In This Issue:

  1. A framework for assessing learning

  2. One hundred years of research on grading

  3. Eight ways to foster trust

  4. The art of thinking about problems in a different way

  5. Dealing with people who won’t let go of strong beliefs

  6. Building critical thinking skills for the Internet

  7. Making the best possible use of school time

  8. Pointers for instructional coaches

  9. Suggestions for successful summer school programs

10. A nine-second response to “gateway” bullying behaviors

11. Short items: (a) Photos of Earth from space; (b) Big-picture graphs of human progress;

      (c) Key scientific concepts

 

Quotes of the Week

“The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between the two, the leader must become a servant.”

            Max De Pree (quoted in item #2)

 

“What am I doing that I should keep doing? And what am I doing that I should change?”

            The questions asked by General Electric managers in frequent “touchpoint”

conversations with employees as part of a new performance evaluation system,

in “The Annual Performance Review: Should You Eliminate It?” by Peter Cappelli,

Wharton Nano Tool, December 31, 2016, http://whr.tn/2hJFVzF

 

“Explore the difference between intention and impact. Most people don’t intend to shoot themselves in the foot.”

            Dan Rothwell (see item #8)

 

“Proximity to your own problems can make it easy to get lost in the weeds, endlessly ruminating about why a colleague, a spouse, or your children won’t listen. Sometimes all you need is someone to suggest, ‘Well, could the problem be that you are bad at listening to them?’”

            Thomas Wedell-Wedellsborg (see item #3)

 

“Despite the gains of the safe schools movement and the tremendous difference this work has made, about one in four LGBTQ youth still attempts suicide at some point during adolescence.”

            Michael Sadowski in “More Than a Safe Space” in American Educator, Winter 2016-

2017 (Vol. 40, #4, p. 4-9. 42), http://bit.ly/2hJYKRG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. A Framework for Assessing Learning

            In this article in Independent School, Charles Fadel and Maya Bialik (Center for Curriculum Redesign) report on their organization’s model for measuring four dimensions of student learning:

            • Knowledge: What we know and understand – Traditional subjects like mathematics, modern disciplines like entrepreneurship, and themes like global literacy.

            • Skills: How we use what we know to address real-world questions and problems – Communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity.

            • Character: How we behave and engage in the world – Curiosity, courage, resilience, ethics, leadership, and mindfulness.

            • Meta-learning: How we reflect and adapt – Learners’ ability to manage their progress in the other three areas in light of new challenges and experiences and their own beliefs about learning.

            Fadel and Bialik believe this framework necessitates a radical rethinking of assessment in schools. “Assessment can no longer be considered in isolation from learning,” they say; “it deeply affects classroom instruction and workforce training experiences for all learners.” An ideal model of assessment contains:

-   Learning pathways and progressions toward student proficiency in each area;

-   Performance tasks that demonstrate mastery;

-   Tools for interpreting evidence of learning at the individual and group level and following up appropriately.

The last item is particularly important, say the authors, since assessment data can be used in ways that don’t further the broader mission. Leaders need to understand and act on assessment results in ways that improve teaching and learning and explain what’s happening to families and the broader community, they say: “These wider public education, outreach, and public relations functions are crucial in gaining the support needed from all education stakeholders to help move assessment and systems of education more toward 21^st-century goals and student success.”

 

“Assessments for the 21^st Century: Findings from the Assessment Research Consortium” by Charles Fadel and Maya Bialik in Independent School, Winter 2017 (Vol. 76, #2, p. 18-20), http://bit.ly/2iGNC6N

Back to page one

 

2. One Hundred Years of Research on Grading

            In this Review of Educational Research article, Susan Brookhart (Duquesne University), Thomas Guskey (University of Kentucky), Alex Bowers (Columbia University), James McMillan (Virginia Commonwealth University), Jeffrey Smith and Lisa Smith (University of Otago), and Michael Stevens and Megan Welsh (University of California/Davis) review a century of research on grading practices. Some key conclusions:

            • Grades convey important information. Over the years, grades have been maligned by researchers and psychometricians as subjective and unreliable measures of student achievement. Actually, grades are useful indicators of things that matter to students, teachers, parents, schools, and communities, and they are more accurate predictors of high-school completion and transition to college than standardized test scores. In addition, when grades are aggregated from individual pieces of student work to report card or course grades and GPA, their reliability increases. For example, the reliability of overall college grade-point averages is estimated at .93.

• Grades are multidimensional. They often include noncognitive information that teachers value, including effort, motivation, improvement, work habits, attention, engagement, participation, and behavior. That’s probably why grades are more accurate than test scores at predicting downstream success; it’s now clear that noncognitive factors play an important role. (“Although noncognitive skills may help students develop cognitive skills,” say the authors, “the reverse is not true”). Teachers typically distinguish between noncognitive factors and academic ability on the one hand and other factors they believe should not be factors in grading: gender, socioeconomic status, and personality.

            • Grades have a subjective element. Each teacher’s values come into play, including a desire to help all students be successful and wanting to be fair – i.e., the feeling that kids who worked hard shouldn’t fail, even if they haven’t learned. “Although measurement experts and professional developers may wish grades were unadulterated measures of what students have learned and are able to do,” say the authors, “strong evidence indicates that they are not.” Over the years, researchers have attributed variations in teachers’ grades to a number of factors: the rigor of the learning task; the actual quality of student work; the grading criteria; the grading scale; how strict or lenient the teacher was; and teacher error.

            • Transparency is important. Problems arise when teachers aren’t clear with students, parents, and colleagues about what goes into grades. When that happens, grades can convey inaccurate and misleading information.

            • Grading practices have improved. Early researchers found fault with teachers for giving different grades to the same piece of student work. But teachers in these studies were often flying blind; they weren’t given the grading criteria. Recent studies have shown that with clear rubrics and proper training, teachers can achieve an impressive level of inter-rater reliability.

            • Grades are only the tip of the iceberg. What could explain why students who tried hard didn’t master the intended learning outcomes? There are several possibilities:

-   The learning goals were developmentally inappropriate.

-   Students lacked readiness or appropriate prior instruction to master the material.

-   The teacher didn’t make clear what students were expected to learn.

-   The curriculum materials weren’t appropriate.

-   The teacher didn’t instruct students in appropriate ways, including using formative assessments to catch learning problems and help struggling students in real time.

In other words, say the authors, “Research focusing solely on grades typically misses antecedent causes. Future research should make these connections… Investigating grading in the larger context of instruction and assessment will help focus research on important sources and causes of invalid or unreliable grading decisions.”

 

“A Century of Grading Research: Meaning and Value in the Most Common Educational Measure” by Susan Brookhart, Thomas Guskey, Alex Bowers, James McMillan, Jeffrey Smith and Lisa Smith, Michael Stevens, and Megan Welsh in Review of Educational Research, December 2016 (Vol. 86, #4, p. 803-848), http://bit.ly/2i31I1D; Brookhart can be reached at [email protected].

Back to page one

 

3. Eight Ways to Foster Trust

            In this Harvard Business Review article, Paul Zak (Claremont Graduate University) reports on his findings on engagement and trust. “Employees in high-trust organizations are more productive, have more energy at work, collaborate better with their colleagues, and stay with their employers longer…” he says. “They also suffer less chronic stress and are happier with their lives, and these factors fuel stronger performance.” In ten years of field research on employees’ cognitive and affective indicators, Zak and his colleagues pinpointed what managers did to foster engagement and trust:

            • Recognizing excellence. This has the biggest impact on trust “when it occurs immediately after a goal has been met, when it comes from peers, and when it’s tangible, unexpected, personal, and public,” says Zak. “Public recognition not only uses the power of the crowd to celebrate successes, but also inspires others to aim for excellence. And it gives top performers a forum for sharing best practices, so others can learn from them.”

            • Assigning challenging but achievable goals with a concrete end point. Leaders should also check in frequently to assess progress and adjust targets so they’re at the Goldilocks level of challenge – not too hard and not too easy.

            • Giving people discretion in how they do their work. “Being trusted to figure things out is a big motivator,” says Zak. “Autonomy also promotes innovation, because different people try different approaches.” Of course monitoring and looking at results are essential, as is debriefing on what’s working and what isn’t.

            • Enabling job crafting. Motivation and trust are enhanced when people have some latitude to work on what interests and energizes them and choose their teammates.

            • Sharing information broadly. When everyone knows the organization’s goals, strategies, and tactics, stress is reduced and buy-in increases.

            • Intentionally building relationships. Social ties at work improve performance, and these can be fostered by managers expressing interest and concern for team members and structuring lunches, staff parties, and fun off-site activities.

            • Facilitating whole-person growth. “Numerous studies show that acquiring new work skills isn’t enough,” says Zak; “if you’re not growing as a human being, your performance will suffer… Investing in the whole person has a powerful effect on engagement and retention.” Leaders need to have a growth mindset about developing talent, giving frequent feedback and discussing work-life balance, family, and career plans.

            • Showing vulnerability. “Leaders in high-trust workplaces ask for help from colleagues instead of just telling them to do things,” says Zak. “Asking for help is effective because it taps into the natural human impulse to cooperative with others.” He quotes CEO Max
De Pree: “The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between the two, the leader must become a servant.”

            In a sidebar in this article, Zak says the sweet spot is employees having a sense that they’re working toward a higher purpose in a trusting organization. “Trust and purpose then mutually reinforce each other, providing a mechanism for extended oxytocin release,” he says, “which produces happiness. So joy on the job comes from doing purpose-driven work with a trusted team.” A quick and easy way to measure an organization’s culture is to ask people, “How much do you enjoy your job on a typical day?”

 

“The Neuroscience of Trust” by Paul Zak in Harvard Business Review, January-February 2017 (Vol. 95, #1, p. 84-90), https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-neuroscience-of-trust

Back to page one

 

4. The Art of Thinking About Problems in a Different Way

            In this Harvard Business Review article, consultant/author Thomas Wedell-Wedellsborg says an important leadership skill is reframing problems. Too many people jump right into problem-solving before completely understanding what the issue is – for example, people are concerned that The elevator is too slow and jump to various solutions: improving the algorithm that decides which elevator comes first; upgrading the elevator’s motor; installing an additional elevator. But if the problem is reframed – Waiting for the elevator is annoying – different solutions are possible: staggering lunch hours so elevator traffic is spread out; encouraging people to get exercise by using the stairs; installing mirrors by the elevators; playing music; installing a hand sanitizer.

            Wedell-Wedellsborg recommends seven practices for effective reframing. These can be used in a 30-minute group process, or if time is short (someone grabs you in the corridor and asks for help solving a problem), applying one or two of the practices can help:

• Establish the legitimacy of problem reframing. You can do this by showing an article or telling the elevator story.

• Bring outsiders into the discussion. Fresh eyes on the problem can be very helpful, especially if they know something about your world, will speak freely, and are willing to give input, not solutions.

• Get people’s definition of the problem in writing. This forces a level of precision that may be elusive in an oral discussion.

• Ask what’s missing. Zoom out and ask if the problem statement lacks something important.

• Consider multiple categories. Step back and get people thinking metacognitively about what category of problem is being discussed: A personnel problem? An incentive problem? An expectations problem? An attitude problem? Some other category?

• Analyze positive exceptions. Look at situations where the problem didn’t occur and ask what was different.

• Think about underlying interests. In a classic Getting to Yes story, two people are arguing over whether to keep a window open or closed. It turned out one person wanted fresh air while the other wanted to avoid a draft. The solution: open a window in the next room.

Reframing doesn’t always work, concludes Wedell-Wedellsborg, especially if a problem is complex. And some people are too wedded to a direct problem-solving mode to step back and see things differently. “Proximity to your own problems can make it easy to get lost in the weeds, endlessly ruminating about why a colleague, a spouse, or your children won’t listen,” he says. “Sometimes all you need is someone to suggest, ‘Well, could the problem be that you are bad at listening to them?’”

 

“Are You Solving the Right Problems?” by Thomas Wedell-Wedellsborg in Harvard Business Review, January-February 2017 (Vol. 95, #1, p. 76-83), no e-link available

Back to page one

 

5. Dealing with People Who Won’t Let Go of Strong Beliefs

            In this article in Scientific American, writer/publisher Michael Shermer observes that people who reject what seems like convincing factual evidence do so because their deep-seated beliefs or fears are threatened. Some examples:

-   Creationists dispute the evidence in fossils and DNA because they are concerned that secular forces are encroaching on religious faith.

-   Those who believe vaccinations cause autism point to one (discredited) study because they distrust big pharma and believe money has corrupted medical research.

-   Those who believe 9/11 was an inside plot discount evidence because they think government lies and conducts “false flag” operations to create a New World Order.

-   Climate-change deniers point to countervailing evidence because they are passionate about freedom for markets and industries to operate unencumbered by restrictive government regulations.

-   Those who insist Barack Obama was born in Kenya find minute problems with his birth certificate because they believe the nation’s first African-American president is a socialist bent on destroying the country.

In each case, says Shermer, “proponents’ deepest held worldviews were perceived to be threatened by skeptics, making facts the enemy to be slayed.” Their ability to hold to their beliefs in the face of contrary evidence is tied up with two psychological dynamics:

            • Cognitive dissonance – This is the uncomfortable tension from holding two conflicting thoughts simultaneously, which proponents try to reduce by spin-doctoring facts to fit a preconceived notion.

            • The backfire effect – In one experiment, people were shown fake newspaper articles reporting that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. When subjects were shown articles correcting the misconception and reporting that WMD were never found, those who were skeptical in the first place accepted the new articles as true, but those who supported the invasion rejected the new articles and said they were even more convinced of the existence of WMD, and Hussein must have been successful in hiding them.

            “If corrective facts only make matters worse, what can we do to convince people of the error of their beliefs?” asks Shermer. His suggestions for these difficult conversations:

-   Keep emotions out of the exchange.

-   Discuss, don’t attack – no ad hominem.

-   Listen carefully and try to articulate the other position accurately.

-   Show respect.

-   Acknowledge that you understand why someone might hold that opinion.

-   Try to show how changing facts does not necessarily mean changing worldview.

“These strategies may not always work to change people’s minds,” Shermer concludes, “but now that the nation has just been through a political fact-check wringer, they may help reduce unnecessary divisiveness.”

 

“When Facts Backfire: Why Worldview Threats Undermine Evidence” by Michael Shermer in Scientific American, January 2017 (Vol. 316, #1, p. 69), http://bit.ly/2iZ9fm2

Back to page one

 

6. Building Critical Thinking Skills for the Internet

            In this Hechinger Report article, Chris Bernik describes how AP U.S. history students in California were initially impressed with the professionally designed pages of the website www.minimumwage.com, It had a menu of research reports, well-produced graphics and videos, and an “About” page describing the site as a “nonprofit research organization” named the Employment Policies Institute. Then the teacher, with a few exploratory clicks beyond the website, revealed that this was actually a front group created by lobbyists for the restaurant and hotel industries. “Fudge nuggets!” exclaimed one chagrined student.

            This exercise was part of the “Civic Online Reasoning” curriculum created by Stanford University researchers led by education professor Sam Wineburg, all designed to help students become more critical consumers of online news, opinion, and misinformation. The goal is to help secondary students spot “native advertising” (ads masquerading as articles), the authenticity of an alarming image posted on Facebook, the claims of a controversial article. “Overall,” concluded a report on several pilot tests of the curriculum, “young people’s ability to reason about the information on the Internet can be summed up in one word: bleak.” The Common Core’s push for evidence-based reasoning is for naught if students trust everything that pops up when they do a Google search. “This isn’t just a problem with kids,” says Wineburg. “Reliable information is to democratic functioning what clean air and water are to public health.”

 

“What These Teens Learned About the Internet May Shock You!” by Chris Bernik in The Hechinger Report, December 21, 2016, http://hechingerreport.org/teens-learned-internet-may-shock/

Back to page one

 

7. Making the Best Possible Use of School Time

            In this Kappan article, Lori Nazareno (Center for Teaching Quality, North Carolina) describes how a school-based team of teachers, students, parents, administrators, and union representatives might go about systematically improving how instructional time is used:

            • Taking stock – Do a systematic inventory of how student and teacher time is currently used: interview students and teachers (and perhaps shadow two or three) to learn about time that is particularly well spent and time that’s not used well. For students, wasted time might include long transitions between classes and activities, numerous intercom announcements, whole-class bathroom breaks, and materials that are hard to access. For teachers, it might include onerous e-mail and paperwork, moving from one classroom to another, mandatory meetings that don’t add value, and professional development not customized to their needs. Findings should then be presented in a compelling way – for example, if five minutes of each hour are used inefficiently, that adds up to 17 days of lost instructional time during a school year. This website has 24 indicators that schools can use to assess the use of time: http://timeforequity.org.

            • Investigating options – The data might point to reducing or eliminating wasted time, modifying the schedule so teachers have more team meeting time, getting students involved in more hands-on and real-world experiences, tweaking classes so students can advance at their own pace, or extending the school day and year. This website has a toolkit with examples and case studies: www.teachingquality.org/time.

            • Modeling and testing possibilities – Nazareno recommends starting small and testing some possible solutions. “Prototyping gives your team a low-risk opportunity to learn lessons and improve your plan,” she says. “Identifying and trouble-shooting challenges during a testing phase lets your team adjust before full-scale implementation, which makes success more likely.”

            • Engaging stakeholders – Colleagues, parents, and others need to understand the rationale for changes before they’re made, and clear, consistent explanations are key, preferably with opportunities for feedback.

 

“4 Steps for Redesigning Time” by Lori Nazareno in Phi Delta Kappan, December 2016/ January 2017 (Vol. 98, $4, p. 21-25), www.kappanmagazine.org; Nazareno can be reached at [email protected].

Back to page one

 

8. Pointers for Instructional Coaches

            In this Leadership Freak article, Dan Rothwell passes along ideas from a group of instructional coaches he’s been working with for the past year:

• Stay curious. Focus your inquisitiveness forward, rather than psychoanalyzing the past. Resist the temptation to give quick suggestions, which tend to be those that will work for you, focusing instead on what will work for them. Use effective go-to questions, for example, Tell me more about that. What’s the next step? And what else?

• Be honest with your feelings. When something doesn’t feel right, say, “Something doesn’t feel right. I’m wondering about…” or “It feels to me like you’re getting frustrated. What’s going on for you?” If you, the coach, feel strong emotions welling up, it may indicate that “your inner control freak is trying to control someone,” says Rothwell.

• When it’s appropriate, be direct. Prepare the way by saying, “I’m going to give you very direct feedback.” Be explicit about what you observe, including when the coachee hesitates, is inconsistent, doesn’t follow up, or shows high or low energy.

• Practice patience. Don’t try to coach when the person is dealing with urgent, time-sensitive matters. Give progress time to happen – but if it’s not happening, know when it’s time to change something. And, Rothwell suggests, “Explore the difference between intention and impact. Most people don’t intend to shoot themselves in the foot.”

• Be timely when it’s appropriate. “Coach in the moment,” says Rothwell. “Don’t wait two weeks for the coaching appointment.”

 

“5 Coaching Tips for Internal Coaches from Internal Coaches” by Dan Rothwell in Leadership Freak, December 28, 2016, http://bit.ly/2hmWS0W

Back to page one

 

9. Suggestions for Successful Summer School Programs

            In this Kappan article, Daniel Browne reports the results from summer programs for elementary students organized by the Wallace Foundation in five high-need public school districts. The programs had several features in common (with flexibility on curriculum materials, scheduling, and non-academic activities):

-   Voluntary student participation;

-   No charge for participation, transportation, and meals;

-   Certified teachers providing academic instruction;

-   Class sizes of no more than 15 students;

-   Full-day programming five days a week for 5-6 weeks;

-   At least three hours of instruction in math and ELA each day;

-   A mix of academics and enrichment activities.

After two years of planning and two years of implementation, a RAND study comparing students who participated and a control group that did not found strong gains in academics, especially for those with high attendance (although lower student attendance in the second summer produced less-impressive statistics). The RAND researchers have preliminary recommendations for districts on summer programs:

• Start planning early – Commit to a program by December and start planning curriculum, teacher selection, tech support, transportation, and other items no later than January.

• Invest in high-quality instruction – That means teachers with subject and grade-level experience who can make strong links to the regular school year; high-quality, aligned curriculum materials; and fun enrichment activities.

• Track and maximize attendance – Average attendance in the two years was a disappointing 75 percent. Multiple strategies are needed for a program to compete successfully with family trips to the beach, taking care of siblings, fear of bullying, and other issues.

• Contain costs – This includes getting a realistic estimate of students who will attend so staffing and space are in synch with enrollment (the Wallace programs had a 20-30 percent no-show rate).

 

“Summer Learning That Sticks” by Daniel Browne in Phi Delta Kappan, December 2016/ January 2017 (Vol. 98, $4, p. 15-20), www.kappanmagazine.org

Back to page one

 

10. A Nine-Second Response to “Gateway” Bullying Behaviors

            In this article in American Educator, Elizabeth Kandel Englander (Bridgewater State University) defines bullying as “calculated, ongoing abuse that is aimed at less powerful targets who cannot defend themselves” and identifies gateway behaviors that may or may not lead to victimization – “socially inappropriate behaviors used to convey contempt and dominance.” Some examples: whispering about people in front of them; laughing at others openly; eye rolling; ignoring name calling; encouraging peers to drop friends; posting embarrassing photos online. These may be a momentary annoyance or the byproduct of a minor conflict, but if they are repeated and targeted toward a weaker individual, they can escalate to bullying. Englander has two recommendations:

            • Be alert for gateway behaviors and always respond. The goal is to nip them in the bud, setting clear expectations that such behavior is unacceptable.

            • Say that you are bothered by the behavior and it needs to stop. The whole interaction should take about nine seconds, says Englander: “The critical element here is not to emphasize the damage being done to the target (‘How do you think that made Kristin feel?’). Instead, emphasize the damage to yourself and to the entire school community. No question or attention should be drawn to the target – implying to any watchers that the target is really not the problem. If needed, you can always talk with that child later, but for now, you’re driving home the message that the use of socially cruel behaviors affects you and the entire school by poisoning the school climate.”

 

“Understanding Bullying Behavior” by Elizabeth Kandel Englander in American Educator, Winter 2016-2017 (Vol. 40, #4, p. 24-29, 44), http://www.aft.org/ae/winter2016-2017/englander

Back to page one

11 . Short Items:

            a. Photos of Earth from space – This collection of 20 photos taken by astronauts gives a unique perspective on various places on our planet.

 

“The Awesomeness of Earth from Above” by Emily Anne Epstein in The Atlantic, October 23, 2016, http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2016/10/daily-overview-book-benjamin-grant-satellite-images/503912/

Back to page one

 

            b. Big-picture graphs of human progress – These graphics show that while there’s been a 6.8-fold increase in the world’s human population over the last two centuries, dramatic progress has been made in levels of extreme poverty, democracy, basic education, vaccination, literacy, and child mortality.

 

“The World as 100 People Over the Last Two Centuries” by Max Rosner in Vox, December 23, 2016 https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/World-as-100-people-2-centuries-1.png; more detail at http://bit.ly/2inpWmZ

Back to page one

 

            c. Key scientific concepts – This Wall Street Journal feature lists some ideas that Edge.org solicited from leading thinkers: http://graphics.wsj.com/image-grid/year-end-science/

-   Steven Pinker on the second law of thermodynamics;

-   Alison Gopnik on life history;

-   Mario Livio on the Copernican principle;

-   Frank Wilczek on complementarity;

-   Jared Diamond on common sense;

-   Helen Fisher on positive illusions;

-   Adam Alter on the law of small numbers;

-   Lisa Randall on effective theory.

 

“Terms of Enlightenment: What Scientific Term or Concept Ought to Be More Widely Known?” in The Wall Street Journal, December 28, 2016

Back to page one

 

 

 

 

 

 

© Copyright 2017 Marshall Memo LLC

 

If you have feedback or suggestions,

please e-mail [email protected]

 

About the Marshall Memo