Curriculum Leadership Institute

Pathways to School Improvement

COVID-19

Now is the Time to Strengthen Community and Parental Connections

by

Adult hands in to represent a team
Click here for a printer-friendly version.

For twenty years America’s public schools have focused on complying with external standards. Most of those standards have been written by, or in cooperation with, state and federal governments. Accrediting bodies have also come up with standards.

In the early years of the standards movement the mandates or strong recommendations were not as well designed or worded as they are now. And they changed regularly, often confusing school leaders and teachers.

Reasons behind the standards movement were associated with an attempt to make schools more efficient, less expensive, and more accountable. Accountability was determined through the development and use of high stakes tests. Test results were recorded on massive data bases and used to make decisions about funding. And to compare school districts with each other. 

That movement may have had good intentions.  It possibly improved the quality of some school programs. But it also tended to interfere with the American tradition of building strong connections between and among schools, parents, and community patrons.

Local networking, so much a hallmark of American education, became overwhelmed with externally developed and required strategies to upgrade learning quality. 

Now this nation is besieged by the Coronavirus Pandemic, an event that is changing the nation in many ways. Especially schools and colleges. Ways of doing things in the past seem hopelessly mired down.

The experience tells us much about ourselves and the institutions we revere.

Parents who once accepted the value of standards and high stakes tests are now in homes with children struggling to learn via an internet platform or some other kind of virtual connection. They can see what their children are doing or not doing.

They see the frustrations of both students and teachers as they struggle with everything from poor internet connections, to maneuvering through a lesson. They feel the frustration of students, either their own or others, who have difficulty understanding concepts or developing basic skills.

Far too many of those parents, as grateful as they are to teachers who try so hard, have concluded that this COVID era is when effective education has been put on hold. A warp in time that can only be repaired when everything “gets back to normal.”

But the question is, “What is the future normal going to look like?”

The Curriculum Leadership Institute has long advocated strong communication between and among local school stakeholders. Board members are fully involved or informed about everything being done to upgrade curriculum and instruction. Some of them serve on curriculum councils, along with selected others in the community.

All meetings of the professional staff are open to parents and community members, who sometimes participate in subject area committee meetings. Districts are encouraged to make parents and patrons aware of all actions taken to modify curriculum, instruction, assessment, and other matters relevant to the academic program.

Many client districts sponsor hard copy or online newsletters that explain the improvement processes they are undertaking. Some have a close and positive working relationship with the local media. They sponsor excellent web pages that describe what is being done in substantive terms.

“Substantive” means those districts share curriculum information, and the techniques they are using to ensure students succeed as much as possible even in these difficult times.  They share documents like grade level and/or subject area curricula, that include clearly written “purpose” or mastery statements for EACH subject being taught. Under each purpose statement are listed unit outcomes.

Because both purpose (mastery) statements and unit outcomes are written using measurable verbs and specific content fields, parents can more fully participate as “guide on the side” teaching assistants. They can do that because what is being taught to mastery is not just “stuff to be covered.” A verb such as “describe” tells parents their student must articulate something orally or in writing, and a content field like “how a hypothesis is developed” means listing or even more detailed information as shown in an entire unit outcome.

Teachers and parents, working together, are continually testing students FORMATIVELY. That is a topic for another E-Hint, but the key idea is that ongoing assessment is built on a trusting working relationship between teachers and parents. And no longer dependent solely on high stakes tests and other forms of summative measurement of learning.

Keeping Students Engaged Systematically Using the Instructional Planning Resource

by

Enter button on keyboard is replaced with Learning button in green
Click here for a printer-friendly version.

Virtual teaching is a challenge. Many teachers were not ready to conduct instruction using the internet. Much had to be learned to make the new medium work for students AND teachers.

And if that challenge was not enough, teachers were also asked to use what is known as a hybrid model. A term that means teaching occurs in BOTH classroom and virtual settings.

Back and forth.

Which is hard, especially when teachers learn students do not have computers or are not connected to the internet. Or both. And when parents do not allow their children to attend school for fear of catching the virus.

Meeting such overwhelming challenges has resulted in major disruptions in the continuum of student learning. Chances are good that conditions, while not as bad as the first stages of the pandemic, will be unsettled for months or years.

Therefore, contingency planning by curriculum councils should be vigorous and ongoing. Subject area committees, operating under the auspices of councils, should stay ready for any eventuality. The old idea that we can depend on a single medium for teaching public school students is no longer valid.

Client districts using CLI’s Instructional Planning Resource (IPR) can connect contingency planning to intentional forms of instruction. The IPR does not overcome the lack of personal computers, home-based internet availability, or willingness of parents to risk their children getting sick. But it does give structure to how teachers plan for variable instructional settings.

The IPR contains everything necessary for thinking-through and planning instruction, virtual or not. In clear and specific phrases, it includes the mastery purpose of the course, well-constructed unit outcomes, and their components. It provides information on how to formatively assess student performance. It describes teaching methods, student activities and resources to be used. Alternative or “differentiated” instructional techniques are inserted.

And the summative assessment is not just a one-off pencil and paper test, but a clearly described method to determine if students have indeed met criteria in each component.

Client districts using the IPR model know it to be challenging to create for teachers accustomed to writing and using daily lesson plans. It requires training wordsmith intentions for student learning accurately and comprehensively, and considerable imagination to project all possible variations as to possible methods, student activities, and resources to use.

But developing skills to write IPRs is worth the effort on many levels, not the least of which is a teacher’s cognitive engagement with the curriculum to be taught.

First, the IPR can be saved in a digital databank and used repeatedly. Because it is saved in a computer, it can be modified any time conditions require.  Portions of it can be shared virtually with students or on a classroom screen.

Second, an IPR eliminates the need to create elaborate daily lesson plans. Teachers can keep track of where they are in the margins. They can also code the IPR for use in pacing guides or individualized instruction.

Third, the IPR provides a quick glance at the amount of curriculum to be covered in a standard classroom setting, thereby giving teachers a clear indication of how much seat time is necessary. If the class is being taught virtually, the teacher can get a sense of how quickly students are progressing.

If instructional conditions are poor because of the medium being used, as in virtual formats, the teacher may need to delete part of an intended curriculum. Having to skip parts of an intended curriculum inadvertently happens now. The difference when using an IPR is that the portion deleted can be done intentionally instead of just “running out of time.” Having that option available is important for two reasons: (1) a deleted portion may be selected because it is the least essential element, and (2) knowing what was deleted can be revisited later when more time and opportunity are available.

The pandemic has taught us to be ready for almost anything. In addition, it is teaching us that virtual or hybrid forms of instruction do not need to be inadequate stopgap measures. They may not be perfect but, as with many other things in this “new normal,” those instructional settings can work if we plan ahead more thoroughly and precisely.

New Challenges Require District Curriculum Councils to Revisit Curriculum Governance Policies

by

Woman holding small chalkboard that says Think Big
Click here for a printer-friendly version.

America is beginning to change. So are its schools. The reasons are obvious. The COVID 19 Pandemic is one of them.

Other important reasons are associated with social disparities, funding, shifting governmental policy, and the purpose of education in a developing 21st Century.

School boards, curriculum councils, teachers, and administrators are under more pressure than ever. Parents and school patrons demand solutions to nearly unsolvable problems. Most of which involve virtual learning, social distancing, and learning quality.

Meeting agendas often include topics shown below:

  • keeping students engaged using distance education,
  • the role of curriculum and instructional design,
  • the extent to which students are “falling behind,”
  • internet access,
  • availability of electronic tools like computers,
  • budgets that sustain the many changes in learning configuration,
  • family support systems,
  • teacher salaries and morale, and
  • the health of both teachers and students.

These topics have long been areas of concern. They are challenges made worse by the pandemic.

The first three topics in the list should be discussed as priorities by the curriculum council. They need both immediate and long-term attention. Subsequent E-Hints will offer ideas for solving immediate issues. However, now is a good time to ensure long-term policies are still in place and working.

Three are most important:

Ensure your district has a clear policy for academic program development, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation.

If there is a policy in place, is it being adhered to by the board, curriculum council, and administrative staff? If not, how can that problem be addressed?

Make certain your district has a long-range plan of action, a process that systematically upgrades the quality of curriculum, instruction, and assessment of student learning over time.

If a plan of action exists and is up to date, is it being followed according to policy provisions? If not, what can be done to resolve that problem?

Clear intentions for student learning called mastery statements are more essential than ever!

Teachers need mastery statements to guide their planning, instruction, and assessment. Parents and school patrons want to know what is expected of students. Three kinds of mastery statements are essential:

  • a comprehensive description of what students who complete a district’s full curriculum will know or do
  • descriptions of what students who complete each subject area in the district’s curriculum will know or do
  • an accurate statement of what students will know or do after completing each subject at grade level

If those three actions were taken years ago, today’s unique challenges might require a few modifications. We suggest the process start with your curriculum council. Recommendations can then be made to the administrative staff and board of education.

Addressing the Social-Emotional Needs of Teachers

by

Teacher looks frustrated and exhausted at desk with his hands on his face
Click here for a printer-friendly version.

Teaching through the pandemic is more stressful, time-consuming, and emotionally-draining than any other time in recent history. The stressors of teaching kids in person, virtually, and often a combination of the two, are far beyond the many stressors that teachers have experienced. What has become abundantly clear, is that for today’s educators, the conditions and scenarios in which they are working, cannot sustain if we want to avoid mass burnout. 

Since the start of the pandemic, there has been a push to make sure we are meeting the basic needs of our students. As we know, if their basic needs are not met, the chances of students being successful at achieving academic targets are slim. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is used to determine how to better meet the needs of students. This same hierarchy should also be used to better meet the needs of our teachers. Within your Curriculum Coordinating Council (CCC), or curriculum governing committee, make this topic a priority at your next meeting. Here are some ways to address this issue:

Do the research As is common practice when discussing issues within the CCC, find articles that clearly communicate the topic like this one on teacher morale from Edweek. Upon reading, ask committee members to share out what resonates with them. Ask them to reflect upon the strategies listed, determine if their school is already doing them, or if any of the strategies could work there.

Introduce Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and each level of the hierarchy. Relate each need to teachers and how their needs are not being met due to the pandemic. For example, a physiological need that may not be met right now is food. As stress levels rise and time is short, teachers may be rushing to get out of the house in the morning and may not prioritize packing a healthy lunch. Another physiological need that may be lacking is sleep or rest. Additional responsibilities at work usually take away from personal downtime and might make it more difficult for teachers to get adequate rest.

Brainstorm solutions Ask CCC members to come up with ways that the district could help meet teachers’ basic needs. Put a poster-sized piece of paper for each level of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs at different tables around the room. Divide the paper into columns. The first column would identify the specific need, the second column to list what the district is already doing, and the third column is used to record what more can be done. For example:

Encourage members to be as creative as possible and not to worry about the costs. If a solution does cost money, ask them to add a dollar symbol to that one. 

Prioritize solutions Use a facilitation activity, like “Spent a Dot,” to determine priorities. Give members of the committee six or so dot stickers, or sticky notes, whatever you have on hand. Ask them to walk to each paper and review the ideas offered during the brainstorming session, and “spend a dot,” or add a dot sticker to the ideas that they think should take priority while planning next steps. After the activity, it should be clear which ideas, or solutions, to move forward.

Plan next steps Good intentions and discussions will always remain just those, unless, a plan is created and followed through. For each of the priority solutions, plan what needs to be done, who will be responsible for seeing it through, and when it needs to happen. It may be helpful to create a subcommittee for following through with the plan as some solutions might take more time and effort than others. To ensure that the next steps happen, make sure to revisit this topic at the following CCC meeting, and create ways for teachers to offer their feedback. 

Continue to monitor the social-emotional health of your teachers throughout the remainder of the year and be sure to communicate your efforts to better meet their basic needs. The last thing anyone wants is for a third of the teaching staff to resign because they can’t continue teaching under the conditions of this past year or so. Your teachers will appreciate that you care and that the district is looking out for their well-being.

Could COVID-19 Spark Updates to Grading?

by

Are you tired of talking about COVID-19 and discussing how this pandemic has set your students back? One of the common complaints from teachers who incorporate any virtual learning is that grading is more complicated and challenging to maintain than when students are learning solely in person. I can’t help but wonder if this could be an opportunity to fix some of the philosophically diverse grading issues keeping schools from moving forward with their grading policies and practices.

Robert Marzano, Ken O’Connor, and others have been encouraging educators to update grading practices for decades. It seems as though these shifts happen more easily in the elementary grade levels than they do in secondary schools. There are various reasons for this delay, most notably that parents are more comfortable with the typical A-F system, or 100% grading scale. Another is the fear that colleges won’t admit a student if their grades don’t reflect a traditional grading system. While I can’t speak on behalf of post-secondary institutions, I would like to address the confusion that students and parents have felt while learning/schooling remotely. 

The discussion of updating grading practices begins with clarifying what a grade means or should represent. There’s a correct answer to this question, as it’s somewhat rhetorical. The answer is that a grade should represent learning, or what a student knows and can do. A considerable benefit of standards-based/standards-referenced/competency-based grading systems is that what a student knows and can do is clearly identified. Extra factors that could affect a grade, such as late work, extra credit, or student behaviors, are left out. 

Additionally, grades align with learning targets or standards rather than assignments. So, if a student cannot succeed on a learning target on one assignment, they can show success at another time. Their grade for that target or standard can then be updated to accurately reflect their current knowledge or ability. When contemplating the purpose of standards-based grading, it’s a no-brainer. But, when factoring in the intended audience’s philosophical and emotional differences, updating grading practices can get a bit more tricky. But, that was before COVID-19. Things are a bit different now.

Here’s how to begin the conversation with your teachers. Ask them what difficulties they’re having with grading that are due to adding the virtual piece. Extend the conversation to parents, too. Is there a parent-teacher organization with whom you could discuss this? Or perhaps you could send out a survey to the parents of your online students. Identify the most significant challenges to grading and analyze whether switching to a standards-based grading system might solve some of these issues. I like doing a book study with Ken O’Connor’s A Repair Kit for Grading.  It includes simpler fixes as well as more complex ones. You might be able to develop momentum by fixing some of the simpler issues while working toward shifting to standards-based grading.

The pandemic has forced us to change the way teaching and learning look in our districts. I have yet to meet an educator who claims that these changes have been easy. But, perhaps a silver lining to COVID-19 and requiring a virtual component to education, is that it provides an opportunity to re-evaluate our grading practices to communicate better what our students know and can do. It may give that extra push that some of us need to make the leap to standards-based grading.

Maintain Learning Expectations No Matter the Setting

by

African-American mother supervises her teenaged son as he studies on his computer

The “start of school” has come and gone, and school district officials have made some of the hardest decisions they have ever made. Decisions that require re-evaluation nearly every day. The building preparation, bus preparation, and schedule concerns have all been addressed to the degree that gets the school year going. Now, it’s time to focus on teaching and learning. Ensuring that all students, whether entirely on-site, fully online, in a hybrid setting, or even homeschooled, reach a level of learning such that they are prepared for their future, as unsure as that may be.

Districts have long had curriculum, instruction, and assessment conversations. They have made decisions as a district regarding their local curriculum and expectations for student performance.  Those conversations and decisions are critical within a district to ensure equal opportunity for students and smooth transitions from grade-level-to-grade-level and course-to-course. The professional staff has, in turn, had detailed conversations about the importance of those decisions and any ramifications for instruction and assessment.  Those decisions, though, have probably only been communicated generally to parents. 

In a typical school year or school environment, as a district, you are covered! Let’s get started!  However, there is NOTHING normal about this school year. Students are attending school in a myriad of ways. For the decisions made by professional staff to be implemented for all the varieties of ways that students “attend” school, communication must be carefully planned and executed. Without good communication, unintended results might occur. Those unintended results might include:

  • inequity issues among students,
  • missed building blocks within the learning process,
  • an unclear vision of what is “good enough” for student success,
  • and students may work very hard but misunderstand expectations. Therefore, when they re-enter the in-person setting, they may feel their hard work was wasted.

For the most part, parents are engaged with helping their children succeed as students; investing in their children’s success is a high priority. However, parents have jobs, multiple children, past experiences with school, and rarely do they have professional training or experience as educators. Some of the decisions that the district made will make complete sense to their staff, but not necessarily to the people charged with monitoring and implementing the remote portion of a student’s instruction. 

Often, it isn’t the “what” that non-educators can’t understand, it’s “why?”  Having not been present for discussions among professional staff, decisions are communicated as, “Here’s what we are going to do,” not as, “Here’s what we are going to do, this is why we are doing it, and these are the expectations for your child because of what we’re doing.” In other words, the expectation has been to communicate decisions to stakeholders and parents without necessarily explaining “why” that decision was made.

This school year, with so many variables for how students are being educated, why is just as important to parents as what. Knowing why a particular decision was made could go a long way toward alleviating unintended consequences. It may also help parents determine appropriate steps to help a struggling student without losing sight of the expectation. The time spent designing this communication might pay big dividends when students come back together in a more “normal” setting.