Tuesday, November 13, 2012

What does Common Core implementation look like?

Over the past few months, many of us have wrestled with what Common Core implementation might look like in our classrooms. What impact will it have on our students? How will it affect us as classroom teachers? How will we know that  we have succeeded in creating "Common Core" classrooms? As Learning Facilitators, we have the opportunity to have these deep conversations on a daily basis.  And despite the collective knowledge of the group who are neck deep in research and readings, even we struggle with what it will "look" like.

In reading "Pathways to the Common Core: Accelerating Achievement" by Lucy Calkins, Mary Enrenworth, and Christopher Lehman, I believe I have found SOME clarity as well as re-confirmations of what I have always believed about learning. As many of us discussed on our last Non-Instructional Day in September, the Common Core standards provide a rigorous framework of high expectations for all students regarding literacy across all content areas. And while this framework provides a relatively easy structure to understand the progressions and expectations at grade level (compared to most state standards), what the Common Core does NOT do is tell us how to implement or teach it on the ground level. Calkins et al attempt to help us move forward with the gigantic task in front of us.

One of the first thing the authors do is provide us yet another opportunity to reflect on our mindset going into the work ahead of us. They challenge us to decide whether we will simply complain or examine this as a "golden opportunity".  The authors systematically explain many of the major criticisms and concerns regarding Common Core and what it means. As I read them, I found myself nodding along, agreeing with many of the curmudgeonly concerns with it.  However, as I continued to read, I also recognized that there are many aspects of the Common Core which are hard to argue against.  They are the parts in which the focus on what is best for our students and we know to be true regarding learning.

Once I was willing to accept that I had pre-conceived opinions and  ignorant attitudes about what they mean, I could then move forward and see that the standards ask my students to develop the higher order critical  thinking skills I've always held dear to my heart.Once I was willing to acknowledge that some of my fears and concerns are selfishly about  not wanting to endure yet more changes to my curriculum, assessments, and instructional strategies. Sadly, some of my reluctance is also about not wanting to roll my sleeves up and get dirty with things I thought I had "mastered" in my classroom. If I'm being really open and honest, what I have learned from the Common Core is that what I believe and what I have  provided for my students are very different. I have my own implementation gap.

Another thought from the first chapter of the book I found particularly interesting:

"It is no longer okay to provide the vast majority of America's children with a fill-in-the-blank, answer the questions, read-the-paragraph curriculum that equips them to take their place on the assembly line."

One of the great ironies here is that many of us rail against the use of standardized tests as not being valid or fair assessments of our students, yet Calkins calls us out for assessing students in very traditional ways.  That's not to say that multiple choice assessments aren't valid, but if we aren't challenging ourselves to look at the rigor of the questions we are asking, we are missing opportunities to truly understand what our students know and can do.  I don't know that I am any closer to understanding what a "common core classroom" will look like, but I do know that we need to challenge all of our past practices through multiple lenses.

Ultimately, the goal of common core is to help our students become college and career ready, and the task ahead of us is daunting, but not impossible. As I mentioned before, we must admit our own pre-conceived notions, we must unlearn what we have learned, and we must work together to overcome our own implementation gaps.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Seeking your inner Jefferson.

This past weekend I had the opportunity to visit Monticello, the home of President Thomas Jefferson . For those that know me, Jefferson has always had a special place in my heart. Most people will recognize him for his accomplishments which include being the main writer of the Declaration of Independence,  the  third President of the United States and the founder and  father of the University of Virginia. Modern American political parties each claim Jefferson as one of their Founding Fathers. The left will claim him because of his  views on religious freedom and separation of church and state. The right will claim him because he was a staunch believer in small government.  His ability to support political views while immediately contradicting others is something I chuckle at every time someone uses Jefferson's words to support their beliefs.   Jefferson, the man, is a contradiction. The "American Sphinx" as Joseph Ellis calls him, seems so familiar to us, yet also completely inaccessible at times.  We must also acknowledge that there is a vast difference between what he says and writes, and what he does.  This holds many back from fully appreciating Jefferson as he was. (Not that I have a firm grasp on that either.) Jefferson was fallible, human, imperfect, and complex.

Much like I do each time I visit Independence Hall or Valley Forge, whenever I visit Monticello I feel a strong connection to our past. This feeling is part emotion and part  intellect in that it provides me an opportunity to both appreciate and learn.  As a group of 20 of us sat in his "experimental garden" eating a salad made up of vegetables historians know he grew, I found myself connecting even more deeply to who Jefferson was in his time.  Amidst the warm glowing foliage and the crisp fall air, I realized that Jefferson still speaks to us in the 21st century. And as an educator,  I also am coming to recognize that  Jefferson, the learner, has huge implications for us all. After all, he was a pro-education kind of guy.

 Jefferson grew up on a plantation, the child of a wealthy Virginia planter and surveyor. He had every opportunity a "rich kid" could be afforded: including private tutoring.  In Jefferson's writings, he acknowledges that among the greatest gifts his father could have ever afforded him,  requiring him to learn Latin was one of them . Learning Latin exposed him to more than just the "classics", as it opened his world up to more than philosophy or literature. It exposed him to architecture, gardening, and  physical science (among many other areas) which became passions of Jefferson's throughout his life.

 While serving in the Virginia legislature, Jefferson staunchly advocated for a publicly supported (ie: taxes) education system for all in Virginia. Despite having the opportunity to be classically and privately trained. He believed that all Virginians (but not African American slaves) , despite their station, should be afforded the same opportunities he did. That an informed society was more apt to solve problems together and create a better society as a whole.  (His timing was poor as we were in the midst of the American Revolution and Virginian's proved not willing to pay yet more taxes.)  In his retirement, he organized and oversaw the building of  the University of Virginia.

"Thomas Jefferson founded the University of Virginia in 1819. He wished the publicly-supported school to have a national character and stature. Jefferson envisioned a new kind of university, one dedicated to educating leaders in practical affairs and public service rather than for professions in the classroom and pulpit exclusively. It was the first nonsectarian university in the United States and the first to use the elective course system." 
University of Virginia

It's important to note that in his original designs for the university, Jefferson sought true educational freedom, allowing students to determine their course or path of learning. 

We know that Jefferson loved to learn. If he found a book he wanted to read, but it was in a different language than one of the ones he already knew, he taught himself how to read that language. Jefferson learned 8 languages in his lifetime, most of which were self taught. Jefferson was a just-in-time learner. He used the technology of the day  to be more efficient. When Jefferson wanted an easier or better way to do something, he customized or invented it. He was creative. He was methodical and scientific.  He would read books, collect specimens, and through trial and error, come to the best version of whatever it was he needed.  He failed a million times, yet the process never seemed to discourage him from moving forward and learning more.

This past weekend, I learned that Jefferson was a globally connected learner, a collaborator, a sharer, especially when it came to his garden.  He planted over 350 types of flowers, plants, vegetables, and fruits in his garden from places all over the world. (He had less interest in what was already native to Virginia.)  Friends and colleagues knew that one of his passions was experimenting in his garden, so they sent him seeds from their travels. Strangers would send him specimens and he would return the favor by sharing seeds from his own garden. This practice continues to this day at Monticello as you can buy seeds grown in the garden there.

Jefferson was reflective as evidenced in the countless letters and journals he wrote, along with the meticulous record keeping he did. His entire volumes of writings are still being transcribed into book form despite a decade of the process. His friendship with John Adams, especially in their twilight years provides us tremendous insight into how both of these men viewed themselves and the changing times.

I often wonder how Jefferson would view modern life and I suspect that while he would recognize very little of it, he would be aptly suited to live and thrive in 2012. Modern  technologies would give him unbridled access to experts around the globe and information that he could use to answer the deeper questions he frequently asked of himself. It would allow him to be more creative and inventive. Jefferson didn't purse knowledge or information alone, he pursued understanding. He recognized that  knowledge and information helped support the answer to the greater questions of why or how.  If we take one lesson from the learner Jefferson was, it should be that filling our lives with passions fuel a desire to learn. And that the desire to learn and the routes and paths we take to get there,  happen in ways that are unique to each and every one of us. As educators, we must grab hold of our inner Jefferson:   Be creative, be willing to fail and learn from those failures, be connected (both locally and globally), be collaborative, be a sharer, be reflective, and most of all, be willing to afford your students those same opportunities. Be passionate. Be a learner.

Thursday, October 18, 2012


               Over the summer, I re-read one of my favorite books, "Mindset" by Carol Dweck. For those of you who aren't familiar with Dweck's work, she presents stories and research to support her belief that there are two types of mindsets all of us employ: growth mindset and fixed mindset.  And while no one person is fully of the growth mindset or the fixed mindset, having a dominant growth mindset  is a far more emotionally fulfilling and happier way to go through life.  Believing that each moment is an opportunity to learn and grow, open to change and new possibilities, helps us to overcome whatever life may throw at us. She also asserts that being growth minded shifts the focus from task completion back to learning.

              Dweck's research has huge implications for our classrooms as well as in our personal lives. Some of the book is dedicated to how we interact with children and how many of the classroom cultures and systems we have created actually work against our best intentions and  desires to help students to become self-directed learners.  One of the many benefits of being a standards based educator is affirmed through Dweck's research in that we need to help our students focus on the learning journey, not the end goal of achieving a "score".Dweck maintains that the myth of fixed intelligence is perpetuated every time we falsely praise our students for being smart or by categorizing students by what they can and can not do. One of my biggest takeaways from the book, is that despite my belief that all students can learn if provided the right supports, many of my actions, including the way I offer praise and feedback have been counterproductive.

              Just last week, George Couros, a principal whom I recommend everyone read or follow on twitter, posted commentary on mindset vs skillset which echoes Dweck's research very nicely. As I read through his post, I found myself nodding along to many of his sentiments.  Successful use of technology in our personal and professional lives is rarely about the skills we do or don't have. It's about building habitudes such as perseverance and open mindedness. It's about flexibility and patience. It's about problem solving and creativity.  What also deeply resonated with me is how often I failed to model this for my students. If we want our students to persevere, to take risks, to be creative, to be flexible and patient, to problem solve, then we must be willing to hold ourselves to those same expectations. If we want our students to be growth minded, we must be growth minded. If we want our students to be focused on learning, we must be learners  as well.