Applying the Instructional Model: Part 3

Assessment. In my mind, always synonymous with test. Multiple-choice test. Icky, yucky, waste of time test. But my mind has been changed. This week, I truly learned the difference between formative and summative assessments in the simplest of ways: 

• formative = for learning
• summative = of learning

Because I have often held the viewpoint that summative assessments are standardized, I can honestly say that I did not realize how much summative assessment I have been using in my class when I thought I was using more formative assessment. And I am a more than a bit disappointed in myself because I thought I was a better teacher than that. 

My first lesson of the marking period was winter break haikus. I did not share the art of haiku with my students. I did not show them examples of wonderful poems. I showed them the format, then told them to write. Yes, I helped them along the way - if they made it to me before the bell rang. So some students got immediate feedback. Others, however, got no feedback. Bad, Ms. Foti! 

Then I had them write an acrostic to fill up a day when I was going to be out. No formative assessment for understanding. Just an assignment to turn in, thereby becoming a summative assessment of the method. Bad, Ms. Foti!

Rewriting a passage from "Flowers for Algernon"... three homework writing assignments... compound sentences... a reading passage reflection... a thinking map... All summative. None of these assignments have been for the learning. They have been of the learning. I am disappointed in me. I am sure I am doing some informal formative assessing, but based on what I have learned this week, I am far from where I need to be. 

This week, I read that we, as teachers, have spent a great deal of time focusing on the craft of teaching in recent years, and I know that I definitely have, but we, as teachers, have not spent as much time focusing on the students' learning. Time to shift thinking once and for all. Good, Ms. Foti. 

Applying the Instructional Model: Part 2

I have spent the past few hours reading from two different books:

There is a great deal of crossover between the two, and my mind is racing with more information and ideas than I can keep up with - unless I start writing some things down, of course. 

One of my weak areas is student self-assessment. I never feel like I have any very good ideas for this, but I ran across one in tonight's reading. We write learning logs on occasion, but the kids never really figure out what I want them to write about or how to write it (guess this is another weakness in my explicit teaching). 

In Classroom Assessment, there are briefs from teachers about how they have applied the methods within. One teacher, Kristen Gillespie, has put together a method of self-assessment that I can definitely work with and will be applying next week. 

I will be hanging three poster boards up on the wall:  

Each student will receive a sticky note with each class receiving a different color. Rather than putting their names on the notes like Gillespie does, I am going to have them draw a symbol that represents them on the front and put their name on the back. As we move through a lesson, the students will post and/or move the notes, allowing me to assess their learning and modify my teaching as needed. 

I believe that if my district is going to pay for this training, it is my responsibility to study the material and apply it. I am jumping in head first. 

As always, more to come...

The penny gallery

So, to make myself feel better about Tuesday's penny disaster, I had my kids draw the pennies Wednesday. I used it to show that sometimes we need to go back, look at things, and get more information to do a better job. We discussed, in great detail, what we needed to do in order to have drawn perfect pennies the first time, and then applied it to the inference work we were doing for the day. Pretty insightful. 

I keep waiting for a worse penny than mine, but no so luck. They all at least knew the president on the penny was Abraham Lincoln!

Applying the Instructional Model: Part 1

Tomorrow I head to my second day of training for the instructional model pilot program that my district is adopting. After one day, however, I was already able to apply the information that I learned.

One of the things we discussed is called Deconstructing a Content Standard. Essentially, the goal is to break down the standard into smaller pieces to determine what the students need to know. The four pieces are knowledge (understanding), reasoning (thought), skill (something the student does that can be seen by the teacher), and product (the work made). The process also reveals the steps in scaffolding instruction. 

I already knew that I needed to go back and reteach an inference assignment because when I started grading them, I realized that there was a flaw in my teaching process. But where? To figure this out, I deconstructed:

Looking at the knowledge targets, I was able to conclude that my students know the meaning of inference and textual evidence. They can speak these definitions back to me (this is a skill target), and with a bit of prompting, can also use the Total Physical Response routine I taught them to remember the definition of inference. Two targets eliminated. 

Reasoning. Yes, my students can create inferences. We discuss them all the time. Target eliminated. 

Product. When I looked at the standard, I realized that I had not focused on writing a  complex inference. I was not transferring the information we discuss into writing them clearly and specifically. With this information, I planned accordingly for reteaching.

I started by showing a student example from the original assignment. The kids had to copy down a specific quote from "Flowers for Algernon" and make an inference about Charlie based on that information. We broke the student response into pieces, making sure everything fit and looking for areas that needed improvement. We then took that information and rewrote a new, more precise inference. 

As we discussed, we also created a checklist of information for self-analysis (another piece of the instructional model): 

This is an example of the original work:

And this is an example of what the work looked like after it was rewritten:

To some extent, this process almost seemed a bit DUH! It is logical, and I already knew all those pieces and steps in my head. Writing them down and analyzing them, however, let me see them in a new light. 

I'm anxious to head back to training tomorrow. I have only learned two out of five chunks of information. I am ready to see what I can do with the rest. 

Can YOU draw a penny without looking?

Today was day one of my Instructional Model Pilot Program training. We are using Classroom Assessment for Student Learning from the Pearson Assessment Training Institute as a guide (sorry for the Amazon link; it's not posted with detail on Barnes & Noble). 

Although I will share more as we go along with this process, I want to reflect on one activity I participated in. Ken Mattingly, our facilitator for today's journey, instructed us to draw the face of a penny without looking at one. Simple enough. I'm forty years old. I know what a penny looks like...?

I got the circle part. But then I couldn't remember which president was on the penny, nor could I remember which way he faced. I knew there were some words but drew a blank about what they were. I had to look at my friend's sketch to even remember that there is a year on all coins (my students taught me that TEACHING and CHEATING have the same letters, so my actions were completely acceptable). How did I not know what a penny looked like?

Now, I'm no artist, but it is really that bad? (cough-cough, wink-wink)

Despite my belief that this lesson was designed to humiliate the non-artistic in the room, there actually was a bigger purpose: without preparation and a clear target and purpose, learners are often left stumped and confused. (more on this in the future)

For now, I am taking away a bigger lesson. Tomorrow, I will be making fun of my students using this activity. I can't wait!

"Flowers for Algernon" - Double-Bubble Thinking Map

My class is up to the last progress report in "Flowers for Algernon." Before we move on to Charlie's downfall, we are stopping to compare and contrast his character pre- and post-surgery using a Double Bubble Thinking Map (a glorified Venn diagram for those of you unfamiliar with these). 

Today, the kids are working in groups on planning. I counted off to put them in groups, something I rarely do. I decided they needed some mixing up. For the most part, it has worked. I have only had one group so far that did not want to get anything done. 

The single bubbles are for the categories: pre-surgery and post-surgery. This is the foundation of the work the kids are doing. 

The box is called a Frame of Reference. Within the F.O.R., the kids must include the title of the story and the page numbers as a manner of citation. They also have to include two quotes that describe Charlie - one prior to the surgery and one after. Regardless of how many times we cover over what a quote is and the proper punctuation, they do not get it. Guaranteed, I will get final copies with mistakes. 

The bubbles in the middle, D, E, and F, are for similarities: What about Charlie stays the same before and after the surgery? I am getting questions like, "Is it okay to say Charlie is a boy before and after?" Nothing like deep thinking on a Monday morning. 

The outside bubbles are for the contrasts. Unlike a Venn diagram, the contrasts must connect together. For example, for 1a, I can say that Charlie had an IQ of 68. For 1b, I would then say that Charlie's IQ was above 200. This pairing doesn't always work with a story, but for "Flowers," it does. 

My model is color-coded and labeled to help my ELLs(and probably the rest of them) understand the pieces that fit together. When my students make their final poster board copies, they are required to color-code theirs as well. 

The secret agenda: Open House. At this level, I rarely have much to show, especially since we do so much on the computer. I am going to hang these up for parents to view. It's always nice to have something to show. 

Examples to come. 

Fun Friday: Playing with our new Ipads

As part of the Texas Literacy Initiative, my school received two carts of brand new Ipads. The carts had been in my room for a few days, but my students did not notice. They were a bit surprised when I said we were going to be getting them out. Then they were a bit disappointed when I said we were going to be playing word games. 

Despite their initial thinking, the word games were a hit. I gave them a list of apps to choose from, and each class seemed to have its own favorite. I expected groans, and lots of this is boring. Instead, I saw students working together to figure things out. They asked questions when they were stuck. They told me they learned things. I was really impressed, and I am excited to do this again. 

The choices (we used the free versions of all apps):

• RhymieStymie - determine a set of synonyms that rhyme together
• This is to That - solve analogies
• Get+Together - figure out compound words based on clues and pictures (this one was really good for my ELLS)
• Grading Game - find all of the errors in a paper or be fired
• Idiom Stories - What does the idiom mean? (another good one for my ELLs)
• Word Stack - put together words by association