A few thoughts
concerning student improvement and performance came to me as I was listening to
a presentation by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education (DESE) concerning the implementation of the new teacher evaluation
system. Knowing that this new system
measures teacher performance based on student progress is coupled with the
issue of just how to measure that progress, I became curious as to what is both
“in it for” and required of students throughout this process? I found it difficult to juxtapose with the
fact that it is being implemented concurrently with the Massachusetts State
Common Core (MCSS). Surely, as schools are focusing on literacy and higher
order thinking skills as they implement the Common Core, we all need to lay out
a plan delineating not just how to measure what, but the supports needed by
students to reach these expectations as they transition from the old to new
curriculum
To fully disclose my
position, I am currently writing my dissertation on the teaching and
acquisition of thinking skills; specifically those required for the discipline
of History. Therefore, my main concern
was how we support instructors in the teaching of essential, often discreet
thinking skills when they are concerned about covering standards and being
evaluated upon their progress in doing so.
Clearly there is plenty of responsibility to be shared. Districts must support administrators,
administrators must support teachers, parents must support students, and students
must take responsibility.
The Foundation of
Critical Thinking (2011) asserts that the most effective way to study and learn
any subject is to practice what Gardner (2007) terms “disciplinary
thinking.” Furthermore they state that
if students are to become “master students,” they need to practice the
following list of behaviors:
·
“raise vital questions and problems within it…
·
gather and assess information…
·
come to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions…
·
adopt the point of view of the discipline…
·
communicate effectively with others using the language of the
discipline and that of educated public discourse
·
relate what one is learning in the subject to other subjects and
to what is significant in human life” (Critical Thinking 2011, p. 1)
These behaviors are
then supported by a comprehensive list of 18 ideas for students to internalize.
This coupled with an understanding that all disciplines in school possess common
intellectual structures (Paul and Elder 2001) will improve students’ ability to
think. In fact, the following statement
made in Paul & Elder’s (2001) guide should be examined as we move forward
in the consideration of new teacher evaluations and learning requirements. “It’s [the guide] goal is to foster lifelong
learning and the traditional ideal of a liberally educated mind: a mind that
questions, probes, and masters a variety of forms of knowledge, through command
of itself, intellectual perseverance, and the tools of learning.” (p. 1)
While I
personally wholeheartedly support the ideas put forth by Dr. Paul and Dr. Elder
(they are part of my dissertation), I cannot help but read that sentence and
wonder how we, as educators, are supporting its realization. By way of example, the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts is now revamping the tool for teacher evaluation. Teachers will now be evaluated based on the
amount of progress as student achieves and what they are personally doing to
affect its increase. This is occurring
at the same time schools across the state are scrambling to implement the
Common Core that focuses on literacy and specific College and Career Readiness
skills. The problem you ask?
· The Massachusetts
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has given no clear direction
as to how the progress teachers must produce is measured.
· The Common Core
Standards instruct teachers to focus on literacy and college and career
readiness standards.
· Teachers are still held
to the expectations of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS).
· While teachers struggle
to improve their practice, less is being expected from students in the way of
taking responsibility for their education.
· There is a growing
attempt to measure everything quantitatively, when most of the important growth
is qualitative.
Does
anyone else see a problem with not only holding all but the most important
group responsible for students’ education, but also giving unclear dictates as
to on what that education should be focused?
Yes,
students should be taught and yes, there should be high expectations.
Yes,
teachers must continue to improve and support students in their education.
..however, we all need to remember that for this all to be successful (however “this”
is measured) students must be responsible for their own learning.
The quandary is this:
Teachers
are being told they will be measured on the growth of students in areas that
the Common Core is de-emphasizing. Therefore they are expected to teach material
that does not prepare students to produce the data that is being quantitatively
measured to determine effectiveness. So
much of what students should be and are learning may only be assessed
qualitatively through detailed narratives that explain the progression of
students ability to think, problem solve, be creative, and act as productive
citizens.
My opinion is this:
We
(educators and parents alike) need to help our students learn to think by
supporting their efforts and showing them the way. We (educators and government) need to
underscore the importance of qualitative data and its analysis when determining
the effectiveness of teachers, programs and schools. For years we have been measuring ourselves
against other nations on assessments that compare apples to oranges. This makes perfect political sense, but loses
its luster when examining the ways in which it compromises student growth. Yes we need to stay globally competitive to
ensure a bright future for our students.
The irony is that in an effort to take the lead, we are eliminating the
very aspects that put us there for so many years; the fostering of creativity,
innovation, the ability to solve problems, and acting as respectful,
responsible citizens.
Sources consulted for
this post:
Gardner, H. (2007). Five minds for the future. Boston,
Mass., Harvard Business School Press.
Paul , R., & Elder, L. (n.d.). How
to study and learn (part one). Retrieved from
http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/how-to-study-and-learn-part-one/513
No comments:
Post a Comment