for me and hopefully to inspire some change in your classrooms too!
1) Assessment should be used all throughout the writing process, whether it's graded or not. Learning targets need to be made continuously clear, instruction needs to be scaffolded to meet the needs of all students, student growth needs to be monitored, and students need to learn to self-assess. All of that can take place using formative assessment. Remember, writing is a process, and students can only move through the process if they get constant and encouraging feedback. Overmeyer says, "Assessment, when used correctly in a formative way, can empower students and teachers not only to improve but, better yet, to believe in themselves as writers and teachers of writing. And once students believe they are writers and you believe you are a teacher of writing, any barrier, no matter how imposing, begins to crumble" (7).
2) Teachers need to set the state for students so that they can succeed. Each student has an individual stage that needs to be set, and it's up to the teacher to know their students and plan to meet their needs. We need to "teach the writer, not the writing," and that can be done "if we read their writing because we want to learn and not just grade" (11).
3) Overmeyer suggests that "[i]f students have a compelling reason to write, then they tend to write more effectively" (12). Many students write just for school, and, therefore, they have a narrow audience and purpose, which is primarily to get a passing grade. As a result, no passion goes into the writing. We need to ask ourselves why we are asking our students to write? How can we broaden their audience and richen their purpose for writing? Overmeyer gives the example of teaching students how to write persuasively so that they are meeting Standard 5 of NCTE. The students of his workshop recently got a new school principal. Students had to write persuasively to their new school principal about something they would like to change about their school. Students were motivated because they had a strong purpose and an audience other than their teacher, the school principal. Yes, the principal did receive the letters, and that really excited students because they saw a reason for their writing. Their purpose for writing went beyond just completing a school assignment and getting a grade; they were writing to make a change.
4) This seems like a no-brainer, but teach to your current students. Just because a writing assignment or lesson to teach part of the writing process was successful in the past, doesn't mean it will now. That doesn't mean you have to recreate all new materials each year; it simply means you need to consider if the assignment or how you plan to teach the assignment will reach your current group of young people. What was good for one group of young people does not mean it will be good for this group of young people. Overmeyer suggests three things that we might adjust each year as we give writing instruction: time, topic choice, and talk.
Time: Students can be successful in writing for short periods of time. Try quickwrites--timed, free-choice, or prompted writings. They can be used at the start of a lesson to prompt thought, during the middle of a lesson to practice, and at the end of a lesson to reflect.
Topic Choice: Let students select their own writing topic, or give students a "framed" choice. A framed choice is one single prompt for which there are many possibilities; students can take the general idea and twist the create their own details so that the writing is still tailored to meet their needs/interests.
Talk: Engage your students in meaningful talk. The topics for meaningful discussions will change each year, because you will have new interests and new needs to address in discussion. The key here is to let students talk it out; you get to know your students, as a result, too. As you talk about writing, keep a list of what you note as a class (strong leads, strong diction that creates imagery, active verbs, figurative language, etc.). Ask students what they noticed about what you read as a class. Let them come to terms with what impressed them about the writing. In doing so, you are teaching your students to assess writing so that they can learn to implement such strategies in their own writing and assess their own writing, too. You can also formatively assess your students as they discuss writing and provide more direct instruction based on their needs.
5) In place of a rubric, try a writing checklist. Sometimes students will look at a rubric and complete the bare minimum to get a passing grade, but if you use a general checklist, it holds all students accountable for that single component. Either they have it or they don't, and if they do, they can place a check next to it to signify they have it. It's also a way of teaching students to self-assess.
6) Use rubrics meaningfully. Don't use them just to get a score for a grade book; use them to guide instruction so that students move forward with their writing.
7) Allow students to be a part of the rubric-creating process. Overmeyer suggests that a teacher create a rubric, using detail and language that is suitable for the assignment and their students, then present it to their class, followed by an open discussion. Allow students to voice their opinions about the rubric--what confuses them, what they like, what they would like to change or add, etc. In doing so, the expectations become extremely clear for students because they are the creators.
8) When you read your students work, notice something to praise, look for something to wonder about, and look for teaching points; discuss those points with students individually. Conferencing with students is hugely powerful...for students. Let students talk, and listen to them! When you listen to your students talk about their writing, you learn about their process, purpose, audience, etc. If we don't let our students communicate that then how can we help them progress? We can't. Verbal conferencing can help clarify a lot so that students are redirected. It's a form of formative assessment and individualized instruction.
9) Have students create a "self dictionary", where they keep a running list of words they come across that are new and that they genuinely think they would like to use or could use in their everyday language or writing. Such a dictionary enriches students vocabulary and makes it meaningful to them.
10) For each new piece of writing, have students set goals for their writing. Its OK if they keep some of the same goals as they move on to new pieces of writing. Overymeyer says, "Goal setting allows students to demonstrate what they know about themselves as writers, and goals aligned with this knowledge can provide opportunities for growth" (58). Once students have set their writing goals, discuss how they can achieve those goals through individual conferences. You can even make a general list as a class. And, to promote reflection, have students write a written reflection on their practice and their achievement.
11) This one is simple: not all writing has to be turned in for a grade. Allow our students enough time to practice.
12) When students are struggling and are not continuously meeting the standard, share with them what they are doing well, and then make a one improvement goal. Never label students as unsatisfactory; always convey to them that they are capable. Eventually, even if the progress is slow, students who are not meeting the standard will meet the standard. It just takes time, praise, and individualized goal setting to help students succeed. Don't ever give up on them or write them of as incapable.
13) Don't just assess students when they reach a standard; assess them as they make strides to meet the standard. Overmeyer says it best: "I believe that we can justify passing grades if students are making progress toward a standard--we do not have to just wait until they get there" (87).
14) Allow your students many, many opportunities to write. Grade student work according to one or two standards. If a student doesn't do well on a particular writing assignment, let them provide you with another piece of writing they have done (from the many writing opportunities that you provide) to replace the writing assignment with an unsatisfactory score.
15) Teach students that the improve the quality of their writing is more important than the grade. Again, Overmeyer says it best: "I believe one key to deemphasizing grades is in monitoring the talk in the classroom: If the talk is consistently about writing and the qualities of strong writing, then our message to students is about quality, not grades. If I choose to repeatedly remind my students how to raise a grade instead of how to improve the writing, then I am asking them to work for the grade and not for the quality" (91).
16) Establish support in your classroom, a support system that students can seek out when they hit a roadblock in the writing process. The support can take the form of students or teachers. Teach your students how to ask each other questions and communicate constructive feedback.
17) Read to admire students' work. In doing so you will pick up individual strengths, topics to begin an individual conference, and the possibility of student work as a model for class instruction.
Friday, February 28, 2014
Friday, February 21, 2014
I Just Don't Know.
You got that right: I just don't know. That's right, this teacher, the bearer of knowledge, just doesn't know what to think about rubrics. And, to be honest, up until this week, I never really thought twice about using a rubric in my classroom. For all I knew, rubrics were sophisticated; I have spent hours in the past crafting rubrics that were organized and specific, yet loose enough for optimal student success. I was holding myself and my students accountable. I was showing my students what I expected of them--no secrets. I was trying to set parameters so that my students felt like they had direction. All of that sounds really great, right?
Well, herein lies my serious internal conflict. I read a text this week called Rethinking Rubrics by Maja Wilson who forced me to do exactly what the title of her books says: rethink rubrics. Go figure! I literally held the book eagerly in my hands, mouth agape (maybe a bit of drool), as I turned the page in amazement, shock, and agreement. Wilson reveals to her readers the birth of the rubric, which just so happened to be because of ranking in colleges. Students needed to be quickly assessed to see how they stacked up to one another for college admission. That concept was adopted by the creators of the SATs and then the creators of state exams. Here, the rubric was used to be objective, quick, and, quite frankly, impersonal. If that's the case then, why do teachers use them in their classrooms? Yes, we prepare our students to take all of the exams just mentioned, but we're not administering those exams, so why do we use rubrics that push us to rank our students? Wilson suggests one reason we do is to save time. Let's face it, English teachers have to grade sometimes up to 150 papers. And with that many students can also come many battles, from students themselves, parents, administrators. But, if a teacher uses a rubric that clearly lays out what is expected of students, there is less room to argue. Right? Well, that's another idea Wilson proposes. Wilson also suggests: "All writing teachers grapple with what we value in student writing. We think we know it when we see it, but how do we articulate our knowing to students? The rubric attempts to articulate this knowing, and even when we give an overall impression grade, we rely on the rubric to provide a kind of working list of what good writing is...However we map it out, we believe that these lists keep us focused on what we value" (33). in other words, using rubrics helps to keep teachers focused on what should be assessed and accountable for that content. Moreover, it stabilizes teachers reactions to student writing so that they are consistent and less subjective.
If those are some reasons why teachers use rubric--some of which may not sound bad to you at all--why is Wilson questioning their use or impact on students? Simply put: they unnecessarily and unfairly rank students, as well as hold them back. Wilson suggests that students' writing style cannot be standardized; what each student is capable of is different, and how they present their ideas will also be different. So how can there be one rubric that can be used for all students? Just because one student decides to take a risk with unique organization and play with literary devices that may make their writing intent a little less obvious, should they be penalized? Can they even be compared to the writer that has perfect organization and detail clarity? What makes one better over the other? Inevitably, the student who has great organization and detail clarity will score well, because that is what teachers want of their students and what will probably appear on the rubric. So what happens to the student that took a chance and perhaps had a more sophisticated writing style? They fail. Now, is that fair? While I subconsciously considered that quandary when writing my own rubrics, I never broke it down in such though. Thus I was stumped when Wilson broke it down for me. Have I been unfair all of these years? Have I stunted my students' writing growth? Did I try to make my students fit a mold? Of course my first reactions were sheer horror, embarrassment, shame.
Is there a way to make a rubric loose enough to allow for such risks? I think so, and Wilson's counterpart, Vicki Spandel thinks so too. Herein lies part II of my internal conflict: Spandel is in defense of using rubrics, and I really find value in what she has to say about their use. So, while I agree with Wilson and value her viewpoints, I feel the exact same way for Spandel, putting me smack-dab in the middle of the good ol' rubric debate. Spandel says that not all rubrics are alike. In fact, "Some are vaguely written, shrouded in jargon, more accusatory than helpful. Some emphasize a formuliac approach to writing or focus on trivia at the expense of substance, and to the extent they influence instruction, this can have devastating ramifications" ("In Defense of Rubrics" 19). That "sketchy" kind of rubric just described are for the teachers whose primary concern is to score someone's work, according to Spandel. But there can be instructionally friendly rubrics, rubrics that help students learn about their writing and drive instruction. Such rubrics teach students to read their work and revise. Spandel asserts, "Writing is revision, after all. If we cannot teach students to revise, we cannot, in the truest sense, teach them to write" (20). If a rubric, however, has students question their clarity, voice, audience, etc., then students are being pushed to write with purpose and skill. And that can look different for every student. So perhaps what Spandel is calling a rubric is really a writing guide that urges students to revisit their work and strengthen it. For Spandel, reading student work and using a rubric is far from impersonal: "Far from becoming robotlike in their response, good readers use criteria as reminders, then look diligently for the tiniest sparks of voice, an unexpected phrase or connection, the trail of the writer's thinking" (20). To me, that does not sound objective, quick, and impersonal; rather, it sounds subjective, thought-provoking, which may take more time, and personal.
So, have I made strides in solidifying my pedagogical practices this week? No. But have I been enlightened and prompted to reflect and reconsider my pedagogical practices? Absolutely. While I may not have all the answers, I do know one thing for sure: a teacher that takes the time to consider multiple viewpoints, a teacher that reflects, and a teacher that is constantly revising is a teacher that puts her students first. I don't think there is one right answer here to whether or not teachers use rubrics. I think the most important things to consider here are: Are we putting our students first? Are we allowing them room for individual growth in their writing?
Well, herein lies my serious internal conflict. I read a text this week called Rethinking Rubrics by Maja Wilson who forced me to do exactly what the title of her books says: rethink rubrics. Go figure! I literally held the book eagerly in my hands, mouth agape (maybe a bit of drool), as I turned the page in amazement, shock, and agreement. Wilson reveals to her readers the birth of the rubric, which just so happened to be because of ranking in colleges. Students needed to be quickly assessed to see how they stacked up to one another for college admission. That concept was adopted by the creators of the SATs and then the creators of state exams. Here, the rubric was used to be objective, quick, and, quite frankly, impersonal. If that's the case then, why do teachers use them in their classrooms? Yes, we prepare our students to take all of the exams just mentioned, but we're not administering those exams, so why do we use rubrics that push us to rank our students? Wilson suggests one reason we do is to save time. Let's face it, English teachers have to grade sometimes up to 150 papers. And with that many students can also come many battles, from students themselves, parents, administrators. But, if a teacher uses a rubric that clearly lays out what is expected of students, there is less room to argue. Right? Well, that's another idea Wilson proposes. Wilson also suggests: "All writing teachers grapple with what we value in student writing. We think we know it when we see it, but how do we articulate our knowing to students? The rubric attempts to articulate this knowing, and even when we give an overall impression grade, we rely on the rubric to provide a kind of working list of what good writing is...However we map it out, we believe that these lists keep us focused on what we value" (33). in other words, using rubrics helps to keep teachers focused on what should be assessed and accountable for that content. Moreover, it stabilizes teachers reactions to student writing so that they are consistent and less subjective.
If those are some reasons why teachers use rubric--some of which may not sound bad to you at all--why is Wilson questioning their use or impact on students? Simply put: they unnecessarily and unfairly rank students, as well as hold them back. Wilson suggests that students' writing style cannot be standardized; what each student is capable of is different, and how they present their ideas will also be different. So how can there be one rubric that can be used for all students? Just because one student decides to take a risk with unique organization and play with literary devices that may make their writing intent a little less obvious, should they be penalized? Can they even be compared to the writer that has perfect organization and detail clarity? What makes one better over the other? Inevitably, the student who has great organization and detail clarity will score well, because that is what teachers want of their students and what will probably appear on the rubric. So what happens to the student that took a chance and perhaps had a more sophisticated writing style? They fail. Now, is that fair? While I subconsciously considered that quandary when writing my own rubrics, I never broke it down in such though. Thus I was stumped when Wilson broke it down for me. Have I been unfair all of these years? Have I stunted my students' writing growth? Did I try to make my students fit a mold? Of course my first reactions were sheer horror, embarrassment, shame.
Is there a way to make a rubric loose enough to allow for such risks? I think so, and Wilson's counterpart, Vicki Spandel thinks so too. Herein lies part II of my internal conflict: Spandel is in defense of using rubrics, and I really find value in what she has to say about their use. So, while I agree with Wilson and value her viewpoints, I feel the exact same way for Spandel, putting me smack-dab in the middle of the good ol' rubric debate. Spandel says that not all rubrics are alike. In fact, "Some are vaguely written, shrouded in jargon, more accusatory than helpful. Some emphasize a formuliac approach to writing or focus on trivia at the expense of substance, and to the extent they influence instruction, this can have devastating ramifications" ("In Defense of Rubrics" 19). That "sketchy" kind of rubric just described are for the teachers whose primary concern is to score someone's work, according to Spandel. But there can be instructionally friendly rubrics, rubrics that help students learn about their writing and drive instruction. Such rubrics teach students to read their work and revise. Spandel asserts, "Writing is revision, after all. If we cannot teach students to revise, we cannot, in the truest sense, teach them to write" (20). If a rubric, however, has students question their clarity, voice, audience, etc., then students are being pushed to write with purpose and skill. And that can look different for every student. So perhaps what Spandel is calling a rubric is really a writing guide that urges students to revisit their work and strengthen it. For Spandel, reading student work and using a rubric is far from impersonal: "Far from becoming robotlike in their response, good readers use criteria as reminders, then look diligently for the tiniest sparks of voice, an unexpected phrase or connection, the trail of the writer's thinking" (20). To me, that does not sound objective, quick, and impersonal; rather, it sounds subjective, thought-provoking, which may take more time, and personal.
So, have I made strides in solidifying my pedagogical practices this week? No. But have I been enlightened and prompted to reflect and reconsider my pedagogical practices? Absolutely. While I may not have all the answers, I do know one thing for sure: a teacher that takes the time to consider multiple viewpoints, a teacher that reflects, and a teacher that is constantly revising is a teacher that puts her students first. I don't think there is one right answer here to whether or not teachers use rubrics. I think the most important things to consider here are: Are we putting our students first? Are we allowing them room for individual growth in their writing?
Saturday, February 15, 2014
Power = Insight
Give your students power. Yes, that's right, power. As a teacher, that may sound a little scary, as any number of things could happen as a result. But I dare you to give your students power regardless. Power to write. Power to reflect. Power to collaborate. Power to revise. When students gain power, they possess ownership over their writing and become intrinsically motivated. Such ownership and motivation leads to a continued appreciation and involvement in writing.
This week, I learned the key to student empowerment is to let students speak. Allowing students the chance to speak is a simple task teachers may overlook. It is simple, but it is also invaluable. Don Murray, professor and author, writes about the benefit of holding one on one student/teacher conferences in his essay "The Listening Eye". According to Murray, when he conferences with his students one on one, he is teaching them to be evaluators of their own writing so that they continue to write well beyond their school years. He wants to teach his students how to read "evolving writing", because writing is a process after all. During his student conferences, Murray says he listens before he speaks; he allows his students to share their ideas, ask questions, and come to conclusions all on their own before he interjects any commentary. Murray even goes so far as to say that his students do most of the work during their conferencing time, and he feels sort of guilty as a result. But I would like to suggest that is a good thing. Students should take ownership over their learning, that way it is more authentic to them and they are thus intrinsically motivated.
Let's take a step back, though. In order to train his students to be critical assessors of their own writing, Murray starts off the year of conferencing with guiding questions that teach students how to question or analyze their writing. I find these questions to be especially helpful, even though they are simple, and perhaps you will too:
"What did you learn from this piece of writing?"
"What do you intend to do in the next draft?"
"What surprised you in the draft?"
"Where is this piece of writing taking you?"
"What do you like best in the piece of writing?"
"What questions do you have of me?"
Murray even goes so far as to suggest that conferencing with your students can be the substitute for whole class instruction. Now that may not be feasible in all classrooms; Murray is a college professor, however. Then, how can middle/high school English teachers use the power of frequent conferencing in their classroom where there is so little time in a school day? That question was posed to me, and some solutions were also suggested. The solutions sounded like no-brainers once I heard them, and I immediately thought: Why didn't I think of that myself?! So, let me share those solutions with you so that you can help to empower your students.
(1) Let students pair up and conference with each other. I mean, most students do love to talk to each other. Therefore, having students talk about the strengths/weaknesses/questions they may have of their own paper with each other allows students to have a focused discussion. It also promotes collaboration, which is an invaluable skill to have in the real world. Once students have conferenced with each other, individually invite pairs to see you to report what they have discussed. Doing so holds students accountable for the time they spent discussing their writing. As students report back about their conversation, you as the teacher can help problem solve any issues that your two students couldn't figure out together. Ultimately a student paired conference allows for student collaboration and time cut in half with teacher conferencing. Essentially you are teaching your students how to ask each other questions and partake in a discussion that would be very similar to the one you may have with a student one on one. Win!
(2) As you are reading student writing, write questions that prompt students to think more critically or consider an alternative, for example. I'm sure most teachers do that already. But here is something new to try: Have students answer your questions in a written response. Then students' written responses can be used to help them revise their draft. In having your students write a written response to your questions, you know they are considering the questions and working toward enhancing their writing. As always, if your guiding questions, which are questions you would ask during a one on one conference, throughout your students' writing promotes confusion, while students are writing in class, you can pose one on one conferences with students who need extra support or clarification.
(3) While students are spending time writing or revising in class, call one student up at a time for individualized conferencing time. As students are busy working, you can give individualized attention. What I have done in the past is review my student's paper rather quickly and have them read a paragraph or two aloud. We then discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the excerpt, and what questions they may have. I even extend the conversation to discuss what is the purpose of their writing and who is their intended audience and whether or not that comes across as clear and how to then improve it if not.
Now that I've suggested some ways to incorporate conferencing into your classroom, what are some ideas you have? What strategies have you used that have proven to be successful?
This week, I learned the key to student empowerment is to let students speak. Allowing students the chance to speak is a simple task teachers may overlook. It is simple, but it is also invaluable. Don Murray, professor and author, writes about the benefit of holding one on one student/teacher conferences in his essay "The Listening Eye". According to Murray, when he conferences with his students one on one, he is teaching them to be evaluators of their own writing so that they continue to write well beyond their school years. He wants to teach his students how to read "evolving writing", because writing is a process after all. During his student conferences, Murray says he listens before he speaks; he allows his students to share their ideas, ask questions, and come to conclusions all on their own before he interjects any commentary. Murray even goes so far as to say that his students do most of the work during their conferencing time, and he feels sort of guilty as a result. But I would like to suggest that is a good thing. Students should take ownership over their learning, that way it is more authentic to them and they are thus intrinsically motivated.
Let's take a step back, though. In order to train his students to be critical assessors of their own writing, Murray starts off the year of conferencing with guiding questions that teach students how to question or analyze their writing. I find these questions to be especially helpful, even though they are simple, and perhaps you will too:
"What did you learn from this piece of writing?"
"What do you intend to do in the next draft?"
"What surprised you in the draft?"
"Where is this piece of writing taking you?"
"What do you like best in the piece of writing?"
"What questions do you have of me?"
Murray even goes so far as to suggest that conferencing with your students can be the substitute for whole class instruction. Now that may not be feasible in all classrooms; Murray is a college professor, however. Then, how can middle/high school English teachers use the power of frequent conferencing in their classroom where there is so little time in a school day? That question was posed to me, and some solutions were also suggested. The solutions sounded like no-brainers once I heard them, and I immediately thought: Why didn't I think of that myself?! So, let me share those solutions with you so that you can help to empower your students.
(1) Let students pair up and conference with each other. I mean, most students do love to talk to each other. Therefore, having students talk about the strengths/weaknesses/questions they may have of their own paper with each other allows students to have a focused discussion. It also promotes collaboration, which is an invaluable skill to have in the real world. Once students have conferenced with each other, individually invite pairs to see you to report what they have discussed. Doing so holds students accountable for the time they spent discussing their writing. As students report back about their conversation, you as the teacher can help problem solve any issues that your two students couldn't figure out together. Ultimately a student paired conference allows for student collaboration and time cut in half with teacher conferencing. Essentially you are teaching your students how to ask each other questions and partake in a discussion that would be very similar to the one you may have with a student one on one. Win!
(2) As you are reading student writing, write questions that prompt students to think more critically or consider an alternative, for example. I'm sure most teachers do that already. But here is something new to try: Have students answer your questions in a written response. Then students' written responses can be used to help them revise their draft. In having your students write a written response to your questions, you know they are considering the questions and working toward enhancing their writing. As always, if your guiding questions, which are questions you would ask during a one on one conference, throughout your students' writing promotes confusion, while students are writing in class, you can pose one on one conferences with students who need extra support or clarification.
(3) While students are spending time writing or revising in class, call one student up at a time for individualized conferencing time. As students are busy working, you can give individualized attention. What I have done in the past is review my student's paper rather quickly and have them read a paragraph or two aloud. We then discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the excerpt, and what questions they may have. I even extend the conversation to discuss what is the purpose of their writing and who is their intended audience and whether or not that comes across as clear and how to then improve it if not.
Now that I've suggested some ways to incorporate conferencing into your classroom, what are some ideas you have? What strategies have you used that have proven to be successful?
Friday, February 7, 2014
Is There Such a Thing as too Much Writing?
The question is: how much writing should students be doing in school? I think the simple answer is: a lot. Based on my own beliefs and the beliefs of Linda Rief, teacher and author of Inside the Writer's-Reader's Notebook: A Workshop Essential, writing teaches students about themselves and enlightens them about the world around them. So if writing is a portal for such knowledge, then why should it be limited?
I questioned this week if it's a good idea for students to keep a W-RN notebook in all subject areas. At first, I thought students may be overwhelmed by all the writing they would have to do in all content areas and begin to hate writing, if they didn't already in the first place. After some contemplation, I realized that it really wouldn't be overwhelming for students, because how each content area teacher uses the W-RN would be different. Rief suggests that the notebook can be used for "recording data, collecting facts and questions, making predictions, sketching observations, planning labs for experiments and solving problems, conducting interviews, researching issues for an inquiry project, working out cause and effect, and gathering evidence and researching conclusions" (26). As you can see, how the W-RN can be used is universal; and what's great is that the suggestions Rief provides are just her own ideas for how other content area teachers can use a W-RN. I would be really curious to see how each department and each grade level within each department would utilize such a notebook in their classroom. Based on the evidence Rief provides, students begin to notice the world, make connections, ask questions, and participate by thinking as a result of using the W-RN (35). Isn't that at least part of the goal for each class a student takes in school?
After I determined that writing should be done as often as possible, and in every class, I then thought about how that would impact teachers. I know for a fact that some teachers do not assign much writing in their class for the simple fact that they cannot grade it all. While teachers want to put their students needs first by assigning a lot of writing, if a teacher cannot turn those writing assignments around quickly and hand them back to students for them to self-assess and grow as readers, writers, thinkers, then that is really not putting students first. If anyone has taught before, they will know that there are simply not enough hours in a day to accomplish what a teacher needs to accomplish. Grading writing assignments frequently is next to impossible. Or so teachers may think. Rief thinks otherwise, though she does admit that she is only human and can grade only so much in a day. As a result, Rief created a solution to grading over 100 W-RNs. Since the writing done in W-RN is first-draft thinking, a teacher should not spend time correcting every single error they notice in their students' writing. That is a task that takes up a lot of time and is unnecessary for the kind of writing done in a W-RN. Instead, Rief suggests nudging students' thinking through comments, suggestions, and questions. In fact, in reviewing samples of her students' W-RNs, Rief uses a mix of symbols and written comments. She uses checks and pluses to show students when their thinking is especially profound or interesting. Sometimes a simple symbol is all students need in order to know how to progress, and using symbols certainly does make reading and grading student writing go much faster. Another strategy Rief uses when grading her students' W-RN is not grading them every day or even every week. Rief collects her students' W-RN every two weeks. She assesses each student's notebook based on quantity (did they submit an entry every day and add to their vocabulary bank) and quality (thoughtfulness and thoroughness of an entry. However, Rief asks her students to pick one entry that they want her to grade for quality work. Rief maintains that in asking students to read over their own work and select the entry they are most proud of, she is taking them how to self-evaluate. I love this idea! Students should be able to assess their own work and determine what is strong and what isn't and why. Plus, it slightly removes the subjectivity of quality grading because (a) students are selecting it and (b) they are selecting it because it's something they did really well. Now, I do have one problem or question with that method. Since students know that only one entry of their W-RN is graded for quality every two weeks, what about those students who don't put much effort into the other entries because they know they only have to select one to be graded? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the notebook? I feel that is a kink I will need to work out when I implement the notebook in my classroom.
Ultimately, I love the purpose of a W-RN. Rief notes that W-RN "give students a place to be personal, individual, and real as they take notice of their world...it [also] allows them choice, time, and practice with regard to writing and reading" (3). I really appreciate how the W-RN is differentiated and individualized. Each student of ours is different-different experiences, likes/dislikes, views, etc., and each student can capitalize on their own interests. Choice is powerful for students. As a result, all areas of discipline in a school should find a way to utilize a W-RN in their classroom. The first step is collaboration!
I questioned this week if it's a good idea for students to keep a W-RN notebook in all subject areas. At first, I thought students may be overwhelmed by all the writing they would have to do in all content areas and begin to hate writing, if they didn't already in the first place. After some contemplation, I realized that it really wouldn't be overwhelming for students, because how each content area teacher uses the W-RN would be different. Rief suggests that the notebook can be used for "recording data, collecting facts and questions, making predictions, sketching observations, planning labs for experiments and solving problems, conducting interviews, researching issues for an inquiry project, working out cause and effect, and gathering evidence and researching conclusions" (26). As you can see, how the W-RN can be used is universal; and what's great is that the suggestions Rief provides are just her own ideas for how other content area teachers can use a W-RN. I would be really curious to see how each department and each grade level within each department would utilize such a notebook in their classroom. Based on the evidence Rief provides, students begin to notice the world, make connections, ask questions, and participate by thinking as a result of using the W-RN (35). Isn't that at least part of the goal for each class a student takes in school?
After I determined that writing should be done as often as possible, and in every class, I then thought about how that would impact teachers. I know for a fact that some teachers do not assign much writing in their class for the simple fact that they cannot grade it all. While teachers want to put their students needs first by assigning a lot of writing, if a teacher cannot turn those writing assignments around quickly and hand them back to students for them to self-assess and grow as readers, writers, thinkers, then that is really not putting students first. If anyone has taught before, they will know that there are simply not enough hours in a day to accomplish what a teacher needs to accomplish. Grading writing assignments frequently is next to impossible. Or so teachers may think. Rief thinks otherwise, though she does admit that she is only human and can grade only so much in a day. As a result, Rief created a solution to grading over 100 W-RNs. Since the writing done in W-RN is first-draft thinking, a teacher should not spend time correcting every single error they notice in their students' writing. That is a task that takes up a lot of time and is unnecessary for the kind of writing done in a W-RN. Instead, Rief suggests nudging students' thinking through comments, suggestions, and questions. In fact, in reviewing samples of her students' W-RNs, Rief uses a mix of symbols and written comments. She uses checks and pluses to show students when their thinking is especially profound or interesting. Sometimes a simple symbol is all students need in order to know how to progress, and using symbols certainly does make reading and grading student writing go much faster. Another strategy Rief uses when grading her students' W-RN is not grading them every day or even every week. Rief collects her students' W-RN every two weeks. She assesses each student's notebook based on quantity (did they submit an entry every day and add to their vocabulary bank) and quality (thoughtfulness and thoroughness of an entry. However, Rief asks her students to pick one entry that they want her to grade for quality work. Rief maintains that in asking students to read over their own work and select the entry they are most proud of, she is taking them how to self-evaluate. I love this idea! Students should be able to assess their own work and determine what is strong and what isn't and why. Plus, it slightly removes the subjectivity of quality grading because (a) students are selecting it and (b) they are selecting it because it's something they did really well. Now, I do have one problem or question with that method. Since students know that only one entry of their W-RN is graded for quality every two weeks, what about those students who don't put much effort into the other entries because they know they only have to select one to be graded? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the notebook? I feel that is a kink I will need to work out when I implement the notebook in my classroom.
Ultimately, I love the purpose of a W-RN. Rief notes that W-RN "give students a place to be personal, individual, and real as they take notice of their world...it [also] allows them choice, time, and practice with regard to writing and reading" (3). I really appreciate how the W-RN is differentiated and individualized. Each student of ours is different-different experiences, likes/dislikes, views, etc., and each student can capitalize on their own interests. Choice is powerful for students. As a result, all areas of discipline in a school should find a way to utilize a W-RN in their classroom. The first step is collaboration!
Saturday, February 1, 2014
Each School's Curriculum Needs to be Made Rich with Authentic Assessments
This week I really contemplated the following questions:
Does "teaching to the test" ruin the integrity of education? But what about schools who don't teach to the test- are those students prepared to take the state test that dictates the rest of their schooling career or if they can even graduate? What is the difference between instruction that teaches to the test versus instruction that does not teach to the test?
These questions are just a few droplets of water from the monsoon that came barreling in this week- shaking me up, weathering me, breaking me down- so that I could thinking more clearly about the difference between authentic and objective assessments.
What did I learn as a result of my research? Objective assessments have no place in a Language Arts classroom. I realize that is a bold statement, and some may disagree with my assertion, but let me explain why I feel confident enough in making that claim.
For starters, every teacher should read Authentic Assessments for the English Classroom by Dolgin, Kelly, and Zekha, because it contains a few really good ideas for how to implement authentic assessment in the classroom. Though it only contains a few ideas, each idea is thoughtfully developed with explanations, reactions, examples, and materials to get teachers started. Furthermore, the ideas present in this text serve as starting points, or forms of inspiration, for which educators can create their own unique, authentic forms of assessments. Really, that's the whole point of this text: to enlighten and inspire. And this text did just that for me.
"We want better for our students. We do not want our students to be known simply as a level on a state exam- we want them to be more, and we believe in the research and theories that argue alternative and authentic assessments lead to high standards" (Authentic Assessments 77). That statement gives me goosebumps. As a teacher, my students will never be just a number or a label, and I will always strive to have my student meet high standards through a curriculum that is rigorous and applicable to their lives. Throughout my experience as a teacher, I have yet to see how the state exam is real-world applicable for students or how it's even an accurate measure of student knowledge. State exams predominately have multiple choice type of questions where there is only one right answer. Well, not all students can choose the best- the one- right answer because they can argue for more than one answer. And why exactly is that a bad thing? It's not. When a student wants to argue for more than one right answer that means they have a voice, and when students have a voice in class and on their assessments they are reaching higher standards. In the real world, people need to have a strong voice that is active with convictions. To me, having a strong voice that is filled with reason helps to determine one's knowledge. As a result, the state tests do not accurately measure student knowledge, as I've said in past blog posts, because not all students can take objective assessments well. Just because a student does not test well on a state exam does not mean they are a poor reader or that they are truly below basic or basic; it could simply mean that in order for that student to thrive, they need to be given an authentic form of assessment, one where they an use their voice.
As I have already alluded to, administering objective assessments remove students' voice, and, as a result, students lose the ability to critically reason. Wow. Taking a multiple choice test seems too easy, almost like little effort goes into it, unlike writing an essay or giving a speech or creating a Glog or putting on a drama skit. It's no wonder many students would rather take an objective assessment. Education, with the state exam and teaching to the test, has taught students to become lazy. Our students do not care to have a voice, and they probably feel that way because they do not know what they are missing.
It's obvious that state exams aren't going to be abolished anytime soon, so what can we do to rectify the disaster they have created for our students and in the classroom? For starters, get rid of objective assessments in the Language Arts classroom and create authentic forms of assessment instead. Teachers need to convey to their students that learning is much more than learning how to take a test. Teachers need to ignite a passion for learning and help students find all of their lost voices. Teachers need to help prepare students to become active members in society. Teachers can do all of that by not teaching to the test and including authentic forms of assessment. And for those of you who are still skeptical about whether or not our students will pass the state exam if we don't teach to the test, don't worry. The state exams are not rigorous. If teachers help students find their voice and prepare them to be active members in society through other varied, authentic forms of assessment, students will undoubtedly pass the state exam because they are going beyond the standards of the exam.
Authentic assessments are assessments that are varied and ask for student interpretation and voice. Because authentic assessments are varied, that means they can take many different forms. The text Authentic Assessments, as already stated, offers a few ideas to help teachers get started with creating authentic assessments in their classroom. I really liked how on pages 65-68, the text outlines how East Side High School administers an end-of-the-year assessment. Most teachers give an objective assessment that is cumulative. However, East Side has students use what they have learned all throughout the year, using various concepts, themes, and texts, and apply it to their grade level's end goal: "to have students feel empowered to use their own voices to write and speak about the world around them" (65). The phrase "end goal" is key here. Authentic Assessments introduces the concept of backwards planning. Consequently, East Side created their end-of-the-year assessment first, and then planned for how they are going to get students to reach that end goal. What I love most about their end-of-the-year assessment is that students have a choice. Students can do any of the following: write a short story that focuses on a community leader; choose a genre (tv show, poem, song, letter) to create a revolutionary message that targets an issue; write a persuasive speech about injustice; create an enact a theatrical performance; or partake in a testimonial project. In order to complete any one of those assessments, students have to use information from the texts they have read throughout the year, consider the concepts learned, and reflect back on class discussions or projects. Students can illustrate their mastery of the knowledge without having to answer a multiple choice test. Instead, they can choose how they want to express their knowledge that best suits their abilities. Now that's authentic and differentiated.
Now I end this post with questions for you to consider:
What is your subject and grade level end goal? Does it help prepare students to become active members in society? If so, how? How are you going to get your students to achieve that end goal? How can you incorporate authentic assessments into your instruction so that students are challenged and form their own voice as a unique individual?
Does "teaching to the test" ruin the integrity of education? But what about schools who don't teach to the test- are those students prepared to take the state test that dictates the rest of their schooling career or if they can even graduate? What is the difference between instruction that teaches to the test versus instruction that does not teach to the test?
These questions are just a few droplets of water from the monsoon that came barreling in this week- shaking me up, weathering me, breaking me down- so that I could thinking more clearly about the difference between authentic and objective assessments.
What did I learn as a result of my research? Objective assessments have no place in a Language Arts classroom. I realize that is a bold statement, and some may disagree with my assertion, but let me explain why I feel confident enough in making that claim.
For starters, every teacher should read Authentic Assessments for the English Classroom by Dolgin, Kelly, and Zekha, because it contains a few really good ideas for how to implement authentic assessment in the classroom. Though it only contains a few ideas, each idea is thoughtfully developed with explanations, reactions, examples, and materials to get teachers started. Furthermore, the ideas present in this text serve as starting points, or forms of inspiration, for which educators can create their own unique, authentic forms of assessments. Really, that's the whole point of this text: to enlighten and inspire. And this text did just that for me.
"We want better for our students. We do not want our students to be known simply as a level on a state exam- we want them to be more, and we believe in the research and theories that argue alternative and authentic assessments lead to high standards" (Authentic Assessments 77). That statement gives me goosebumps. As a teacher, my students will never be just a number or a label, and I will always strive to have my student meet high standards through a curriculum that is rigorous and applicable to their lives. Throughout my experience as a teacher, I have yet to see how the state exam is real-world applicable for students or how it's even an accurate measure of student knowledge. State exams predominately have multiple choice type of questions where there is only one right answer. Well, not all students can choose the best- the one- right answer because they can argue for more than one answer. And why exactly is that a bad thing? It's not. When a student wants to argue for more than one right answer that means they have a voice, and when students have a voice in class and on their assessments they are reaching higher standards. In the real world, people need to have a strong voice that is active with convictions. To me, having a strong voice that is filled with reason helps to determine one's knowledge. As a result, the state tests do not accurately measure student knowledge, as I've said in past blog posts, because not all students can take objective assessments well. Just because a student does not test well on a state exam does not mean they are a poor reader or that they are truly below basic or basic; it could simply mean that in order for that student to thrive, they need to be given an authentic form of assessment, one where they an use their voice.
As I have already alluded to, administering objective assessments remove students' voice, and, as a result, students lose the ability to critically reason. Wow. Taking a multiple choice test seems too easy, almost like little effort goes into it, unlike writing an essay or giving a speech or creating a Glog or putting on a drama skit. It's no wonder many students would rather take an objective assessment. Education, with the state exam and teaching to the test, has taught students to become lazy. Our students do not care to have a voice, and they probably feel that way because they do not know what they are missing.
It's obvious that state exams aren't going to be abolished anytime soon, so what can we do to rectify the disaster they have created for our students and in the classroom? For starters, get rid of objective assessments in the Language Arts classroom and create authentic forms of assessment instead. Teachers need to convey to their students that learning is much more than learning how to take a test. Teachers need to ignite a passion for learning and help students find all of their lost voices. Teachers need to help prepare students to become active members in society. Teachers can do all of that by not teaching to the test and including authentic forms of assessment. And for those of you who are still skeptical about whether or not our students will pass the state exam if we don't teach to the test, don't worry. The state exams are not rigorous. If teachers help students find their voice and prepare them to be active members in society through other varied, authentic forms of assessment, students will undoubtedly pass the state exam because they are going beyond the standards of the exam.
Authentic assessments are assessments that are varied and ask for student interpretation and voice. Because authentic assessments are varied, that means they can take many different forms. The text Authentic Assessments, as already stated, offers a few ideas to help teachers get started with creating authentic assessments in their classroom. I really liked how on pages 65-68, the text outlines how East Side High School administers an end-of-the-year assessment. Most teachers give an objective assessment that is cumulative. However, East Side has students use what they have learned all throughout the year, using various concepts, themes, and texts, and apply it to their grade level's end goal: "to have students feel empowered to use their own voices to write and speak about the world around them" (65). The phrase "end goal" is key here. Authentic Assessments introduces the concept of backwards planning. Consequently, East Side created their end-of-the-year assessment first, and then planned for how they are going to get students to reach that end goal. What I love most about their end-of-the-year assessment is that students have a choice. Students can do any of the following: write a short story that focuses on a community leader; choose a genre (tv show, poem, song, letter) to create a revolutionary message that targets an issue; write a persuasive speech about injustice; create an enact a theatrical performance; or partake in a testimonial project. In order to complete any one of those assessments, students have to use information from the texts they have read throughout the year, consider the concepts learned, and reflect back on class discussions or projects. Students can illustrate their mastery of the knowledge without having to answer a multiple choice test. Instead, they can choose how they want to express their knowledge that best suits their abilities. Now that's authentic and differentiated.
Now I end this post with questions for you to consider:
What is your subject and grade level end goal? Does it help prepare students to become active members in society? If so, how? How are you going to get your students to achieve that end goal? How can you incorporate authentic assessments into your instruction so that students are challenged and form their own voice as a unique individual?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)