This year’s PTA Reflections topic proved to be a bit of a challenge for Laura, and as she began brainstorming about the different ways she could “make a difference”, a familiar brand of dread began to wash over me. Parents and teachers know this feeling all too well. I call it the “I’ve been standing on my feet talking and thinking all day and I really don’t want to patiently coach you through your own thought process right now thankyouverymuch” feeling. But I did. I poured myself a nice tall glass of caffeine, and we sat down to brainstorm.

“How can you make a difference, Laura? Let’s start there,” I said.

“I know! I can recycle!”

I smiled. Of course she could.

“Or, maybe I could go door to door and raise money for cancer research,” she suggested.

Um………no.

“What if I picked up litter?” she asked quietly, peering out the window while I contemplated adding something from our liquor cabinet to my glass. She was at a loss.

I tried a different approach.

“Laura, when you think back over the last few years of your life, were there any experiences that really stood out as challenges to you?” I asked, tilting my head and looking hard at her. I knew what she was going to say.

“Grandma and Grandpa died.” And suddenly, she began to really think about the birthplace of service. We give because someone has given to us, often. And we serve because we remember how, at one time, we were in need of service ourselves.

Three years ago this January, my otherwise healthy father-in-law was diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme, and within five months of his diagnosis, he was gone. Laura is one of seventeen grandchildren in the Stockman family. My husband is the youngest of seven. Watching my brothers and sisters-in-law attend to their father, witness his death, and go through the motions of planning a funeral was absolutely the most heartbreaking and inspiring thing I have ever experienced.

One month later, when my mother-in-law passed away suddenly, I came to appreciate the fact that there are things people should never feel well-practiced at. Planning a funeral is one of them. Grief is another. Watching my daughter lose both of these people within the space of one summer was quite a bit to bear. There was nothing that I could do to help her make sense of this or feel better.

Time heals all wounds, though, and we’ve all recovered rather well from that awful summer. Laura still sleeps with her Grandpa’s picture next to her bed each night, and at least once a week, when I tuck her in, she will mention how much she misses him. She misses her Grandmother too. But Al was her favorite grandparent, hands-down. He was larger than life in that little girl’s eyes. And in death, ironically, he looms even larger in her mind.

Asking children to write about things that really matter to them is, in my opinion, the single most important thing that we can be doing as educators. We’ve been fortunate in that our girls have always been provided tremendous choice as learners. Their teachers, for the most part, have always encouraged them to choose their own writing topics, to select their own books…to engage in a workshop model where they have been allowed to thrive. I’m pretty vocal about the fact that I have loved the teachers my children have had. But I know that my experience is the exception, not the rule. Particularly when it comes to using technology.

Laura began her blog rather spontaneously. She decided that she could make a difference by living the example her grandfather set for her…by doing “small things with great love” as her Aunt Barb so aptly reminded us. And she wanted to blog about it. Because she loves to blog. Truth be told, I don’t particularly love her blogging (especially this week, actually–because the kid TYPES SLOWER THAN MUD). But I appreciate her enthusiasm, and I know that if she’s going to learn how to use the net safely, I am going to have to play a role in making that happen.

I did not expect to be speaking to PR people, proofreading press releases, granting phone interviews or sending thank you messages for matching fund offers. This is not what I anticipated when Laura said, “Hey, I’ve got a great idea! Let’s start a blog!”

In the last four days, I have marvelled over the fact that Laura is able to visibly trace the ripple effect that she so desperately wanted to create. And the more momentum she creates, the more people want in. Everyone likes a few extra hits on their own blogs. It’s a win-win situation that we are happy to be a part of. I am stunned by the traffic that is moving through her site, and I am humbled by the fact that not a single comment or email we have received has been inappropriate in any way. As a mom, I am excited for her…but I can’t help standing back and observing, as a teacher, exactly how the internet has provided her a voice, reinforced the good, and driven a REAL audience to her work…that she cares VERY MUCH about impressing appropriately as a writer.

It doesn’t get any more engaging or authentic than this.

And here’s something that I know. I know that a good majority of the passages on the New York State English Language Arts Assessments have actually been pieces of electronic text. Mock ups of web pages and Wikipedia entries and emails and ….blogs.

I like getting MY kid “ready for the test” THIS way.

Yes, I really do.

We are so OVER the practice test. How about using a blog as a formative assessment? I know it can be done, and I can’t wait to start seeing that happen. We educate in exciting times.

So, back to the start: I’m doing Laura’s challenge too. I’ll be doing one good deed a day, anonymously and quietly, for twenty five different teachers I know in the region. I haven’t decided who they will be yet….but I have a lot of great teachers to choose from.

The group was small–there were seven teachers, total. And they were a diverse group: music teachers, speech pathologists, special education teachers, and high school teachers from a couple of different content areas. The discussion was interesting, and I learned a lot.

Something that I noticed, though: they latched on to the activities and strategies that I shared with them right away: games, ice breakers, reciprocal teaching structures, active participation strategies…all of the fun stuff that helps to build community within a classroom or within teams. But, they weren’t so crazy about the emphasis I was placing on planning for a successful year, truly engaging with their kids, and using a lot of specific praise.

Some of them explained that despite their great efforts during their first year on the job, implementing CL resulted in chaos. Inequity. Frustration all around. And I remember feeling this way as well.

We spent the afternoon trying to go at the planning proactively. I shared the situation that I found myself in as a teacher with mammoth class sizes, inclusion students, and very short class periods. And I gave them some tips that worked for me when I was struggling with the same issues. Tips “beyond the binder”…nothing really fancy…just simple things that I did to rectify my own issues implementing CL over the course of the very quick decade I spent in the classroom. I didn’t think it very binder-worthy, truth be told.

They loved it. They ate it up, made it their own….left with a plan. It honestly left me with a bunch of mixed feelings. Don’t get me wrong, I was happy that they were happy–and planning to take some serious steps toward implementing Cooperative Learning. But it was quite perplexing to realize that despite the fancy binder and the awesome resources and the wasted anxiety about the agenda, what mattered most to these teachers was my willingness to admit that it wasn’t all sunshine and flowers, that I too couldn’t bear giving group grades, that I needed to do a lot of modeling before my kids truly understood what a “six inch voice” was, what a “valid contribution” looked like, and what “smooth group transitions” really required. And that there were good, solid ways to measure–to assess–CL skills and hold kids accountable for improving their performance.

That conversation made up the better part of yesterday’s “staff development”…for all of us. It was really just a conversation….and I wasn’t leading it….I was just contributing. I wish every day could be like that.

Digging into this issue quickly leads most teachers to the realization that there are “too many words” in their content area, and many teachers struggle to define which words students should be held accountable for learning…..and how teaching and learning words might vary, depending on how the word might be used by students long-term.

I’ve spent the last year learning as much as I can about vocabulary instruction, and like so many others, I still often feel like I am swimming in a vast ocean of information that we’ve only begun to dip a toe into. Much of what I share with teachers comes from Robert Marzano’s work, but I found Janet Allen’s book, Words, Words, Words  to be helpful as well, in that it provides solid information about tiering words, a process that enables teachers to begin “categorizing” the many words that their students confront in a given year. Once this task is accomplished, decisions can be made about how to best instruct and assess around the words. Allen provides important strategies for practicing and assessing vocabulary that move beyond defining words and using them in sentences (which, apparently, some studies have shown causes regression in vocabulary development over time).

Many of the teachers that I worked with last year revamped their instructional practices and have begun incorporating the use of word walls, performance-based assessments, and considerations for learning styles. Several districts have developed grade-level formative assessments that will be used to study vocabulary development over the course of the year, using writing samples and rubrics that are very similar to the 6+1 Traits rubrics that so many of us are familiar with.

I am eager to see how these assessments work for teachers…specifically, whether or not they provide them with the information that they are hoping to gather.

I am also eager to hear from others who might be focusing on vocabulary instruction and assessment………it seems to be a solid place to begin helping students maximize their learning potential.

I know how I felt.

And I know how a few hundred teachers in Erie County felt as well.

Just a teensy bit overwhelmed. And kind of in need of a drink. Despite any happy rumors we heard, the new Core was not more specific, and it was certainly not easier to understand. Most perplexing was the realization that performance indicators DID seem to spiral across grade levels, but the way in which the curriculum was articulated made it very difficult to see where the indicators were first introduced, where they were expected to be mastered, and where new and more rigorous indicators made their first appearance.

And none of them were numbered! Staff developers and curriculum coordinators…can I get a collect groan please? If anyone out there is mapping against this curriculum, you know the pain I speak of.

Faced with the task of understanding and helping teachers to appreciate this daunting new curriculum, I did the only thing I knew how to do at that moment in time: I made lemonade out of a whole lot of lemons. I placed the Core curriculum into a new framework. I didn’t change a thing….other than how it looks. And my work clearly demonstrates where performance indicators are first introduced, where they need to be mastered, and how they evolve (or dissolve) across grade levels. You can see the scope and sequence. You can witness the spiral, despite how broken it may appear to be. I’m in the process of renumbering the indicators, so that they are consistent with the coding used by TechPaths.

I’m happy to share, too. Just go here….and drag and drop the files to your computer.

Angela Stockman

The History of the Project

The call for the creation of a deeply aligned, regional English Language Arts curriculum came from various members of the Erie 1 BOCES Instructional Development Advisory Board. This board is compromised of district-level administrators who oversee the development of local curricula and Associate Superintendents for Instruction from across the region. The process itself was conceptualized by Fenwick English and Betty Steffy and illustrated in their book Deep Curriculum Alignment (Scarecrow Education Press, 2001). During the fall of 2005, members of the Instructional Development Advisory Board worked with Dr. Jan Jacob, a former Superintendent of Schools with extensive experience in the process, to better understand the benefits of working toward a deeply aligned curriculum and to define a concrete process for doing so.

Phase I of the Project: Defining and Unwrapping High Frequency Performance Indicators

One of the founding premises of Deep Curriculum Alignment lies in the understanding that written, taught, and tested curricula must be tightly aligned in order to best serve students. During Phase I of the project, approximately 100 teachers from the Erie 1 BOCES region and surrounding areas gathered together to learn more about the New York State English Language Arts assessments and standards. These teachers began by identifying which Performance Indicators were linked to “high frequency” items on the assessments, historically. As they studied the longitudinal trends in testing and uncovered those Performance Indicators that were tested most often, it became apparent that the identified skills were not arbitrary in nature. In fact, it became very clear to the teachers involved that the high frequency Performance Indicators were some of the more vital skills that all good teachers need students to become proficient in. During this phase of the project, teachers were also exposed to Douglas Reeve’s conception of Power Standards and challenged to understand how the high frequency Performance Indicators present on the New York State English Language Arts assessments might begin to help us define what is most vital in our own curriculum….not because it simply shows up on the assessment, but quite possibly because the assessment might actually be testing many of the skills and understandings that everyone agrees are most important.

Once the high frequency Performance Indicators were identified, teachers worked together to revisit and deconstruct the assessment items mapped to these Performance Indicators at grades 4, 8, and 11. At the conclusion of Phase I, teachers had a clearer understanding of the types of text that students were challenged to read (content), the manner in which questions were posed and responses were given (context), and the level of thinking that each item demanded (cognitive load). Most importantly, teachers uncovered a host of embedded literacy and thinking skills that students needed to have at their disposal in order to perform well on these items. In this way, simple Performance Indicators were unwrapped, and the complexity of the items and what they demanded of students was more specifically defined.

Phase II of the Project: Articulating a Scope and Sequence

Phase II of the project challenged teachers to revisit the high frequency Performance Indicators and those embedded literacy and thinking skills uncovered during Phase I. Working groups, compromised of K-12 teachers, defined a clear scope and sequence for these embedded skills, ensuring a type of precision alignment that would provide for effective scaffolding across all grade levels

Phase III of the Project: Creating a Deeply Aligned Curriculum

Phase III of the project will bring teachers back to the table to begin building grade level curriculum that is tightly aligned to the scope and sequence articulated in Phase II. Larry Ainsworth will be working with members of our group and our region as a whole to guide us in the development of common authentic, formative assessments at each grade level. This will provide educators across the region with essential pieces of curriculum that will help students perform well not only on the New York State Assessments, but in the classrooms they are trained in and the world that we will leave to them as well.

This final phase of the project will serve to demonstrate this group’s belief that preparing kids for New York State Assessments has little to do with skill review books and practice testing. Good test preparation looks like good instruction: it is engaging, creative, rigorous, and rich with varied opportunities for success.

Angela Stockman

As a classroom teacher, I was not a fan of NYS Assessments. Not at all. First of all, a large portion of them involved multiple choice questions, and if you read my last entry, you already know how I felt about that. Also? In my mind, “teaching to the ELA Assessment” meant familiarizing my students with the construct of the test and allowing that construct to heavily influence the construct of my own classroom assessments. What did this mean to me? It meant tossing out five of the ten performance-based assessments that my students found engaging and replacing them with assessments that looked a lot like the NYS Assessment. This is what we call a knee-jerk reaction, and I, like many of my teacher-friends, spent most of the 1990’s embracing it as a powerful instructional tool.

Here’s the thing: State Assessments can be evil. They can be used in a variety of ways that range from meaningless to destructive, and the fact of the matter is this: that will happen when people aren’t informed about how to use them well. For better or for worse, though, they aren’t going away. Once I wrapped my head around that notion, I began to develop a deep interest in how standardized tests, such as the NYS ELA Assessment, might be used in meaningful ways by TEACHERS and STUDENTS.

What if, instead of simply teaching TO a test, we started teaching FROM it?

For example: the NYS ELA Assessments are given once a year. They are a standardized measure of how students perform during one quick moment in time each year. Drawing conclusions off of that score alone is a good place to begin a conversation, but in my mind, the NYS Assessments provide mere clues for teachers about where instruction might be improved. And this happens only when teachers are invited to delve into the test and into the data generated from it. Together. Collaboratively.

In order to understand what the NYS ELA test demands of students, teachers gain a lot when they are given the opportunity to take the test and collect information about the content of the test, the construct of the test, and all of the skills required to perform successfully on it. During my first year as a consultant, Marie Perini, a colleague of mine, suggested that I engage teachers in perception mapping, a process used frequently at that time by Jennifer Borgioli, who now works with Giselle Martin-Kniep at Learner Centered Initiatives. Although I was unfamiliar with Jenn’s process, I did some research, got the hand of it, and encouraged teachers to use it in several districts soon after. In the end? Gathering perception data revealed so much to the teachers that I worked with that I now hesitate to roll out data before working through this process.

Once we are clear about our perceptions regarding test performance, digging into the data becomes very interesting. In many cases, we learn how incorrect our perceptions are….mine included! And suddenly, teachers begin to realize how necessary data is…..and not just standardized test data. Classroom data.

Case in point: if I roll out trend data revealing that students at a particular grade level  have struggled with items testing knowledge of the story elements for the last ten years, it would make sense for teachers to collaborate about the potential causes for that. In our region, this process is faciliated through the English Language Arts Deep Curriculum Alignment Project. Teachers involved in this project work together to identify Power Performance Indicators and deconstruct test items aligned to them. What we’ve learned is that while assessment data might suggest a historical weakness in test items relevant to “story elements”, when the items themselves are revisited, there were many other skills embedded within them. Students could be struggling with any of those skills. How do we uncover what the real problem is?

We teach FROM the test. We use the test to provide us with information about where we may need to improve. We revisit the items. We determine which literacy and thinking skills were finer parts of the item as a whole. And then? We align our instruction and a number of our assessments to those discoveries. We gather THAT data. Because THAT data will give us a clearer idea about how our students are struggling and what kinds of instruction are leading to improvement.

Classroom data provides teachers with evidence about what works, instructionally, and what might not. It can guide effective decision-making. It brings an end to department battles, based on hunches, over which instructional strategies are “best.” It can lead to more efficient teaching and easier learning. It simplifies our struggle.

It also makes meaningful use of those assessments we hate so much.

Angela Stockman

But of course, time was always an issue.

And I had too many kids.

And most of them were apathetic. None of them did their homework. And their parents didn’t care and our class periods were too short and I had to get them ready for the state assessments and last year’s teacher didn’t prepare them well enough and I needed new resources and I was being pulled out of my classroom too often and the temperature was too warm in my room and my computer printer was jammed and I was trying to differentiate my cooperative learning-driven literature circle. That was differentiated. With the differentiation. Cooperatively.

*Sigh*

And anyway shouldn’t the kids have COME to me having learned this material already? Hmmmm?

It’s funny, the perspective you develop when you step out of the classroom and into the role of staff developer. It’s been an education, and some days, I truly do wish that I could go back and do it all over again. Better. I think everyone in my position does. And if I’ve learned anything, it’s that the definition of “better” is always, well……getting better. Evolving. Some people are frightened by that. I find it exciting.

The notion of using data to inform instruction is something that has moved well beyond the district office planning room and into classrooms across our region. Teachers who were once skeptical or overwhelmed by data-driven conversations and processes are now considering how the use of data might actually help them target areas of student need with better precision, align their instruction, and provide rich opportunities for collaborative discussion that might truly create meaningful change. The fact of the matter is this: when instructional decisions are based on evidence, the teacher’s ability to respond effectively becomes a simpler road to travel.

I began teaching two years before the first waves of the English Language Arts assessment crashed upon the shores of New York State. I was a proponet of Nancy Atwell’s workshop model, performance-based assessment, and cooperative learning. I truly believed that if I were to distribute a multiple-choice test in my classroom, I would then have to sit back and plug my ears as my students’ brain cells erupted in shrieks of pain before receeding to their ultimate demise.

You might say I had some strong opinions. I’m sure I was a joy to work with.

At any rate, the notion of using data during that time was something lost on me and every other teacher I knew. It just wasn’t done, and it didn’t have to be. Accountability was a distant nightmare for those of us in the classroom at that time. In fact, the first time that I was asked to consider data was in reaction to the NYS Assessments. And it wasn’t fun. For anyone. And all of us, everywhere, were doing it.

Unfortunately, that early trauma still lingers, and each time I use the dreaded *D* word with teachers today, I can practically hear their jaws clench as they brace themselves against another blow. It doesn’t have to be that way.

Using data to inform instruction gives teachers better information about what their students need and how well their curriculum and instruction is providing it. Gathering data, having conversations about it, and forming pro-active responses to the conclusions drawn puts teachers in better control of their practice. It eliminates the fear of the unknown and the frustration that so many teachers feel when it dawns on them that they spend a good deal of time firing shots at a target that seems to keep moving.

When I roll out assessment data to teachers, I’m often confronted with justified skepticism over what the assessment is TRULY testing. Some teachers still feel that if they focus on drilling the content of the test, their scores will improve. Others feel that if they focus on test-taking strategies, their students will have it made on testing day. And sadly, some teachers have resigned themselves to the perception that SED is just trying to “trick” their students, confuse them…..abuse them.

How do we teach well in a standards-based, data-driven climate? How do we continue to deliver rich curriculum that engages students and inspires teachers to want to be in their classrooms? These are important questions to consider, and I don’t claim to know the answers. I am, however, willing to share what I’ve learned about better practices (understanding, again, that “better” just keeps getting “better”), and I plan to do that over the next several entries.

What I do feel certain about is this: using data to inform instruction seems to make a lot of sense. And data are defined well beyond assessment scores. Data goes much deeper than the reports used by the folks in district offices. The most important data is classroom data. Data can be gathered about anything.

Understanding which data you might want to gather is key. And that’s where I’ll pick things up next time.

Yesterday, I was fortunate enough to listen to him speak at the closing session of the Western New York BOCES High School’s New Face Conference in Ellicottville. Truth be told, I was not looking forward to this. Having spent three days having every last brain cell that I possessed pushed to its absolute limit, I was more than ready to hop in the car and head for home, where the most cerebral thing I planned to do was order a pizza and celebrate the fact that my children survived three days at home alone with their father (a situation that might have forced me to go completely postal).

I’m glad I stuck around.

Peters’s message was a simple one: in order to teach your students, you must first come to know them…deeply. Having accomplished that task, you can then go about the business of inspiring them to learn. Sounds simple, right?

Um…………maybe not so much. Of course, we all strive to do exactly what Peters spent an hour motivating our group to do yesterday. Contrary to what some people may believe, most of the teachers that I work with each year have the best of intentions. I know very few who seem to be in the field simply because they would like their summers off.

Schools can be toxic places. Not only for students, but for the teachers that work in them as well. Ask any teacher at the secondary level what a typical work day requires of them, and they will mention the realities of full class loads that amount to 140+ students per day. They will tell you about class periods that might last as little as 35 minutes—on a day free of assemblies. They will reflect upon the weeks of instruction lost to test prep that they feel pressured to fit in. They will tell you about the students they can’t reach, the parents who don’t care and the ones who care more about their child’s “self esteem” than they do about holding the little darling accountable for anything. There are teachers who will tell you that they have to fight to secure necessary resources for their classrooms. I have a friend who teaches at the elementary level who has spent the last fifteen years of her career purchasing toilet paper for the restroom in her wing.

The reality is this: teaching demands so much more of a person than the effective construction and execution of a lesson plan. Teaching requires confronting all of the issues above…and many more. And it requires doing so in isolation, much of the time. Teachers spend their days in classrooms, fighting the good fight, alone.

Yesterday, Stephen Peters asked a room full of educators to recall who their favorite teacher was and to remember exactly what it was about that teacher that made them so memorable. We all had the same story to tell, and I’m sure you can guess what was shared. Our favorite teachers were the ones that made us feel like we mattered. Our favorite teachers engaged us, and they were able to do so because they knew us. And they came to know us because they genuinely respected us. Even when we didn’t bring the very best of ourselves into the classroom each day. Even when we refused to pay attention, forgot our homework, or responded to a finely crafted lesson with supreme apathy. Our favorite teachers kept right on trying, in the face of that.  They knew it was part of the job. Some of them even knew that it was the best part of the job: turning kids on to learning, in the face of all of that negativity.

Our favorite teachers let us be human, with all of our flaws, and they inspired us to want to do better. It wasn’t about meeting their agenda, so that they could feel like teacher of the year. It was about inviting us to the table, and making us feel included, no matter who we were or where we came from. It was about making us feel like we COULD do it. It was about respecting us for trying our best, even when we didn’t perform as well as we wanted to. Because doing our absolute best was and still remains the highest standard in this standards-based world we teach and learn in today.

Above all, it was the absence of judgment, shame, and perfectionism. It was the absence of fear.

Peters’s message and his personal story resonated with all of us in the room. But one piece of that message meant a great deal to me as a former teacher and as someone who spends her time training teachers today. And I’ve been wondering this: How much more effective could teachers be if those in positions of leadership in their buildings and districts and regions and states left their assumptions about teachers aside and truly took the time to inspire them? To respect them? How much more effective could teachers be if they entered their classrooms each day knowing that they were not going to be judged, shamed, or subjected to perfectionistic standards? How does one do their best to inspire teachers? How do we go about inviting teachers back to the table that so many of them have walked away from?

I think that these are important questions that people in positions like mine need to grapple with. Because the fact of the matter is this: our favorite teachers treated us like worthwhile human beings. It was that simple, and it was that complex. For a brief but very important moment yesterday, Stephen Peters suggested that educational leaders at all levels might begin to treat teachers in the same way. My guess is that this has always been their intention all along. My guess is that they would appreciate being humanized themselves.

I began this blog as a participant in Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach’s cohort at the High School’s New Face conference. I honestly haven’t given a whole lot of thought as to how I might use it as a tool for teachers, for staff developers, or anyone else who might be reading. But my hope is that I can create a tiny space here in this ocean of information that might be of service to educators out there who are thoughtful and interested in improving their practice. A place for all of our favorite teachers and those who are striving each day to become that teacher for the students they work with every day.

So…welcome! I am excited about growing this blog into something useful.

Angela Stockman