Curriculum Leadership Institute

Pathways to School Improvement

common assessments

A Reflection on “What Works” from a Veteran Consultant

by

Click here for a printer-friendly version.

As I reflect on the past 25 years or so of working directly with school districts of various sizes, I debated my last topic for an E-Hint.  A staff colleague asked, “In your work, what have been the most important things districts can do to change school culture through curriculum development, instructional planning, and local assessment development?” So, I created this list of actions that I feel lead to the most significant impact for districts implementing the model.  I daresay that these actions would lead to positive effects within any school district.  They have led to intense study of best practice through research, consistent improvement of student learning, and powerful conversations between and among teachers, administrators, the board of education, and community members.

To achieve significant results, a district must establish:

  1. a “district” mindset for the governance of curriculum, instruction, and assessment by a representative group of teachers, administrators, board, and local stakeholders.  
    • This district mindset demands that members put aside their titles and their individualism to make decisions that will positively benefit the school district.
    • District personnel bring their expertise to the table, but the stakeholders are free to discuss as equal participants in the decision-making steps involved. 
  2. a climate of accountability for teachers and students along with district-level and building-level leadership. 
    • As with many action decisions, if no one is checking, it is natural to do what is “easier” when stress and deadlines encroach on planning.  Accountability structures lead to productive actions for the entire school staff and foster a sense of daily accountability for students.
  3. a Long-Range Plan to outline timeframes for curriculum development, instructional planning, and local assessment development.  
    • Teachers and teacher teams will not have to wonder when changes are to be made to a curriculum, leading to instructional planning adjustments, assessment revisions, and the potential for new resources.   
    • Administrators can budget time and finances,  for upcoming needs in advance.
  4. district-wide parameters for grading policies that positively impact student learning.  
    • Stakeholders should have opportunities for research and dialogue to identify and implement best practice grading solutions regarding the why and how students are evaluated for their performance.
    • Teachers’ closely held beliefs about grading are often shared while decisions are made about what scores are “fair” to include and how to incorporate the scores into a “grade” for students.
    • An environment of equity and fairness results from the discussions.
  5. a common, local curriculum aligned to standards allows teachers of the same grade level or course opportunities to have planning conversations.
    • Teachers collaborate to develop instructional plans with common outcome targets, leading to using all teachers’ expertise of the same grade level in each classroom.  Teachers learn from each other in pursuit of common goals.
    • The common, local curriculum establishes the Tier One curriculum on which to base intervention plans.
  6. common assessments with descriptions of defined performance levels.
    • Teachers carefully align local assessments to make sure they are assessing the established curriculum.
    • Subjectivity is removed from grading as much as is possible.
    • Results are shared within the grade level or courses to determine best instruction practices on a specific curricular goal and identify the most effective instructional strategies.
    • Teachers can implement interventions in a timely manner.  
    • Communication regarding student progress can be more specific and include celebrations or clear steps for improvement.  
  7. a seamless progression of content and skills in each subject area for efficient instruction.
    • There is a clear “roadmap” of the students’ journey of content and skills.
    • Teachers can identify where or when students may have experienced a loss of successful learning.  
    • Teachers can rely on the learning in previous grade levels to provide the basis for new learning expectations.

These strategies or steps to improve curriculum, instruction, and assessment alignment lead to better communication between and among all stakeholders and provide stability throughout a school district. While these actions would lead to positive effects within any school district, it is often impossible to maintain the priority without a district-mandated structure explicitly designed to require discussion. 

3 Ways to Avoid the Dreaded “Teacher Lottery”

by

We’ve all heard it. Kids talking about their schedules like this, “Yes! I’m going to get an A in math this year because Ms. So-and-so is so easy!” Or, “Dangit, science is going to be so hard. I got Mr. Tough-stuff, and he doesn’t let anything slide.” As teachers, you never want to be considered the easy teacher, but you also don’t want to be the hard teacher that the students dread. But, what if there was no easy teacher or hard teacher, and all learning environments were equally fair? Here are three ways to even the playing field for your students so that the “teacher lottery” becomes less varied.

Set Clear Curricular Expectations

First things first, standards are not curriculum, and neither is a textbook! Depending on the state and content area, some standards are written to be very broad and general. Some are written for a grade band rather than a specific grade level. In many cases, a standard can be interpreted differently by different teachers. Additionally, standards are not organized into teachable units and may not include a level of emphasis or rigor. Textbooks, on the other hand, may include levels of emphasis and rigor, but may not reflect local priorities and may have more lessons than can be taught in one school year. In my Intro to Business class for example, my textbook included 28 chapters. But in any given year, I could only get through 13 of them with my students. The textbook that my school had adopted for that class included more than twice the amount information that I could teach my students.

The solution to both of these issues, is to develop a local curriculum that is organized into teachable units made up of learning targets that are written clearly (so all teachers interpret them the same way), are measurable (avoid verbs like understand, learn, etc.), and is appropriate for the amount of time that you have with your students. This way, the expectations are clear for both teachers and students.

Make End-of-Unit Assessments Common

When all teachers for the same course are using the same assessment to determine success, students are held to the same expectations. To further ensure that teachers are administering the common assessment fairly, include a set of “administration guidelines” as a cover sheet. Information that should be clarified in the Administration Guidelines includes:

  • the amount of time a student is allowed to complete the assessment (must the assessment be completed within a single class period so students cannot discuss answers when they gather after class?),
  • any materials they are allowed (are math students permitted to use a calculator, or language arts students a dictionary?),
  • the amount of assistance a teacher is allowed to give when a student has a question (may a teacher explain the definition of a word, or clarify directions?),
  • and the criteria for successful completion.

Please note that the Administration Guidelines as explained above are meant for general education students that are not on IEPs. Any student with an IEP must be given the modifications that are outlined within their IEP. Similarly, when administering common assessments to ELL students, consult their ELL teacher to determine appropriate accommodations.

Collaborate as a grade-level team

The big idea for all curriculum and assessment work is to improve classroom practices. By collaborating with your grade-level team, you’re able to share what worked and what didn’t. So, if something didn’t work in your lesson, ask a colleague who saw success to share what strategies they used. It’s OK to be vulnerable, and in fact, improving your teaching depends on it. Look for areas that you can improve and help those that can use your help to find more success in their classroom.

Students have enough to deal with without having to worry about which teacher they’re going to have. It will take a bit of work up front to complete the steps outlined above, but your school will be better for it. Your school doesn’t need easy teachers or hard teachers, they need good teachers.

Need some help with these things? Let us know!