A view from another David

Edmonton Journal's David Staples has been writing about 

Grade inflation and flex time harm education, high school teacher warns

and

Alberta schools are no longer the best

 and most recently, 

Students ‘cheated’ by way math is taught, say educators and parents

If you read all these articles, you will notice one important commonality...Staples refuses to write about the "other side" of the story.  Thus I offer a view from another David.

I invite you to read his articles to see one side, and then read below to see the other.

First, Staples wrote:

It’s common for students to get much higher marks in their classroom than they get on their diploma exams...the number of EPSB students who have been graded as “excellent” or “acceptable” on provincewide diploma exams has dropped by 1.9 per cent. In the classroom, however, the number who have been graded “excellent” or “acceptable” has gone up by seven per cent.

He creates an idea that this should not be the norm and the teacher mark should be the same on the diploma.  This is great in theory, but before you nod your head I ask you to remember some minor details: 

• The teacher spends almost 5 months with your child, while the diploma spends 3 hours.  
• The teacher has met, talked, and learned about the interests of your child, while the diploma was made in an office by people who have, most likely, never met your child.  
• Your child is allowed to use real word devices, such as Dictionaries, Apps, Blogs, Web Articles, etc, in the classroom, while the diploma creates a false sense that knowledge is only valuable if you can memorize it, not apply it.
• Lastly, because Staples writes about the Math diploma, the teacher gives various types of questions, in various formats, in various ways to your child, while the diploma only asks Multiple Choice and Numerical Response.

Now I ask, which mark should have more merit?  I pose a different problem... Why is the diploma mark lower than the mark given by the teacher?  Isn't it time we change our standardized assessment strategies? 

Next, Staples writes:

 Alberta students used to be ranked at the top of the world academically, but they are sliding...In 2000, Alberta ranked top worldwide in reading, third overall in science and math. Our teachers and curriculum were top notch and our accountability, through provincial exams, was state-of-the-art....Since then, however, Alberta has steadily dropped. This week when the 2012 PISA results came out, we ranked 11th in math, fifth in reading and fourth in science...

First, I don't believe we can put our faith in a two-hour exam, as my arguments from above still stand, however lets go beyond that.  

Staples will have you believe that this drop is due to the fact that the math curriculum has changed, and even that we need better teachers in the classrooms to be educating your child.  When I read this, I remember back to my Science class when we learned about constant, dependent, and independent variables.

Before we go witch hunting on the teachers, lets remember that these teachers are the same ones who were instructing in 2000.  Unless I am unaware, the graduation requirements to become a teacher in 2000 are the same as they are now.   Thus, teachers would be the constant variable in this. Now that we can't blame teachers, we can ask what changed?

Sure the math curriculum changed, but was there more?  Class sizes over the last year have also increased, funding of AISI projects have been reduced to 0.  I don't understand how if more than one thing has changed (independent variables), how can we point our finger to one of them and ignore the rest? 

My last debate comes from the fact that Staples will have you believe that because we don't teach memorization of math facts students won't understand math.

The reality is that being told number facts, and forced to regurgitate these facts, will not create an environment which is conducive to deeper learning.  The best way a student can understand, not just recite, mathematics is through discovering the facts on their own.  For some, this discovery process can take seconds, while for others it may take an entire class.  The role the teacher plays in this is by acting as a tour guide.  By keeping the students on the “path” towards the discovery, it will ensure that all students create their own individual, and innovative, techniques in learning mathematics. 

I often ask myself, which skills do I want for my own children?  Do I want them to be taught the skills to memorize, and ultimately be able to complete algorithmic tasks, or the ability to create and design which will lead them down a road towards a career with heuristic tasks?  

The reality is that the age old saying that “Practice makes perfect”, does not apply to deep learning in mathematics.  Traditionally, students have been given worksheets which have multiplication facts on them and are given a strict time limit to complete these (named Mad Minutes), but in actuality the mark given on these “Mad” sheets really does not indicate to anyone as to knowledge of the student writing them.  

The weak students truly suffer the most from this model of proficiency-driven, because they find these tasks dull, repetitive, and entirely unusable in the world outside the walls of the classroom.  I would agree that sometimes, knowing facts as the days of the week are important, but these facts should be a by-product of use and application not out of necessity.  

Another fact is, by spending time forcing these facts to be memorized is truly interfering with a child’s innovative and creative ability.  Most of these worksheets require low level thinking and usually can lock the thought process of a student into understanding simple algorithms.  Eleanor Duckworth summed it up the best, 

“Knowing the right answer requires no decisions, carries no risk, and makes no demands.  It is automatic.  It is thoughtless.” 

Is this the environment in which math students should be learning? 

The new math curriculum believes, among many things, that:

·         Students learn by attaching meaning to what they do, and they need to construct their own meaning of mathematics.

·         Students need to explore problem-solving situations in order to develop personal strategies and become mathematically literate. They must realize that it is acceptable to solve problems in a variety of ways and that a variety of solutions may be acceptable.

·         Curiosity about mathematics is fostered when children are engaged in, and talking about, such activities as comparing quantities, searching for patterns, sorting objects, ordering objects,  creating designs and building with blocks

I end with a link to a petition asking the Edmonton Journal to stop writing one sided, bias, articles, and until they do so you agree to stop reading their paper.

STOP WRITING BIAS EDUCATIONAL REPORTS

Henry Ford and Education

I would like to relate this to Education.  Over the last eight years, I have spent hours trying to create "better tests" (faster horses).  In the last two years, I started to question "Is there a limitation to these tests?"

Just like horses, you can create better tests, but there will always be limitations as to what you can do with these assessments.  Whether it is FOR or OF learning, tests, by their design, they can only give us a snapshot as to what a child can do.  As well, most tests limit the amount of knowledge a child can demonstrate to the knowledge of the test creator.

I often wonder, what if educators were like Henry Ford, and instead of making better tests they started working on something different?

Working with this question for quite some time, I have assessed students quite drastically in my class.  I refused to make "faster horses" and instead started working on "a car" for assessment.

First, I personalized assessment in my classes.
Next, I abolished grades in some classes.
Lastly, I even made my final exam a learning experience.

For a more in depth look, you can read through the links, for a quick snapshot here is what I have changed..

• Students should be able to learn, and be assessed, at their own pace.
• Students should be able to be assessed, retaught, and reassessed as many times as needed.
• A multiple choice, numerical response, and written response test does not allow for as much creativity as an open ended, performance based assessment could.
• Student choice, in how to demonstrate their knowledge, can allow students to bring their interests and passions into their own learning.
• Students are more proud of work that is too large to fit on the fridge.

Were there problems with the first ford? Of course!  I do not think that my approach is the BEST, and just as a car still has limitations, so does this new approach towards assessment.  Just like a car and horse, my approach has the same goals as traditional assessments; to teach and assess students.  The difference...students in my class enjoy this new approach, and when I survey them at the end of each course 99% of them prefer this new assessment strategy compared to traditional assessments.

This journey has required me to ponder, as Henry Ford did, if we continue to think in the same mindset as all the people before us, all we will ever have is something a little quicker.  However, if we realize that our past knowledge may be holding us back, then we may create something more effective and efficient than we could ever imagine.

Lastly, as you read this I will leave you with another Henry Ford quote...

WHETHER YOU THINK YOU CAN OR YOU THINK YOU CAN'T-YOU'RE RIGHT- Henry Ford

My new Final Exam

Over the past years I have been trying to make the end of my courses a celebration not a date students dread.  I say that because, I have seen students cry, stress, and create all sorts of excuses, whenever I brought up their "30% final Exam".

This year, I have taken an entirely different approach.  Instead of a 30% exam, which consists of one part multiple choice, one part numerical response, and one part written, I have changed it to the following:

1 part entirely written worth 15%, and a presentation worth 15%.  In our school, there are certain criteria for which a student can exempt a final exam.  In my course I have made the presentation mandatory, and a student can only exempt the written portion.

How does the presentation work?

Students get the following BIG ROCK outcomes of my course:

Students are then required to create a presentation around these outcomes.

What does it have look like?  How long should it be? How many questions should they have? Does it have to have videos? 

The answers to all these are "Up to the student!"

Now, since I have over 40 calculus students, I do not have time to watch 40+ presentations, so I do allow students to collaborate in groups of up to 3.  HOWEVER THEY DO NOT GET GROUP MARKS.

During the presentations I ask questions and depending on the individual answers I differientate the assessment mark for each individual student. 

The presentations usually take 40-60 min in length with disucssions, questions, and even some learning occuring.

My students no longer dread the final and one even told me

"Mr. Martin I spent more time creating my presentation then I did preparing for my diploma in my other course, which is worth 50% of my mark"

Personalized assessment

First, I want to make clear what my assumptions are about assessment.

• Each student learns at a different pace
• There should be no punitive action taken against a student who learns slower.
• Students are allowed as many times as they want to demonstrate learning.

Also, you must know of my story around abolishing grading in my calculus class.

Currently we are three quarters through the course and running out of outcomes to assess and master.  This week I have tried something different.  Personalized assessment!

Each student is given a test but it is drastically different than anything I ever given before.  On the front page, there are questions which assess their knowledge of an outcome we have been working on for a week.  On the next pages, each student's exam is different.

On some, the pages are blank.  These are for the students whom have already demonstrated understanding of all the outcomes up to this point.  The cool part is that these students can be enriched with an activity, as they will most likely finish the test first.  For the rest, their pages are filled with questions on the outcomes they have yet to demonstrate understanding of. (Up to a maximum of 2)

Example:  Susie hasn't demonstrated understanding of outcome 5 and 7 and therefore on her pages, there are questions around outcomes 5 and 7.  Jason, on the other hand, has demonstrated these two outcomes but has missed outcomes 1 and 6.  Consequently, on his test there are questions around outcomes 1 and 6.

Next, I will assess this test under the following scenarios.

1. It will be summative if the student correctly demonstrates all parts of the test. 
2. It will be part summative and part formative for those who can only demonstrate learning of certain outcomes. 
3. It will be entirely formative if a student can't demonstrate any understanding of any outcomes.

If I followed the philosophy that all assessment should be common, then all students would be writing a test around outcomes 1-10, which would take longer than a period, and be a complete waste of time for those who have already demonstrated learning.

Is this a lot of work?

Yes! However, it is worth it when I can say that this test is more about the needs of my students than it is to generate another "mark" in my gradebook.

We all decide the weighting of our standardized exams.

In Alberta, our Grade 12 diplomas are weighted at 50% and the teacher awarded mark is weighted at 50% mark...on a child's transcript.  Now I will make a case that, even though the government has decided this, it is truly up to each stakeholder in education who determines how much this weighting truly is.

First off, the teachers:

It is up to the individual teacher how much the diploma is weighted in your teaching, your assessment, and your daily dealings with the students.  I have seen anywhere from 0%-100%.

What does 100% look like?

Well, very simple.  This classroom teacher puts emphasis on the same outcomes, which are emphasized on the diploma.  This teacher will give only multiple choice exams, as this is the style the diploma is.  The questions used on these assessments are mainly previously used diploma questions, identical to released items from the government, and only questions that will assist the child write the diploma.  This classroom is designed around the "competitive" nature of education.

What does 0% look like?

Again, very simple.  This teacher puts emphasis on the outcomes which will assist them in the next level of the course, or in life.  (Of course, both teachers could have overlap on some outcomes).  The assessments are mainly performance based or written.  The questions asked are created in a way that students can be creative in the solving of the problem, and the answer does not need to be a specific number to be correct.  This classroom is designed around the "collaborative" approach to education.

Lastly, you could have a a hybrid of these approaches in the classroom.

Next, Post Secondaries:

What does 100% look like?

Well these simply ignore the assessment of the classroom teacher and simply use the diplomas as their entrance requirement.

What does 0% look like?

We look to, University of Saskatchewan, which ONLY looks at the teacher assessment if a students mark on the diploma is less than the teacher awarded mark.  (Good Job U of S!)

Third, we have Parents and outside School:

What does 100% look like? 

We have things like the Fraser Institute which ranks schools districts based on standardized tests.  The Fraser Institute ignores the make up of the classes, the teacher's assessment, and only judges the quality of education based on how well the students do on a standardized exam.

There are also people in the public, who hold teachers accountable by the marks the students get on a standardized exam.

What does 0% look like?

We look to Finland, who has exchanged the "accountability" with "responsibility".  There are parents who ignore the mark their children get on a diploma, and are more concerned with "How much does my child enjoy going to school?"

As you can see, it is up to the individual person to determine how much the diploma is worth.