Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 8: Professional Practice

Standard 8: Teacher leaders present professional practice for the review of colleagues
It’s not an easy thing to open your practice as a teacher to others for criticism and feedback. We ask our students to do that every day - show us your work and we’ll tell you if you’re right or wrong. Of course it doesn’t work like that; we reassure them that we’re giving positive and constructive feedback, we use strategies to encourage them to submit their work for criticism, encouraging them to use the criticism to become better at what they do. But do that to ourselves? Nope. That’s not going to happen.

Good teachers recognize that that must happen, and we recognize that for the same reasons we tell our students. In order to grow, we must be willing to accept feedback. That means opening our door and letting other teachers in to see what we do. With that openness comes an expectation that other teachers will see the good, the bad, the ugly, and the beautiful. Once we do that, however, and if other teachers see us as legitimately competent at what we do, then they will accept us as teacher leaders (Katzenmeyer and Moller, 2016).

I have reflected much over the last two years of the Teacher Leadership program with my cohort. We have discussed the ups and downs of our profession and our practice and have shared ideas that have made me a better teacher. I truly have taken advantage of what York-Barr, Sommers, Ghere, and Montie (2006) consider an advantage of groups: more resources such as experience, knowledge, and energy. This has helped me particularly because I teach a singleton class (AP English Language) and do not have a singular team to work with in my assignment. I am part of an AP PLC, and our discussions in that group do help with general knowledge about our common students (York-Barr et al., 2006), but I lack the specific support in my content area. Our SPU study group has been that support, playing an important role in my learning over the past two years (Zepeda, 2008).

My thinking has been pushed these last two years in a number of areas, particularly culturally responsive teaching and community engagement. I could have identified these as areas of need entering the program, and the program and my colleagues in that program have helped me develop a new understanding of how to approach these issues in my practice. I have undertaken an effort to promote my students’ “participation in a multicultural, democratic society” (Pace, 2015, p. 14). I have learned that I must actively participate in “a peaceful transition to a new kind of America, in which no ethnic or cultural group is in a dominant position” (Howard, 1996, p. 324). And I have worked to find the efficiencies in my organization and get the most out of them (Owens and Valesky, 2015). These are only a small part of how this program has pushed me to become a better teacher through opening my classroom door to others and inviting them inside.

References
Howard, G. (1996). Whites in multicultural education: Rethinking our role. In Banks, J. A. (ed.). Multicultural education, transformative knowledge, and action: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 323-334). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Katzenmeyer, M., and Moller, G. (2016). Understanding teacher leadership. In Blair, E. (ed.). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundation of teacher education (pp. 121-136). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Owens and Valesky (2015). Citation to come because I rented the book and don’t have it anymore and don’t even remember the title. I wonder if anyone will actually read this. Comment if you do.

Pace, J. L. (2015). The charged classroom: Predicaments and possibilities for democratic teaching. New York, NY: Routledge.

York-Barr, J., Sommers, W.A., Ghere, G.S., & Montie, J. (2006). Reflective practice to improve schools: An action guide for educators (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Zepeda, S. J. (2008). Professional development: What works. New York, NY: Routledge.

Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 1: Moral Leadership

My preconceptions about our Moral Issues in the Classroom class focused mainly on the religious aspects of the course, but those ideas changed once I began the reading. Our first text, The Charged Classroom: Predicaments and Possibilities for Democratic Teaching, forced me to think about the various issues regarding social justice and democracy that flow through my classroom. Technically, Judith Pace (2015) defines a charged classroom as one “suffused with contradictions that create both friction and potential” (p. 4). This could be a teacher trying to entice students to perform well without embarrassing them in front of their classmates. Or it could be a discussion about a controversial topic where the teacher is trying to navigate between conflicting and provocative viewpoints. Then there’s the teacher negotiating the balance between a district’s curricular demands, state testing, and the unique needs of individuals within a classroom. The “charge” from these areas can be enough to ignite a spark, but the question is whether that spark will destroy confidence or create knowledge.

Pace’s (2015) discussion about face highlights a major charge within the classroom. Students appreciate high expectations, but they don’t want to lose face in front of their peers, and when expectations are not met, public criticism, even constructive, needs to be couched in a way that does not diminish the relationship between teacher and student. This isn't anything new to most teachers; nobody likes to be shown up in front of others, and the teenagers I work with are often at their most vulnerable. When an adult makes them lose face among their peers, they shut down and often fail to return to engagement. Culturally responsive teaching goes a long way toward maintaining a strong relationship; when teachers can empathize with their students’ unique circumstances, they are more likely to avoid face-losing situations.

Controversial topics provide another challenge in the classroom. Often the teacher has a desire to control these discussions to avoid offending students - and perhaps their parents or administrators. Yet the discussion of controversial and provocative topics opens students to new knowledge and is vital to democratic education (Pace, 2015). Teachers should not avoid these topics, but rather they should seek training in facilitating these discussions. Teachers and students must tolerate conflict, according to Pace; she recommends the use of peacemaking curriculum to promote a deeper understanding of conflict. Clary (2017) suggests using reflective writing to have students think about their religious or philosophical views and how they relate to the content. The reflection acknowledges the students' viewpoints without compromising the curriculum.

When I first started teaching about research to my Advanced Placement English students, I had one topic on the taboo list: abortion. I did not trust faith-based arguments, because I felt those arguments were not arguable - I cannot argue against the existence of God. Furthermore, one cannot point to the Bible and its commandment as empirical evidence, as many evangelicals seem to do. Basically, I did not want to deal with abortion, so my students wrote about global warming or animal rights or whether or not college athletes should be paid. After reading Religion in the Classroom (James, Schweber, Kunzman, Barton, and Logan, 2015), I felt that excluding a religious-based argument would limit my students’ ability to discuss those issues of faith in what I hope is a safe environment. This year I did not exclude any topics, but I focused more on making sure my students had arguable topics for their research, religious or not. When I explained this to one of my students who I know has strong religious beliefs, she was pleased with my explanation, a sign that I made the right move. Her research topic: the effect of religious beliefs on the adoption of scientific knowledge. Trocco (2000) actually has his students study topics on the fringe of science and health because "when students study fringe topics, they have to weigh evidence against testimony and claims against facts, and these responsibilities immediately draw them deeper into their work" (p. 628).

Finally, teachers should address curricular demands head on and demand an acknowledgement of their role as the gatekeeper of what actually gets taught to students (Pace, 2015). The teacher is the obvious choice to prioritize those demands, and while some priorities might be set aside, administrators should give teachers training that allows them to provide “access to challenging, meaningful, and multicultural subject matter” (p. 117). With an eye on the needs of the students, teachers should be trusted to manage this conflict, as well as the many others that will inevitably arise in the classroom.

References

Clary, R. (2017). Defusing discomfort: Bridging philosophical and religious conflicts through reflective writing. The Science Teacher, 84(2), 26-30.

James, J. H., Schweber, S., Kunzman, R., Barton, K. C., & Logan, K. (2015). Religion in the classroom: Dilemmas for democratic education. New York: Routledge.

Pace, J. L. (2015). The charged classroom: Predicaments and possibilities for democratic teaching. New York: Routledge.

Trocco, F. (2000). Encouraging students to study weird things. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(8), 628-631.

Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 12: Teaching with Technology

Standard 12: Evaluate and use technology for teaching and learning

I’ve always considered myself tech savvy, from being the only person in my dorm room freshman year to have a computer to being the go-to guy in the building when the computer screen goes blank. I’ve never had any formal kind of training; technology seems to come easy to me. Much of it has to do with an innate curiosity and a basic understanding of how to avoid breaking things. My wife even claims I have the ability to fix computer problems just by standing over her shoulder. My superpower, I guess.

That ability only takes me so far. For example, I know how to connect my iPad to my projector at school. But for what purpose? "Cool, the teacher has an iPad," a student might say, "but that doesn’t help me write my essay." I can use technology myself, but prior to this program I never effectively used technology to improve student learning. Having students use computers to type a paper doesn’t count, in my mind; that task is so commonplace and ubiquitous that it doesn’t seem to count as a use of technology. What I needed two years ago was training in how to use technology to enhance student learning, design digital learning experiences, model digital citizenship, and become the technology leader I always felt I should be - all skills that were one of the objectives of EDU 6433, Teaching with Technology.

Looking back, I see three large takeaways from the class that I have directly applied to my practice. The first and perhaps simplest takeaway has been my expanded use of Twitter as a professional learning network. I had long used my personal Twitter account as a means to share my imperfect commentary on Seattle Seahawks games and to keep up with various news stories. From Dr. Wicks I learned that Twitter could be used in a similar fashion as an educational tool. This fits my needs as an adult learner in that using Twitter is self-directed, relies on collaboration, and is relevancy-oriented (Zepeda, 2012). I follow a wide variety of educators, from those who teach AP English Language & Composition as I do to those who are active in union issues. From those networks I have branched out, following a variety of teachers with concerns about racial and social justice, writing and literacy, and rhetoric education. I have participated in online chat sessions, and I have gathered numerous teaching ideas that I have implemented directly into my practice. For example, several teachers had ideas in the weeks leading up to the AP exam for specific exam prep, and those ideas helped me prepare my students for the test. The ability to tap into the knowledge of my peers greatly enhances the diversity of my instruction.

Another large takeaway was my beginning to use blogs with students. For my action research project I sought ways to provide feedback to students, and I quickly focused on peer review. [Influences on Student Revision Practices] One idea that came out of the research was to have students blog and then require them to read other students’ blogs and provide constructive feedback. The assignment has proved popular, enabling students to write for an authentic audience and flex their voice as a writer. Blogs and other webtools enable students to use a larger platform "to engage in collaborative creation of content and sharing of information across time zones and cultures" (de Ramirez, 2013, p. 7). I intend to double my usage next year, especially if I can incorporate it into my district’s use of Google Classroom.

My final takeaway was an enhancement of my fake news unit. The technology component of this was small; students were given an article of questionable veracity and required to conduct some research to evaluate the article on a set of criteria (E.S.C.A.P.E., n.d.). The task required students to be digital detectives, and it correlated to the research they would soon be doing for their research paper. Technology became a tool as they learned more about digital citizenship. The assignment meets two of the standards set forth by the International Society for Technology in Education, namely that students use technology to actively demonstrate competency in their own learning goals, and that students recognize their rights and responsibilities to live, learn, and work in today's digital world in a way that's safe, legal, and ethical (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018).

The past two years have shown me more ways to use technology to enhance student learning than I had seen in my first 13 years of teaching. I feel more comfortable around technology, not just as a user, but as a proctor facilitating the use by my students. Incorporating technology needs to have a larger purpose, and I have an opportunity to use technology to help students become more productive digital citizens as they move forward with their education. Gleason and Van Gillern (2018) note that secondary educators like myself must "help students their students develop skills that enhance students' ability to identify problems, create persuasive media, and strategically distribute this media to their peers and communities" (p. 210). I intend to keep my mind and eyes open for opportunities to continue this type of discovery.

References

de Ramirez, L. L. (2013). Communicating with the world: Connecting the language classroom to a global audience using web 2.0 tools. Learning Languages, 18(2), 6-7.

E.S.C.A.P.E. Junk News. (n.d.). NewseumEd. Retrieved from https://newseumed.org/activity/e-s-c-a-p-e-junk-news-mlbp/

Gleason, B., and van Gillern, S. (2018). Digital citizenship with social media: Participatory practices of teaching and learning in secondary education. Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 200-212.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2018). ISTE standards for students. ISTE. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-students

Zepeda, S. J. (2012). Professional development: What works. New York: Routledge.

Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 5: Culturally Inclusive Teaching

Teacher Leadership Standard 5: Establish a culturally inclusive learning climate that facilitates academic engagement and success for all

Artifacts: Community Engagement Product | School-Community Case Study | Integration and Action Exercise

Looking back at the last two years, I have had a moderate amount of success in my work toward becoming a more culturally responsive teacher. I have developed a curriculum that has featured more culturally diverse writers, and I have encouraged my students to listen to multiple voices and become more aware of the racial and social injustices in the world around them. Not everything has been a success; my unit on racial justice earlier this year stumbled when a student pointed out how some other students were making comments during a class discussion that she felt were insensitive to African Americans. This episode demonstrated that I still have a long ways to go, but it gave me a direction and some ideas about how to better proceed toward a culturally inclusive learning climate.

I’d like to think I’m progressive in my attitude toward race, but I never assume I’m ahead of the curve, so to speak. I wasn’t surprised about Peggy McIntosh’s (1988) article, “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” and its assertion that “describing white privilege makes one newly accountable.” As McIntosh ran off her list of 50 daily effects of white privilege, I started to answer yes to each one of them. After a while I stopped because there was no variety in my answer. I recognized every one of the items on the list. Some I had recognized a long time ago, but many I had never thought of. For example, No. 11: “I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person’s voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race” (McIntosh, 1988). I have done this before, and reflected on it for a discussion post in the Culturally Responsive Teaching class. I did not recognize at the time what I was doing. I wasn’t really paying attention to the person, in my mind because I was not interested in what that individual was saying, not because of their race. As I imagine how that person felt, being the only individual of their race in that room, and as they spoke and looked out at a room of disinterested individuals, I wonder how they felt. Did they know what was happening? Had this happened before, as in was it a regular occurrence? The lesson I drew from this was that I must be more aware of the unintended consequences of my actions, no matter how small or trivial those actions may seem to be to me. Something as little as lifting up my head and actively listening to an individual may empower them to believe that their voice matters.

One area I have more control over than others is in the materials I choose for my students. I have included different voices in my curriculum and have made some changes this past year to become more diverse, such as adding Chinese philosophy to my philosophy unit and ensuring I had more diverse writers in my environment unit. Banks (1996) highlights the need for changes such as these: “Many of our citizens - including many youths who are poor, who speak a language other than English, and who are of color - are alienated, and feel left out, abandoned, and forgotten by U.S. mainstream institutions” (p. 336). That statement made 20 years ago still applies. Our students often feel left out in our classrooms; textbooks are improving in their appeal to and reflection of our non-mainstream students, but there remains so much farther to go. For example, I enjoy teaching Shakespeare, but it does not reflect the culture of so many of my students. The themes they can relate to, but the characters they cannot, not to mention the setting. Yet English teachers are often limited in the curriculum they can present. When I taught sophomores I started the year with short stories from our textbook, and we had some flexibility to provide representative material there. After that, we researched Greek mythology, then read Oedipus and Antigone, Julius Caesar, and The Lord of the Flies. All of that is Western and male and white. Clearly we can find something in there that can be replaced with a text that better represents the lives of our students, while maintaining the curricular standards established by our district.

Our students are not just influenced by the content we share. Their outside lives have an even greater impact on their lives. My wife, a teacher like me, and I often complain at night about a school system that expects us to perform miracles but never takes into account the outside world that our students live in. So when I read about Allison Davis’s research in which he found that “education is strongly influenced by societal factors such as race, class, and the sociocultural context in which it occurs” (Hillis, 1996, p. 115), it struck a chord. We’ve been talking about this for years, the idea that our students have influences beyond our classrooms and that our job as educators is to somehow work with those influences.

Our careers started in the southern California desert, in a place where education was seemingly highly valued by our white students, but not so much by our Latino students. Upon reflection, the lines were more socioeconomic than racial, but the relationship between the two was there. As a high school teacher, I struggled to reach certain students who could not see value in what I was teaching. I wondered whether my curriculum was beyond their cultural understanding, and I debated how best to get them excited about Frankenstein and Macbeth. I didn’t have complete success, but perhaps I was thinking of the wrong problem. Maybe my lessons were better suited to middle-class students. Maybe I wasn’t giving my lower-income students content that related or mattered to them. Reading about Allison Davis’s work forces me to recognize a different approach to the problem. The lower-class child “learns from his family and teachers that the chances for a person in his lower-class position to finish high school and college, and to become socially mobile through education, are so slight in view of the economic position and classways of his family, that they scarcely exist” (Davis and Dollard, as quoted in Hillis, 1996, p. 119).

Today, I teach in a middle-class school in a middle-class district. Many of my students are lower-income, but not to the extent they were in California. I still have the problem of getting my students to care, but their support systems are so much different here than they were down there. I call back to the phrase, “I wish I knew then what I know now,” and wonder how different my approach to teaching those students would have been had I found ways to demonstrate value in education. I suspect my wife and I would have had some different conversations.

References
Banks, J. A. (1996). Transformative knowledge, curriculum reform, and action. In Banks, J. A. (Ed.), Multicultural education, transformative knowledge, and action: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 335-348). New York: Teachers College.

Hillis, M. R. (1996). Allison Davis and the study of race, social class, and schooling. In Banks, J. A. (Ed.), Multicultural education, transformative knowledge, and action: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 115-128). New York: Teachers College.

McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Independent School, 49:2, 31-35.

Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 6: Communication and Collaboration

When I began this course I did not see the title, “Communication and Collaboration,” as reflecting the emphasis placed on professional development. I was surprised by how much of the course was about professional development, and not necessarily in a positive way. My previous experience with professional development has generally been negative, especially when such activities were organized by the school district. My initial reflection and most of my initial discussion group posts were about my dissatisfaction with my experiences in professional development.

“I have taught at two different schools and I have seen two different models, neither of which has been particularly effective, of delivering professional learning. I have experienced an overabundance of professional learning with no common theme, and I have experienced too little professional learning.”

As I progressed through the course and developed an understanding of adult learning, I began to see why my previous experiences had not worked: I had never been in charge of my own learning. Dalellew and Martinez (1988), as cited in Zepeda (2013) state that adult learning is more self-directed, but I did not direct any of my own professional development until recently. My districts have required trainings for a variety of reasons: to introduce new programs, to reinforce old programs, or to satisfy the union contract. I may have found some of the sessions interesting, but those were rarely followed up on with practical classroom applications; the needs of the classroom have always been so great that I rarely found time to follow up myself.

The examination of different learning models brought attention to my limited and poor experience with professional learning. Honestly, one area where I wish I would have done more with was my experience as an academic coach early in my career. I spent two years sitting in an office because I did not know any better. Had I known the benefit of coaching, and had I been coached on how to coach, I could have taken advantage of this valuable opportunity to learn. My problems were not unique; Johnson and Donaldson (2016) reported a study that found that second-stage teachers in these leadership roles had challenges that discouraged teacher leadership. What was missing in my experience was leadership at my school; I had two principals during my coaching tenure, one of whom was transferred midway through his first year because of his disruptive and demeaning leadership style, the other who was coasting toward retirement. I did not know how I fit into the school’s plan, and according to J. C. Maxwell (2008), “one way to add significance to the lives of the people you lead is to show them the big picture and let them know how they contribute to it” (p. 86-87).

Another aspect of my professional learning has been through professional learning communities, both in California and Washington state. Neither has been an ideal situation, but then I never viewed them as vehicles for professional learning. In California we were prescribed by administration to accomplish certain tasks (take minutes, discuss data, etc.) and in Washington the groups were more for planning curriculum than looking at data. My current PLC is with other Advanced Placement teachers, and with no common curriculum or objectives, we struggle to find a common purpose. Some of my PLCs were more collaborative than others, and those I found more beneficial to me as a teacher, regardless of the tasks we accomplished. What I strive for is the collaboration cited by Angelle (2016) when she writes that “to ensure success for these teacher leaders, the school culture must value their work, the school principal must support their work, and their teacher colleagues must be willing to work alongside them as they strive for a more effective school” (p. 107).

By looking at my own practice through the lens of professional development, I now see where collaboration and communication come in. My previous experiences lacked those components, and when I reflect on my more positive professional learning, collaboration and communication are the highlights. My best training sessions have been Advanced Placement summer institutes, and those have been highly collaborative. In the Seattle Pacific teacher leadership program, I have collaborated and communicated with my cohort and have found it highly rewarding. Just the other night, in a conversation with a couple of colleagues, we discussed potential professional development for next year that includes asking teachers to submit proposals for training sessions they might lead. This would help build leadership capacity at our school and allow the administration to demonstrate their trust of teachers’ knowledge, a critical component for supporting teachers as authentic professionals (Steel and Craig, 2016).

As I move forward into larger roles of teacher leadership in my career, I will keep those two aspects of professional learning foremost in my mind. I must be willing to collaborate with my colleagues and keep open all lines of communication. I must keep the door open, literally and figuratively. That will do the most to bring up myself as a teacher and my colleagues as well.

References

Angelle, P. S. (2016). Teachers as leaders: Collaborative leadership for learning communities. In E. Blair (Ed.). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education (p. 101-108). New York: Peter Lang.

Steel, C., & Craig, E. Reworking industrial models, exploring contemporary ideas, and fostering teacher leadership. In E. Blair (Ed.). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education (p. 83-87). New York: Peter Lang.

Johnson, S. M., & Donaldson, M. L. (2016). Overcoming the obstacles to leadership. In E. Blair (Ed.). Teacher leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education (pp. 157-162). New York: Peter Lang.

Maxwell, J. C. (2008). Mentoring 101: What every leader needs to know. Nashville, TN; Thomas Nelson.

Zepeda, S. J. (2013). Professional development: What works. New York: Routledge.

Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 2: Analyze learning to promote student growth

My Action Research class consisted of an in-depth project about providing feedback to students regarding their writing. Providing feedback has been a particular interest to me: I teach five sections of Advanced Placement English Language & Composition, and with 150 student writers wanting significant feedback on a regular basis, I have sought a way to do that in a timely fashion that leaves me a personal life. Think about it: when 150 students write a 4-page paper, that’s 600 pages to read and give feedback on. And that doesn’t count the two-page timed writes that my students write on a regular basis, nor the journal entries they write weekly. How do I handle the workload?

Through my action research project, I learned about the value of peer feedback through writing workshops. A study by Early and Saidy (2014) revealed that students used written feedback to encourage their peers to add textual evidence, improve aesthetic elements, and develop voice. I instituted a three-day writers workshop in which students shared their rough drafts, provided specific feedback, and then used that feedback to revise their papers. The students did produce better quality papers after the workshop, even though it still took me a significant amount of time to grade the papers afterward. I have since modified my use of writing workshops; a three-day workshop takes more time than I can commit, so I pared the workshop to one day this year. The workshops focused more on different "stations" that students rotated through, centers focused not only on peer review but on finding dead words such as really and very, reading their text aloud, finding specific grammatical problems such as run-on sentences, and a station where I read their paper and give them immediate feedback. I had mixed results with this form of workshop; my students generally turn in polished papers, but I felt much of the time was wasted as students did not have as strong a structure to perform the peer review. I am strongly considering going back to my three-day model in an attempt to give them more detailed and useful feedback, and to allow students to provide that feedback. This would also allow me to incorporate more the cooperative learning that Dean, Hubbell, Pitler, and Stone (2012) advocate for.

The significance of proper feedback cannot be overstated. Wiliam (2011) cites a study that shows that students who received constructive feedback learned twice as fast as a control group. Marzano (2007) says goal setting and feedback are more effective when done together. Dean et al. (2012) say teachers can create a classroom focused on learning by providing feedback that is “corrective, timely, and focused on criteria” (p. 11). Pitler and Stone (2012) encourage teachers to “engage students in the feedback process” (p. 24).

I recognize the importance of providing quality feedback; that isn’t the problem. Finding the time to provide that feedback in a writing class is my greatest challenge, one I will continue to undertake as my career moves forward.

References
Dean, C. B., Hubbell, E. R., Pitler, H., and Stone, B. (2012). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Early, J. S., & Saidy, C. (2014). Uncovering substance: Teaching revision in high school classrooms. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(3), 209-218.

Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Pitler, H., and Stone, B. (2012). A handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Reflection on Teacher Leadership Standard 10: Instructional Practices

Looking back at my writing for EDU 6526 Survey of Instructional Strategies, I see a variety of key learning points. I wrote about effectively using student-led objectives and providing feedback. I realized I do not use summarizing as much as I should. I learned that I need to do more to reinforce effort and provide recognition. And I shared a mixed belief in the value (or lack thereof) of homework. All of these in-class reflections come back to haunt me in a way as I review my actual practices over the course of the past school year. I realize that my teaching practices have not changed much; I still practice the old style of teaching and I have largely forgotten what I learned last summer.

I had set myself a goal of having students set their own learning objectives as a means to increase their motivation and to give them a greater sense of control over what they learn (Dean, Hubbell, Pitler, and Stone, 2012). Marzano (2007) also identifies setting goals and objectives as having a large effect size. My proposal was to have students create a K-W-L chart at the beginning of each unit to address that unit’s essential questions. I have not done this, but with one unit remaining for the school year, I do have time to put this into practice. My goal is to have students set their own objectives through the W (what they want to know) section of the chart. As they complete that section throughout the unit, they would have a record of all they have learned, a gratifying reward for their hard work.

When I think about summarizing, I realize that my students do more of that than I originally thought. Dean et al. (2012) define summarizing as "the process of distilling information down to its most salient points" (p. 78). For my particular class, which teaches rhetorical skills, I have students create a rhetorical triangle for each non-fiction text they read - and they read a lot. The triangle must include information about the speaker, the audience, and the subject, as well as the various appeals to logic, emotion, and credibility; the author’s purpose, main idea, or theme; the tone; the mode of the essay; and the various rhetorical devices used. These are the "salient points" of rhetorical analysis, which occupies every objective when we read non-fiction. The triangle and its components serve as a form of summary frames for the students, allowing them to understand the material better (Dean et al., 2012). I also have students share their findings and observations with each other, providing a form of reciprocal teaching. Marzano, Gaddy, and Dean (2000) write that "the more we use both systems of representation, the better we are able to think about and recall our knowledge" (p. 86).

My reflection on providing effective praise and recognition highlighted the “good job” comments I shared on papers, but as I think about my grading and feedback processes this year, I realize that my comments have been much more focused on the skills the students are or should be demonstrating. Instead of writing “good job,” I identify the specific skill I believe they have done well on, such as writing a clear and strong thesis that has all the necessary components. Perhaps I also need to move away from adding a score on most writing, which would align with a study cited by Wiliam (2011). That study found that if teachers provide diagnostic comments and then put a score on an assignment the effect is the same as just putting a score. Where I also need to improve my skill is in providing praise regarding my students’ effort, praise that ties directly to their accomplishments.

Homework continues to be a mixed bag in my classroom. I do not give a lot of homework in assignment forms. Students do a lot of reading and their assignments are often in the form of reading a text, completing the aforementioned rhetorical triangle, and coming to class being prepared to discuss the text. In a way, this form of a flipped classroom leaves class time for those discussions and direct instruction. My few homework assignments were not high on the rubrics established by Pitler and Stone (2012), but I believe I have had even less homework this year that is not in the form of working on or researching a formal essay.

Maybe my practices this year are not so haunting. I know I have much room for improvement in my instructional strategies, and this reflection has given me an opportunity to revisit some strategies that can still have a strong impact on the remainder of the school year - and beyond.

References

Dean, C. B., Hubbell, E. R., Pitler, H., and Stone, B. (2012). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Marzano, R. J., Gaddy, B. B., and Dean, C. (2000). What works in classroom instruction. Aurora, CO: McREL. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED468434.pdf

Pitler, H., and Stone, B. (2012). A handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.