Monday, February 11, 2013

Dealing with the Disruption of Change


Context:
This post was constructed on the eve of eTech 2013 in Columbus, Ohio.  In a rare moment of total solitude, I’m writing while looking out my 7th floor window in the Hyatt looking at North High Street.  A chance to gaze at the place I called home for 5 years.  Like so much else I’ve written recently, this is again about change….but within the framework of a broader reflection on nearing the completion of my 40th trip around the sun….

Driving to Columbus this evening I found that my XM radio had been activated once again for a ‘trial’ period.  Flipping through the stations, I landed at the 50’s on 5 station and decided to linger for a bit.  As I listened, my mind wandered to how music changed radically within 10 short years between the 50’s and 60’s.  The 70’s saw change take on different forms, and by the end of the 70’s music was radically different again.  The 1980’s carried on the split personality of the 70’s, with the early half very different from the back half of the decade.  The early 1990’s saw a major course correction with the direction of rock, an evolution in hip-hop, and the rise and fall of the boy bands.  Having arrived at the 90’s on 9 channel, I thought again about the 50’s and wondered what the course of the music industry would have been if there had been a refusal on the part of the participants to change with the times….

The movie ‘Lincoln’ has once again focused attention on the era of the 1860’s.  Imagine being 5 in the middle of that decade.  Assuming you lived to an age of 65, think about the ways in which the world changed.  Electric lights were invented and began the process of replacing gas-powered fixtures and revolutionized the way America worked and played.  The telegraph and the railroads gave way to the telephone and the automobile.  Warfare was revolutionized through industrial era inventions that made the Civil War style of battle unrecognizable for those who fought in World War I.  Air travel, almost unthinkable in 1865, was old news by the 1920’s.  I wonder what happened to people from this era who were change resistant?

As I near this next phase in my life, I look back and recognize how fortunate I am to be living at a particular time in the history of this planet where I can bear witness to the dramatic changes that have occurred between the close of the 20th century and the early years of the 21st century.  I am just old enough to remember Pong, and had an Atari 2600 as my first video game console.  In my lifetime, I have had a reel-to-reel music player (I can still remember the face of Johnny Mathis on the box cover), a record player, an 8-track player, a cassette player, a cd player, and a dedicated mp3 player.  In 1999 my wife and I drove across the country and camped the National Park circuit….using pay phones to communicate with home.  A year later I bought my wife her first cell phone, and signed a two-year contract with Airtouch (after a series of M and A’s the vestiges of this company are now part of Verizon).  The phone was the size of your head and had a one-line screen for numerical input.  I had a T.V. in my room for a bit (hooked up to my Commodore 64).  It was a 13-inch black and white with the VHF and UHF nobs.  In 2004 I bought my first hand held GPS receiver.  It did nothing else but give GPS coordinates. Growing up in New Jersey I was a huge NY Islanders fan.  My best friend at the time had cable, so I would go to his house to watch the games.  We would slide the cable box selector to Sports Channel (no remote).  ESPN had just recently been started, and there was only 1 channel of it (the whole world wide leader thing came much later).

We live in a world where the changes have enriched our lives in many ways.  Change does not stand still, does not take time off, and does not wait for people who are reluctant to get on board.  Change disrupts, causes pain, is disconcerting, while all the while creating new opportunities for those who embrace it.

Think back to your first cell phone.  Would you want to use it today?

Would you want your doctor to practice medicine on you in the same way it was practiced in the 1970s?

Would you like to watch T.V. on a state of the art Sony Trinitron from the mid 1980s?

Do you want your kids taught in the same way that kids have been taught for the past 125 years?

As educators, we are practicing at an amazing moment in the history of our civilization.  Never before has it been possible to personalize the experience for every student in the manner now available through the integration of technology with instruction.  The change this reality is bringing to education is difficult for many.  Every day I hear fellow professionals lament educational change for its difficulty, complexity, or the fact that it is change itself.  Education is going to look radically different in five years.  The educators that have a change adverse attitude run the high risk of marginalization or outright alienation in an era of individualized, self-paced learning.

Our nation needs great teachers; ones who aren’t afraid of change, and who teach with the passion of an entrepreneur and the creativity of an indie tech startup.  Teachers who recognize that the future will be radically different from both our past and our present, and who are willing to re-mix what they do on the fly for the betterment of their students.

Music did not stand still in the 1950s.  Communication technology did not stop evolving with the telegraph.  Medical advances did not halt with the development of the vaccine for polio.  Computer technology did not end with the release of Windows 3.0 or the first Macintosh.

Educational change, though slower to evolve initially, will not stop now that the ball is rolling down the hill and the genie is out of the bottle.

Embrace the change.  Prepare your students for the world they will live in.  They will be engaged in ways we can’t imagine and they will flourish because of it.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Leaning into the Change

An article in the January 26th edition of the Cleveland Plain Dealer once again re-iterates what those who have been following the Ohio Academic Cliff saga already know:
A) The tests and corresponding accountability measures are about to get much tougher, and
B) Results are going to plummet across the State of Ohio

Ohio's low cut scores to achieve a 'proficient' rating on the accountability tests have created a false sense of student performance for consumers of report card data (i..e. educators and parents).

When the shock of the new system takes place, the knee jerk reaction will be to blame teachers and the institution of schools for the performance woes.

What will count is how educators react to this criticism.  Planning right now for how to respond, as well as embracing educational practices that leverage student engagement, will help in equipping to survive this day of academic reckoning.

When your car goes into a skid, you know that you should steer in the opposite direction.  However, knowing is one thing.  Actually doing this when the moment happens in much tougher.

The same will be true when the new tests and accountability system come online.  We know that creating authentic, engaging experiences in the classroom (ones where students have multiple options and pathways for demonstrating mastery) will best position students to perform at high levels on whatever accountability test they take (what I like to refer to as teaching in spite of the accountability system).

The difficulty is that while we know this, the firestorm of criticism that will rain down from the sky on schools will make educators want to turn the steering wheel in the wrong direction (i.e. more test prep, more drill and kill, more whole class standardization, more 'experiences' designed to mirror the 'tests' that drain the life out of education.)

The good news is that we know what is coming, and we have time to prepare for our response.  Teaching 'in spite of' and not doubling down on the flawed test prep strategy of the past twenty years will take immense professional courage.

Keep this in mind as you ponder these two options:  As choice in education becomes more of a reality every day, students will increasingly have options as to where they want to spend their educational time.  Given the choice between a classroom where prepping for the test is the focus or engaging in authentic activities is the focus, which do you think they'll choose?

At the end of the day it is always about so much more than test scores.

Don't let the current accountability climate prevent you from teaching in ways that will allow your students to flourish in an economic climate that demands creative thinkers who are capable of producing original, creative content in the post-industrial world.

Open Badge Project Resources

The exciting part about the work to date on the PD overhaul project is discovering the fact that so much information and foundational work exists on the creation of badges.  In order to keep myself organized, and provide a breadcrumb trail for others, below is a list of the resources I'm currently leveraging.

Badges How To: Using Your Classroom Rubrics to Design a Badge System
Author: Karen Jeffrey

The resource above is part of the larger For All Systems initiative.

Mozilla Open Badge Project

One Level Deep: The Mozilla Open Badges Wiki

Two Levels Deep: M.O.B. Wiki of Badge Issuers

Badge Forge - A Tool For Creating Badges that Connect Back to Mozilla Badge Backpack

Based on work recently completed in a free-flowing brainstorm jam with @zjvv77, the following four areas will be the focus of the professional development badge project for the 2013-2014 school year:

1. F.I.P. (Formative Instructional Practices via Battelle for Kids) See a previous post that explores this pathway in more detail.

2. Technology (Creating learning pathways that support the District G.A.F.E. transition)

3. Differentiation (Building personalized online pathways that extend the current District-wide series on this topic)

4. Common Core (Identifying individualized learning pathways that utilize freely available online modules.  For example, building a learning pathway out of modules from Achieve The Core)

The goal is to build on the badge work that is already occurring in the K-12 arena and extend it to the realm of ongoing/sustained professional learning for educators.  The focus of the design work is to create a system that will be replicable in other school districts.


Thursday, January 24, 2013

Completion vs. Mastery in an Open Badge Environment


As I have been working on re-inventing a professional development model for my district based on Dan Pink's concepts of Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose, an interesting issue surrounding the tension between completion vs. mastery has arisen.

I created the sketch below to help think this issue through, using F.I.P. as an illustrative concept.

At the surface level (level 1), badges would be awarded for completion of the on-line modules themselves, indicating a basic acquired knowledge and the associated sunk cost of time with the activity.

Level Two badges could be earned non-sequentially.  For example, if you really connected with FIP module 5, you could develop a representative portfolio of work that demonstrates professional practice in this area in order to earn the badge.  You would not have to complete this level for FIP module 4 first.

Finally, a Level Three badge could only be earned through an award by an outside observer (say, an administrator, department chair, or fellow teacher who observes your practice).  This level gets at the heart of mastery and implementation of the skill in practice.  The behaviors inherent in the module, (ex. FIP 4) would have to be observed through demonstrated classroom behaviors/practices in order for the badge to be awarded.

A multi-level system such as this would allow for the acquisition of a wide variety of surface level skills, while at the same time allowing for deep integration pathways in areas of particular interest to educators.



Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Creating a Bridge to the Change

The Ohio Leadership Council has released a video on the 5 step improvement model for Teacher Based Teams (related to the Ohio Improvement Process).

The principals in my district who have seen it have each shared how they were A) impressed by the message, and B) eager to share and discuss it with their staff members.

What I liked about the video is that it summarized (in 7 1/2 succinct minutes) all of the change initiatives currently underway in Ohio and connected them in a way that made sense (with the end focus on student achievement).

As a leader at the forefront of promoting the change (and trying to figure out how to help my teachers survive and thrive through the change), the video reinforced the professional development I've been promoting, and explained how everything (FIP, SLO's, CCSS, Differentiation, etc) is aligned with basic concept of student growth for all.

If you are a leader looking for a tool to connect your staff to the change, or a teacher struggling to make sense of it all, this is a tool that should be helpful.

Ohio 5-Step Model

Saturday, January 12, 2013

Ohio Accountability Changes Update

Update 1/15
An additional change is the looming State budget and the impact it will have on education.  An interesting video from the Governors office is a first message management step in what is sure to be an interesting legislative session.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhvsrWWDw3I&feature=youtu.be

I had the good fortune yesterday to attend the BASA regional meeting in Dayton and have Michael Sawyers turn out to be the ODE speaker on the latest with HB 555.  Below is a link to a Google Folder with his powerpoint presentation, ODE talking points on 555, and the BASA powerpoint (ignore my notes scribbled in the margins).  When you download the powerpoint, be sure to view it with the notes visible, as the annotated comments for each slide appear there.

http://goo.gl/VsR33

If you have been following this closely, there wasn't a ton of new information, but there were plenty of clarifying points and directional arrows indicating what's coming next.  Below are the information pieces that fell into the 'late breaking' or 'needs action' categories (at least from my vantage point):


  • The State Board of Education (SBE) will meet Monday and Tuesday this week (1/14 - 15).  It is expected that at the close of Tuesday the SBE will appoint a five member accountability committee to work on the specific mechanics of the report card.  (Of significance is to watch for how the State Board defines the letter grades.  Currently the A and F levels are firmly identified in the law.  The level for C is identified, but the language is vague enough - "greater than 70 but no more than 80" - that there is a possibility, albeit remote, that the standard could be higher than 70.  What will be interesting to watch is what the standard for D is set at, given that F is 50 for below)
  • The major focus at the SBE meeting will be to teach the Board about HB 555, and run the members through several report card simulations based on the law in order to stimulate thinking around framing rules and policies for the new report card measures.
  • The Gap Closing Formula for Annual Measurable Objectives on the new report card will most likely look very similar to the formula that was contained in the May 2012 ESEA waiver.  (Since this will be a graded item THIS YEAR, I would examine the formula for each subgroup, plug in last year's numbers, and strategize about your plan as soon as possible).
  • For this school year, the standard to meet an indicator is 75% proficient or above.  This will change to 80% for the 2013 - 2014 school year, before being reset again when PARCC comes on board for 2014-2015. (Teachers in areas where the scores have hovered around 75% will need to know this NOW in order to begin strategizing).
  • In the Overall Value Added Progress dimension, the measurement of students in the lowest quintile will be pegged against the state average of students in this quintile.
  • There is a possibility that value added could be extended to the PARCC exams in 2016.
  • The definition for Safe Harbor (designed to provide temporary relief from the academic cliff) must determined by the SBE no later than March 31st.
  • The new report card will be electronic (the dashboard model) and interactive.  Any printouts would most likely be a 2 page summary of graded metrics, with the electronic version giving people the ability to drill down to reported measures.  Gone are the days of the 8 page printed report card.  (Districts will have to be very strategic in how they unpack the dashboard information for their public, as it appears that not all of the information will be available on the surface level).
  • A major win for Districts was the change during the legislative process from graded to reported for Prep for Success measures (College admissions test results, dual enrollment levels, industry credentials, honors diploma, AP and IB participation and scores).  These will roll out for the 2013-2014 report card.
  • The college and career ready assessment exam has the potential to be an issue (This is most likely the ACT Plan or the PSAT).  Right now it is not scheduled to come on board until 2014-2015, although it may for next year if funding and procurement issues can be worked out.  There is a feeling in the legislature that if it is paid for by the State, it should be graded (right now it is scheduled to be reported only).  The feeling of ODE (and mine as well) is that this test is diagnostic and formative in nature (it tells us where sophomores are in their CCR preparation, not where they are as an end product).  Districts need to pay attention to this and lobby hard if there is a hint it might be changed to graded in future legislation (my opinion).
  • While bits and pieces of the new report card will be coming out as work is completed, a final look at what the new version will look like should not be expected before May 2013.
  • Value Added information is currently being loaded into eTPES, and should most likely be available by 1/19.

Rethinking Honors and Weighted Grades

A central tenant of the common core state standards is an increase in rigor and expectations for all students.  If college and career readiness are truly synonymous terms; all students must therefore be exposed to the same high quality curriculum that prepares for remediation free coursework experiences at post-secondary institutions.  Where then, does an honors section fit in with this model?

The traditional knock on honors is that students end up doing more 'work' to justify the course designation and the weight often associated with the grade.  Teachers feel the pressure to make the experience rigorous, and sometimes have trouble finding the balance between quality (rigor) of assignments versus quantity (extra because you're in honors and you should be able to handle it).  With the raising of standards and expectations for all students, is Honors at risk for becoming marginalized or obsolete?

Another knock on Honors courses and students is the lack of motivation and solid work ethic for many.  Once in the class, with the knowledge that the weight will be granted no matter what, many students often settle for a certain grade and do not stretch themselves to their full potential.  The lack of an AP exam at the end of the course or other such incentive to work diligently throughout the year often allows students to slip into coast mode.

As the PARCC assessments get closer, what if schools were able to sieze this moment to radically re-think how honors designations are earned by students.  Instead of having the title 'Honors' bestowed upon you at the beginning of the year because you just happened to be in the class, what would happen if you had to work for the designation, and it could only be earned by your performance on the PARCC assessment?

As the flipped classroom, blended learning, and personalized learning pathways become more prevalent in courses, students in collegiate level classes will have opportunities to learn and grow to their highest potential.  So, if in a given week a student demonstrates mastery of a certain concept, that particular student can work on extension activities designed to enrich and extend learning and understanding.  These pathways can be tied to authentic, real world applications of the concepts, which will prepare students to apply the material in meaningful ways.

The question is, how do you sell this as something other than 'more work' or a penalty for being smart? The key is to leverage the PARCC assessments themselves.  Early indications are that the assessments will be much more rigorous than the current Ohio Graduation Tests.  The personalized pathways that students would invest time in could be sold as a means to prepare to excel on the PARCC assessments. The payoff for this extra work/initiative would be an honors GPA add-on for only the highest scorers.

The system would work like this.  Every student who earns a four (the minimum benchmark score to be considered at a remediation free level) would receive a GPA weight add on of .01, and those who score a 5 would receive a weight add on of .02.  Instead of giving the weight away at the front end merely for enrolling in the class, students would have the incentive to prepare diligently throughout the year in order to have a chance to truly EARN the add-on weight.  This would solve the problem of rigor at both the collegiate and the honors level, because the course is now as rigorous as you want it to be, based on your individual strengths and motivations.  It also takes a ton of pressure off of the teacher, because it de-couples the grade earned in the class from the associated credit and the weight.  The student alone controls the outcome, based on performance, as opposed to the games that get played with assignments and grades currently in honors sections where the weight is already pre-supposed.