This Is What I Meant

In the years before Harkness, I used to have the students write a weekly journal.  It was completely free-form, but was to focus on what we had covered during the week, commenting on what the students felt comfortable with and with what they were still struggling.  The purpose from my standpoint was to obtain a different point of view than I was able to get from my position lecturing in front of the classroom, and in this regard the journals worked really well, as I not only got information about the math but also about other aspects of their lives, such as band practice, volleyball matches, or student government activities.  Most students followed the directions, and briefly reflected on the week, and while I was getting additional information from the journals, it never really seemed to be having the impact on the students I was intending. 

Once I switched over to Harkness, the journals disappeared.  Since I was talking with the kids every day, I was already receiving the extra information the journals had previously provided, and since the impact the journals were having on the students was negligible, I decided not to waste their time in writing them (nor mine in reading them).

However, a lot of what I’ve been reading lately has emphasized student reflection, and since one of the aspects of going gradeless is to have the students be part of the assessment process, I decided to have the students fill out a weekly form on Google Classroom, asking them to rank their understanding of the skills we are covering in the current unit (based on mastery, not A,B,C,…) and to give either evidence of their learning or their plan for the upcoming week to make progress toward learning the material.  In most cases the kids have been very honest with themselves, seeing in the evidence they have provided how thoroughly they understand a particular topic, and in the lack of evidence where they need to place a little more effort.

This is what I had in mind all along.  This is what I had wanted the journals to be: meaningful reflection that guides student learning.  Maybe it was the fact that I didn’t explicitly name which skills we were working on, taking it for granted that the kids knew.  Maybe it was the more free-form format.  Maybe it was that I didn’t explicitly ask the kids to “grade” themselves.  Whatever it was, I honestly don’t care right now.  The new format is working for the kids that are taking advantage of it.  Since it doesn’t “count for points” (nothing does in the gradeless format), some of the kids are not filling out the form.  However, the kids that are filling out the form seem to be more focused in class and are providing higher quality evidence in their online portfolios than those who aren’t.

I’m going to mention all of this to the kids in class tomorrow, so we’ll see if the participation increases next week.  But for now, I’m just glad to see that for those taking advantage of the opportunity, the reflections are working.

Grades as a Discussion

Well first semester ended well, with the kids in algebra 1 doing well on the common assessment we use for our final exam and the honors pre-calculus kids doing well on their take-home exam.  More important to me, however, was the week leading up to the exams.  The conversations I had with the algebra 1 kids as they worked through the review materials and with the honors pre-calculus kids as they completed the take-home exercises were some of the best of the semester.  The quality of the questions, the responsiveness to feedback, the desire to really understand the material...all of it was amazing.  And, of course, it got me thinking: what can I do to get these conversations to happen earlier next semester, or even better, to get them to happen throughout the semester?

My answer arrived relatively quickly, as it was really just a matter of putting together some things that had been rolling around in my head.  I have been following the Facebook page "Teachers Throwing Out Grades" for a while now, and while intrigued by the concept I was hesitant to attempt it for the selfish reason of being leery of the unknown.  There weren't any guides for how to implement a gradeless classroom, not to mention the fact that my school, like most, requires that grades be given both during and at the end of the semester.  

Also, Rick Wormeli visited my school in early August, so instead of going gradeless for first semester, I opted to try standards-based grading in my algebra 1 classes instead.  And while the algebra 1 kids were definitely more aware of the skills they were being asked to learn, there was still a disconnect between knowing what was expected and really taking ownership of meeting the expectations.  The chase they were participating in was a chase for a grade.  They understood that working toward mastery of the material was the means to that end, but the "good grade" was still the end goal.  Not exactly what I had in mind, and certainly not in the true spirit of standards-based grading.  So, despite the fact that I had been emphasizing standards and not grades throughout the semester, there was clearly some work to be done.

At the beginning of the semester break, I read Starr Sackstein's new book, "Hacking Assessment: 10 Ways to Go Gradeless in a Traditional Grades World."  You can see why the title was attractive to me.  The book is full of practical ideas and suggestions, based primarily on the author's personal experience.  The over-riding theme of the book - or at least what I gleaned from it - was that going gradeless involves getting the kids involved in the process of determining their grade, making assessment a semester-long discussion through which the students are asked to constantly reflect on the progress they are making.  This discussion can include short electronic surveys, longer written reflections, and face-to-face discussions, among other things, and should always focus on the progress the students are making on meeting the standards.  Yes, grades are still reported during and at the end of the semester.  But rather than the grades being about the averages of a bunch of numbers, they are the result of a mutual conclusion of how well the student understands the content of the course.

Put simply, it's Harkness meets assessment.  Harkness is about learning through discussions that are centered around carefully-crafted questions.  Going gradeless is about assessment through discussions that are centered around well-articulated standards.

So next semester, I'm diving in.  I have no doubts that there will be bumps along the road.  But the more I think about it, the more "right" it seems.  I have asked the kids to do the work of learning by having discussions with me and with one another.  It only makes sense that assessing that learning should follow the same course.

Lesson Plans

This year, we have implemented the new teacher Ohio teacher evaluation system at my high school, which means that instead of doing a professional development project along with brief, informal observations, formal observations have returned to my life.  Honestly, I'm enjoying the opportunity to discuss what is happening in my classroom with someone not directly involved in the lesson.  I use the word "lesson" here because I can't really think of another word to replace it.  However, I have come to the conclusion that it needs replaced.

Normally, when someone begins to list what a teacher does, "making daily lesson plans" is somewhere close to the top of the list.  What these plans are to include is pretty standard: there should be a specific, stated objective, a plan for how the objective will be met during the 50-minute class period, and a means for determining whether or not the objective has been met.  None of this applies to my classroom.  To be sure, we accomplish quite a bit in my classroom every day.  But beyond the fact that even a cursory examination of the idea that a specified objective will be met every day during a designated 50-minute window would reveal its silliness (seriously, apply this idea to a business or congressional subcommittee meeting and you'll begin to see the absurdity of it), it is simply not possible for me to know beforehand how far the students will get in a discussion, which exercise will require more time and which will require less, what additional information some student will have found that takes us deep into a particular concept, and so on.  Most days, individual groups within the same class don't need to take the same amount of time on individual exercises, let alone this happening from class to class.  The vast majority of the planning for the course happens in a place called July, and although I know we'll get through all of the material we need to cover in a given semester, trying to time it out day-by-day, or even week-by-week, is close to impossible.  This is why, when putting together a rough calendar for the course, we plan for everything, including exams, to be completed in 75 school days, even though there are 90 school days in the semester.  That way, if the discussion on a particular exercise takes a little longer, or if a particular concept needs a little extra time as we begin the review days, or whatever (including things like snow days), we have the time available to let it happen without forcing us to move through some other topic more quickly than we should.

Fortunately, I have administrators (both in my building and in the district offices) who understand the amount of planning that happens before the course begins, that part of the flow of the course depends on allowing the students to go at the pace they need to take, and that while there is a big picture plan, it simply doesn't make sense for me to attempt to predict the details of what will happen on any given day in my classroom.  They understand that part of the point of a discussion-based classroom is providing the students with the freedom to make sense of the material for themselves rather than having a specified method forced upon them. And they understand that a formal means of determining whether or not an objective has been met has been replaced by constant, informal assessment and feedback throughout the bell.  In other words, they understand that, in the same way students cannot be treated or assessed in the same way, neither can teachers.

Among the other things for which I'm thankful, this is most certainly on the list.

Algebra 1

So it turns out that running a Harkness-based, standards-based algebra 1 classroom is exhausting.

It's not impossible...far from it.  The kids who are on-board with the method - which is most of them - are doing fine.  The discussions are lively, the kids are learning, and life is good.  I am able to give the kids a lot more individual attention than I have in the past, and as a result I have a better feel for where each of them is with the material.  All good things.

As you would expect, the kids have a lot of questions.  In general, more questions than the honors pre-calc kids, and they're less shy about asking.  Giving some kids individual attention makes the other kids want individual attention, and now I have a room essentially full of kids who want my help to learn algebra, which is a very good thing.  This is what teaching is supposed to be about: me helping the kids learn.

This is a natural fit for a standards-based grading system.  Individualized, daily, formative assessment for individualized learning.

But it is exhausting.

That's not a complaint, by the way.  Quite the opposite.  The fact that I have freshmen who start class by themselves before the bell rings is great.  The fact that I was able to do conferences last week without needing to print out a grade sheet or anything like that because I know the kids well enough to speak about their strengths and weaknesses is great.

But there is a price to pay for it.  Giving the kids constant chances to demonstrate they have learned or retained the material - whether in the form of short quizzes every day or kids asking to come in before or after school to show what they know - is time consuming. It cuts into time needed to do all of the other things that go into preparing for the class.  Things that, of course, have to happen.  So really it cuts into the time spent on other things, like writing a blog you're using as a means of reflecting on how things are going.

It's worth it.  The kids are focused on learning and retaining the material.  The rapport with the students is good.  The year is rolling along nicely.

But it's time for bed.

Not Grading

Of all of the tasks that are part of the job description for "teacher", grading is probably the most elusive to pin down in terms of how to do it well.  Some teachers I know just mark what the student got wrong without any explanation, emphasizing the idea that this is a judgment, along with a numerical label, of the student's ability.  Sometimes, the number of points "taken" for each incorrect response corresponds to a detailed rubric, from which the teacher, for the sake of fairness, does not stray.  Other times, the teacher will take points according to a more holistic feel for how well a student did on a particular exercise, making notes about what they have done on previous tests to make sure the grading is consistent from test to test.  It is rare in either case that the teacher will provide meaningful feedback about what they were actually looking for compared with what the student provided on the test.  And even if such feedback is provided, it is often ignored by the student, who tends to only be interested in the numerical grade at the top of the test, leaving the teacher to wonder why they even bothered to put the more detailed information on the graded test in the first place.

While there are certainly other things that are wrong with education in our country, this emphasis on grades and not on learning should be really close to the top of the list.  Many teachers and students (as well as many parents, administrators, politicians...) have reduced education to a game of numbers. As long as the grades are ok, learning must be happening, right?  If we're honest about it, the correct answer to that questions is, "No."  If the grades meant the students were actually learning the material, then the disconnect between high school grades and college placement tests (ACT, SAT, or from the colleges themselves) would not exist, the amount of review currently present is subsequent courses would not exist (example: how much of the beginning of algebra 2 is actually algebra 1 revisited?), the number of remedial courses in colleges - courses that contain material from classes the students actually passed in high school - would not exist....you get the point.  If we're honest about it, grades actually detract from what should be the goal of education, namely: help the students learn.  Instead, the focus has become the grades themselves, and not if they are accurately reflecting the learning.


Enter the first round of testing this year in both algebra 1 and honors pre-calculus.  First, as I mentioned in the previous post, I'm calling the assessments "checkpoints" this year, hoping to emphasize the idea that we're just seeing where the student currently is and where we still need to work.  Second, I created a feedback form for each of these first checkpoints, listing the skill that I was checking for, with options for "mastery", "proficiency" and "developing" next to each, along with room for me to write any comments.  For honors pre-calc, I made the mistake of putting a number (5-mastery, 4-proficiency, and 0-developing) next to each exercise, so the kids were somewhat instinctively drawn to look at the numbers rather than at the comments.  On the sheet for algebra 1, no such number existed - just a checkmark next to the level along with the comments.  For both classes, the opportunity to show me within the next couple weeks (the requirement is before the next checkpoint) that they have developed proficiency in those areas that were marked as developing exists.  This is not a second opportunity on a similar checkpoint; rather, the students need to create an exercise, get my approval that its successful completion will demonstrate the level of proficiency for which I am looking, and then answer the exercise they created.  This set-up made the comments important, since they contained the information about what I didn't see on the checkpoint, and therefore what the student needs to include in the exercise they created and show me in their solution.  In other words, the emphasis was on the material and not on the grade.


It has only been a couple days since I returned to first checkpoints, and many of the kids - algebra 1 and honors pre-calc alike - have completed the second chance, and I've changed the mark from "developing" to "proficient" accordingly.  Only a couple kids have mentioned the grades.  I even figured out a way to get the grading program my school uses to report only the levels and not a semester grade, so that even the online report is about the material and not the numbers.  The rest of  the kids are focused on demonstrating that they now know the material.  The first after school help session, which occurred last Thursday, was the best attended session in years - well, other than those that occurred the day before a test/IES/checkpoint/whatever-we-called-it-that-year.  Kids getting help with material they didn't understand, kids demonstrating that they actually do understand the material but drew a blank on the day of the checkpoint, kids explaining things to other kids...all good things, and all of which I hope happen every Tuesday and Thursday after school.


Just to be clear and complete, the grades will show up eventually, but not until the unit is actually "closed" and the marks for that unit are "final" - meaning, the "grades" for unit 1 will appear after the checkpoint for unit 2 has been taken.  Until then at least, the focus will be on demonstrating knowledge of the material.


So, is it possible to change the focus to learning and away from grades?  For the time being, it seems the answer is at least a short-term yes.  Hopefully the remaining kids will come around soon.  Regardless, I'm going to enjoy the fact that the majority of the students are currently focused on learning and not on getting grades, work toward getting everyone on board, and try to find a way to have this focus continue even after the grades are posted.

2015-2016

Summer is over, and the new year is off to a good start, with this year's docket consisting of four honors pre-calculus and two algebra 1 classes. It was a full and enjoyable summer, with a week at Exeter, a week with EMI in Mason, a four-day weekend at Deerfield Academy participating in a PBL Summit, and lots of family time riding roller coasters, including a few days at Holiday World for our 25th anniversary.  The PD was inspiring, to say the least, and provided the impetus to take the discussion exercises created last year for algebra 1 and organize and expand them so that this year the course can include the discovery and inquiry that were, in many ways, missing last year.  In other words, Harkness has fully arrived in algebra 1.  There are several of us using the new algebra 1 materials this year, and the focus of the blog this year will be on the implementation and the adjustments as we go.  And after four days...

(1) Yes, the kids can do this.  The conversations have been good, the kids are making discoveries, and today they were already putting their work on the board before the bell rang to start class.

(2) No, not everyone is on board yet.  Some of the kids are trying to get by in the same way they have in the past, where not doing work at home and not participating in class menat that the teacher would swoop in and save them by giving them notes and finding other ways to spoon feed them the information.  Needless to say, that's not happening this year.  On the good side, each day another student or two has gotten with the program, so hopefully it won't be too long before we have everyone in the fold.

(3) Yes, there is a slight difference between what I'm doing in algebra 1 and what I'm doing in honors pre-calculus.  Namely, we spend the last five or so minutes of class in algebra 1 discussing the day's exercises as a whole group, as a way of summarizing things and giving the kids a chance to check their notes and make sure they caught the important information for the day.  Honors pre-calc doesn't receive this from me on a daily basis, as part of the point is for them to begin to discern  this for themselves...a college-readiness skill if ever there was one.

In addition to this, the way I'm reporting grades is changing this year.  Specifically, we are going to a more standards-based model, with only formal assessments (which we're calling "checkpoints" this year) contributing to the semester grade.  Homework, participation, etc., will be reported online but will not be included in the calculation of the semester grade.  If a student does not show proficiency on a particular topic, we have laid out a process (at the heart of which is them finding or creating exercises that cover the topic in question) by which they can continue to work on the topic, show proficiency, and replace the grade from the checkpoint.  My hope is that this will nudge any holdouts over to doing the necessary work to learn the material "the first time" (i.e., in class through the daily preparation and unit checkpoints) rather than having to work through the make-up process for the old material while trying to learn the new.  Either way, I'm trying to place the focus squarely on learning the material and not on the grade, and I'm certain that a few posts will be updates about how this process is going as well.

Finally, as a result of presenting "Harkness for Thirty" at Exeter and Deerfield over the summer, I have had a few email conversations with teachers from across the country providing requested information and advice as they make their first attempt at discussion-based learning.  It is a bit humbling and a bit overwhelming to think that my advice is worth asking for.  It has also got me thinking about putting together a workshop that I could do for math departments who would like help putting together the materials to implement discussion-based learning.  Not sure if there's a need for this, but it's probably worth considering at the very least.

So, a lot to work on this year.  Just the way it should be.

Training vs. Educating

In his new book, Creative Schools, Ken Robinson makes a distinction between training and educating students.  The essence of the difference is that educating a student is more holistic, whereas training refers to learning a specific skill or piece of information.

This distinction got me thinking.  When, for example, we teach a student how to factor by showing them several examples of each "type" of quadratic that we want them to factor, and then having them practice each type tens or hundreds of times, are we actually educating them, or are we just training them for a specific skill?  I would contend that this is training, and not educating.  And if we're honest about it, it's training them for a skill that is very limited in terms of its usefulness.  I'm willing to bet that even those who are currently working in a STEM-related field have not needed to factor, foil, integrate - the list goes on - at any time in the recent past.

However, if we help the students learn to factor by leading them to discover the process and allowing them to work through the different "types" (especially in the context of applications), and in the long run become just as proficient at the skill of factoring, we have, by the way the material was covered, educated them instead of trained them.  In addition to the specific skill, we have also improved their problem-solving skills, allowed them to make sense of the material themselves thereby making it more meaningful and more permanent...you get the idea.

I think this gets to the heart of one of the main issues in education.  If we look at a curriculum - any curriculum - and see a list of skills, and understand our job as getting the students to be able to do those skills, then our focus will change from educating the students to simply training them.  The assessments we give will focus on whether or not they have learned the skills, and so long as the students can accomplish this - regardless of whether or not they actually understand what they're doing, why they're doing it, or how it can be useful - then we will have done our job.

Of course, the current standardized testing - PARCC, AIR, etc. - isn't about just the skills (though they are still important), but rather is about the using the skills, especially in ways that are not seen in the textbooks, and therefore are not normally seen in classrooms.  These tests are not about second-guessing the kinds of questions that are going to be on them so we can be sure to cover those "types" of questions in class, but rather are about checking the kids' problem-solving skills.  So even if a teacher thinks that teaching is all about training the kids in specific skills, the standardized tests should get them to rethink their position at least a little.

Needless to say, since I'm solidly behind educating the students rather than training them, I'm not worried about any changes that may come to state testing. If you educate the kids instead of training them, then they will be ready for both a skills test and a problem-solving test...and will not recoil from whatever may be thrown at them, since they will be accustomed to working on exercises the likes of which they have not seen before.  Sounds good to me.