Meeting #1
Our first meeting's agenda was packed!
We Reviewed the District's SBE Philosophy, we began unpacking our individual revised standards, and we read through Technique #7 - The 4 MS.
1. What were your initial thoughts regarding the District's SBE Philosophy?
2. What were your initial thoughts regarding the revised State Standards, particularly 21st Skills?
3. When we begin thinking about best practices regarding: objectives, outcomes, essential learnings, etc. (whatever we decide to call it) do the 4 MS crystallize your thoughts or muddy the waters? If asked minutes before instruction, could you articulate your goals for that day of instruction using the 4 MS?
Next Week:
UBD Review!
Thanks,
A place to gather and discuss education in general and Altona Middle School in particular!
Subscribe via email
About Me
Altona's Staff Development Reading List
Books I Wish I Read Before Sending My Daughter To Middle School
What I'm watching
- Outsourced
- The Walking Dead
- Justified
- Parks and Recreation
- The Mentalist
- Fringe
What I'm playing
- Black Ops (Way Too Much!!!)
- Halo Reach
- Modern Warfare 2 (Too Much!!)
Latest additions to my MP3 player
- Arcade Fire
- Florence and the Machine
- Miranda Lambert
- Queen - Flash Gordon Sdtrk!
- Waylon Jennings
What's on my Kindle
Latest iPhone Apps
- Words Free (Scrabble)
- Supervision 2.0
- iheartradio
- Midomi
- Air Sharing
- Magic Pad
What's on my nightstand
- The Beekeeper's Handbook
- The Hunger Games Trilogy!
- The Templar Trilogy
21 comments:
In regards to the 21st century skills:
It was this element of the new standards that sold me on the project. Instead of simply providing a bullet point list of "learn this," we now have a way to justify and apply the learning.
These skills can used to frame lessons in a real-world context. Parents, students, and teachers can now see the long-term value of learning certain skills.
Looking forward to using these in class to help focus student learning!
I reviewed the state standards for Social Studies with Kevin and Patrick. I was very disappointed at the vagueness of these standards. The interpretation of each SS teacher would have to be very different: hen the standards talk about culture they certainly do not specify the culture of what? and when? They talk about geography but don't mention of historical or present day. Maps could be interpreted as city,state, county, state, continent, etc. I would imagine that each teacher's perception is their own and may not correlate with someone else's expectations.
來問個安，誰不支持這個部落格，我咬他. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
It was interesting to hear Wendy's thoughts on the social studies standards. Even after going over some of the 7th grade standards, she would ask, "What does that actually mean?" Good question! Even though they are an improvement over the old standards, they are still pretty open for interpretation. Almost any lesson will fall under the standards in some capacity. Should the standards be more defined?
The inquiry questions look good... but with world language, am I really supposed to move away from teh language they are to be leanring to ask the question? There is no way a beginning student could answer the question in Spanish... Or do I incorporate all the inquiry questions into the culture part of the world langauge?
Standard: 1. Communication in Languages Other Than English
Range Level Expectation: Novice-Low
Inquiry Questions:
1. What do people need to know, understand, and be able to do to conduct effective
interpersonal communication with those who speak another language?
2. How do people show that they do not understand?
3. How does one know they are understood?
Even without the inquiry questions, though, it would be good for students and parents to see the 21st Century purpose of studying a world langauge.
Patrick said, "Almost any lesson will fall under the standards in some capacity. Should the standards be more defined?" Isn't there a point when things are too defined? These are standards for the whole state... Does every school in every district in the state need to use the same book?
On the other hand, the ELL standards are one page total and give even less information. There it truly is anything done would fit the standards...
1.ELLs communicate for Social and Instructional purposes within the school setting.
2.ELLs communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of Language Arts.
3.ELLs communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of Mathematics.
4.ELLs communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of Science.
5.ELLs communicate information, ideas, and concepts necessary for academic success in the content area of Social Studies.
Having the five 21st century skills specifically articulated both in our standards and by the district is very beneficial. I see my next goal here as:
How do I incorporate the 21st century skills (problem-solving/critical thinking, information literacy, collaboration, self-direction and innovation) into day-to-day lessons?
Science, by it's very nature, does a really good job with problem-solving and innovation although I would like to incorporate more of this in the coming years as SEPUP doesn't always lend itself to project based learning as much as I would like. We incorporated more vocabulary strategies into our lessons last year and I think it was very helpful. I am always looking for new ways to increase collaboration and self-direction :-) Any ideas are welcome!
The new science standards are more specific and give varied teaching approaches; both are welcome changes. My goal here is to figure out what the holes are in our SEPUP curriculum and to develop a plan to fill them.
When looking at the four MS, the first 2 are the ones I need to work on. I need to narrow the scope of my objectives to daily lessons. I also like the idea of exit tickets to make the objective measurable. I used to do this but got out of the habit. Science gals – any way to effectively incorporate that in our curriculum?
The district's SBE philosophy makes me very comfortable. As a "new" teacher I have seen this language and philosophy during my education and I especially like the language of formative and summative assessments. I would like to use this language in my grade book so that the definition of assessment is held to nothing less than quizzes and tests. This brings me to the question of homework not being entered in the grade book every time it is completed. Rather, a quiz every week on the concepts covered in the homework...I think some of my peers already do this.
Wow, I can't wait to craft a lesson given the new math standards. While the evidence/ outcomes portion of the standard will guide a large portion of my lesson, I will use some of the Inquiry Questions to go deeper with particular concepts.
I do not know how the 4 MS will help me articulate my goals for a specific day, but I would like to use the 4MS to focus my objective. I do have a question about the last M. "An effective objective should focus on what's most important on the path to college, and nothing else." I do not agree completely with this statement. Yes, we should focus on readiness for college...I would like to think there is more. As an UbD cool aid drinker, I understand essential learnings as information that is so important that a learner will remember it in 10 to 20 years. An essential learning is concrete real world information that learners will use even if they do not go to college.
My initial reaction to the SVVSD’s Standards Based Education Philosophy statement is that the “ongoing learning cycle” referenced greatly depends on teachers at all levels continually addressing the content standards. This is a difficult reality to imagine when it comes to the subject area of science. I will be very interested in seeing how the increased emphasis on elementary professional development in science and new science curriculum at the elementary level contributes to this learning cycle. I am very glad that Blue Mountain Elementary, Eagle Crest Elementary, Altona Middle School and Silver Creek High School have started a PST this summer for teachers and administrators to start working to cultivate the relationships needed to truly establish a learning continuum in all areas of study.
Implementing inquiry questions into science curriculum is essential for it is, to me, the essence of what science does for society. The processes of scientific studies allow us to look at the great unknown of physical, earth and life science and chip away at it as information is gathered, examined, reflected upon and redefined. Engaging and including our students in that process is done by focusing on relevance and application. The marriage between the new state standards and SEPUP (our middle school science curriculum for SVVSD) is strong in the area of connecting inquiry questions and the questions at the beginning of each lesson in the unit. Where I feel there is some weakness in the 21st Century Skills and Readiness Competencies lies in the idea that mastering the grade level expectation will lead to a measurable viewpoint. It could be open to many different interpretations and one thing I personally focus on is that science studies should not be influenced in a way that promotes individual agendas. I think by focusing on how the inquiry questions relate to a specific standard and how that applies to real life scenarios now and in the future, will help clarify for the students and myself, what content we working to understand. In the end, the viewpoints students develop will be influenced by much more than just mastering the grade level expectation.
Manageable - For me, this was a clarifier. I need to be more aware of the size and scope to be taught in a single lesson. I feel that one of my strong points is to “do different things each day” to aide my students in mastering a skill/concept.
Measurable - For me, a good wake-up call on an area I always intend to do better on, yet as I get bogged down during the year, move more away from. “Setting an explicit measurable goal beforehand helps you hold yourself accountable.” This may very well be a huge component of my 2010 – 2011 professional goal.
Made First - The SEPUP curriculum, actually, helped me move forward with this a great deal last year. Partly because it was identified for me in lesson objectives, but also in that I was really thinking about each piece of the puzzle in a unit BEFORE I started the unit.
Most Important – This does muddy the water for me. Science understanding has very specific implications for those students that are college bound. However, I see it being more inclusive. If I take out the phrase “to college” and replace it with “in life” it better matches my ideals.
When I look at the 21st Century skills in math, I think that if we could produce students who could do all of these things, they would obviously be able to succeed in any future endeavor. The question then becomes how do we create those intentionally crafted lessons that help generate these types of learners. As an example, I think it is quite easy to say that a lesson involves critical thinking, but something quite different to say that students are learning to think critically.
I also agree with the science folks in that math lends itself to situations in which we can create lessons where critical thinking and innovation are a natural progression from ideas and content we present to students; my biggest concern is that it seems quite difficult to measure how much of our intentions are actually being translated to students. We can certainly have our objectives describe what we want students to know and be able to do, however, I personally continue to struggle with how well I am able to measure achievement of any given objective on a daily basis that is both meaningful to me, meaningful to students and manageable in terms of what I can reasonably process on any given day.
When looking at the District's SBE philosophy there were two things that jumped out at me in the "Philosophy" section. The first question that jumped out at me was: "How do we teach effectively to ensure students learn?" This is really the bottom line for me. What strategies are we using? Are we giving the students activities that help them learn and retain the information? The second question that really struck me was: "What do we do when students don't learn or do reach mastery before expectations?" I struggle with the first part of this question a lot. It's difficult to squeeze extra time in the day for students who need one-on-one time or who are falling behind. This is something that I always continue to work on.
I have to say that I am very pleased with the new sate music standards. We started looking at them in our orchestra teacher PST this past year. These new standards are a huge improvement on the last ones because they are much more specific. For each grade level and standard, there are specific music levels for where the kids should be. At the end, they have put pitch ranges for each of the levels.
One thing that bothers me about the state standards is the one standard that talks about music composition. This has been one of the standards that most music teachers kind of "ignore". It takes a lot of class time when you are getting ready for a performance, and we don't have the music writing software at Altona to support this standard. Not only do we not have it, but no other middle schools in the district have it. I think the only school in the district that has it is Silver Creek. When we address the 21st century applications of the standards, we also need to have funding from the state to be able to support the technology that helps us teach these standards. It seems to be so easy for the state to write these standards, but so difficult for them to support them monitarily.
I believe that SBE is very important as a way to ensure that all teachers are focused on the skills and knowledge all students need to be successful. The best part of the new standards are the inquiry questions, which will help to guide planning as well as measure success. The drawback, from an English teacher perspective, is the fact that there is so many standards and objectives that it can become unweildy. Also, as several others have noted, the language is still ambiguous enough that teacher interpretation is still a major factor. While I approve of teacher interpretation and inspiration as valuable teacheing skills, this seems to go against the type of uniformity the state is looking for.
As the the 4 M's, I believe that #1 is going to be valuable for me. I tend to give long term objectives which I know will take up to a week to accomplish, then craft each days activities in a way that will move the students closer to that ultimate goal each day. I should be able to easily adjust my planning to make the result of each days activity the objective for the day. Perhaps I will consider two objectives: one for the unit and a seperate one for day to day measurability.
I think that the social studies standards are well written and defined. I am a bit disappointed that there is so much emphasis on personal finance in the economic standards. Although this is important for students to learn, I’m not sure that it belongs in 7th or 8th grade social studies. Perhaps math might have to pick this up?
I agree with Kathleen about the importance of inquiry questions. The ones in the new standards seem to be well thought out; however, they are not really “manageable” as far as the 4 M’s go. We will have to look at these questions and create some sub questions that we can use as objectives for daily lesson plans. Hopefully by the end of a unit, theses inquiry questions will be answered by the students.
The district’s SBE philosophy is easy to understand and I would agree with most of what they said. I would agree with Josh about the importance of formative and summative assessment in order to direct teaching and know whether the students have learned the material (part of the 4 m’s).
I think the SBE Philosophy is sound and easily understood with the four critical questions. With my emphasis now on the Special Education students, I am more interested in question number four. (What do we do when students don't learn or do reach mastery before expectations?) This question is critical to those students. What do we do when they just don't understand a concept and the class is ready to move on? Certainly modifications and accommodations come into play, therefore this becomes a continuous planning process for the teachers.
Certainly 21st Skills are important for all the students and I like this new thinking for the SPED students. For many of them, the five essential skills are things we look for when planning their IEPs. So many of them have trouble with problem solving due to processing, and we work to find ways to help them think in this manner. Information literacy is critical to their future so that they can become good job candidates. Certainly collaboration is critical to these kids because many of them have trouble working with others or vice versa! We also need them to become self directed and if we can tap into their talents, innovation will emerge.
The Districts' SBE is good in that it challanges all teachers, through the 4 questions, to insure that all student's demonstrate mastery of the district's content standards. My question is related to the third critical question. With the fastness of the standares how can we insure mastery of all the standards, especially with the A-B Day Elective classes?
First, I am thrilled to see #5 Identify and/or develop rubrics for assessments. I do believe that this is long, long over due. Each teacher should not be recreating the wheel of rubrics; this is such a waste of time, energy, and resource when we should ALL be teaching to the same standards and thus same rubrics, i.e. requirements. When Chitra was here she wrote concise rubrics which would be wonderful to have for all given units, especially for those new to teaching or new to St Vrain. I think that this is now even more vital with the new standards which are over-arching but somewhere needs to be refined enough for the classroom teacher. For instance, Math Standard 1 includes “Design and use a budget”. That is great but specifics would be much more helpful in planning a lesson.
Secondly, I have mixed feeling regarding #3 Develop district-wide common assessments. Will they be static or dynamic? Will students get a hold of them and share them across the district allowing room for dishonest evaluation? Will they be conducive to traditional testing of multiple choices or be more informative with constructive responses? Who will develop them? I’ve heard about this idea for several years now: when will they ever be put into place? Will they be used to evaluate teacher performance?
I was wonderfully excited to see personal finance literacy (PFL) as a state standard. Let’s teach our society how to deal with money and then perhaps our nation may not have to deal with financial crisis. There is a no brainer. Unfortunately current curriculum does not include PFL. Just how shall we now teach to this standard??!!! We will of course have to supplement. (Ouch, there goes my copy count…)
What about all the other standards that may not be included in current curriculum?
At first reading I was excited to see the inquiry questions. However, upon further thought I find them sometimes confusing, sometimes limiting, sometimes restrictive.
I think the standards are superbly written and are a great starting point. But they are just that, a starting point, and now it is up to our district to make it more accessible for the classroom teacher and the day to day planning.
No I would not use the 4MS when setting daily plans. I of course use 3 MS in mind (made first, measurable {but perhaps not daily}, and manageable) but honestly, Most important I disagree with. Focus on path to college and nothing else. Not everyone is going to go to college and yet I feel they deserve to have a focus of learning mathematics inside my classroom just as the privilege do.
It was interesting to see that the high school music standards included a 'performance pathway' as well as a 'generalist pathway' for each standard. I only saw the music standards, so I don't know if this also exists in other core standards. Basically, the definition is that the standards for those intending to pursue a career in music are held to the more rigorous 'performance' standards whereas all others need to be held to the 'generalist' standard. Is this true of other subjects? Is this even realistic seeing as teachers teach to all the same material regardless (at least in music classes)? I realize that this is only concerning high school standards rather than middle level, but I found it interesting nonetheless.
What I appreciated most about the District’s SBE Philosophy was actually the attempt to establish a common vocabulary. I think this stuck out to me so much because one of my observations throughout our engagement with “Understanding by Design” was that it is not too terribly different from what we already do. Really, UBD is asking us to think in different terms and organize things a bit differently, but for the most part, we’re all doing what is there already. So, as the district tries to get everyone on the same page, establishing common vocabulary to talk about things will help a lot. It becomes the responsibility of each school to then translate their current semantics into this common language.
Regarding the new state standards, overall, I am glad to see the revised standards. Though they are not perfect, the old ones were definitely in need of revision. As highlighted by some of my colleagues, there are still some ambiguities, especially in the Reading, Writing, and Communicating standards. But, I do like the added categories within the “21st Century Skills and Readiness Competencies.” Both the “Inquiry Questions” and the “Relevance and Application” portions are a good move towards metacognition, both for the teacher in planning and especially for the student. Again, I think a lot of what is included in these two sections most of us already do, we may just be articulating it differently. I think the “Nature of the Discipline” is pointless and needless, but most of the rest of the organization and articulation of the standards I am pleased with as an improvement.
I also really like the explanation sections at the beginning of the document before they get into the actual specifics of the standards themselves. It gives a good explanation and rationale. I’m all about metacognition.
Regarding the 4 M's, I am glad that we are taking a look at streamlining how we write objectives. When Joe had us all look at each others’ Virtual Campus pages last fall, the thing that struck me as most variant were the many different approaches to objectives. I think it will be helpful for students if all teachers from all disciplines were thinking about, writing, and applying objectives in a uniform way.
That being said, I agree with what Steve said about the “Manageable” section. I also tend to think bigger picture when I am writing objectives and then look at how each lesson points to that larger goal. I also like his solution of a larger objective supported by smaller daily objectives. I’m sure we will have opportunity to work on this new strategy together this upcoming year.
I have been unable to do all the reading as I am responsible for my campers pretty much all day every day... but your posts have been very helpful for me, so let me jump in.
I'm excited about the way the outcomes and inquiry questions can help us to make sure our daily plans and goals are measurable and focused. When it comes down to it, the most important thing is that when Joe -- or anybody else -- walks into my classroom, my students can answer the questions: What exactly are you doing? And why are you doing it? In other words, how is your (student's) valuable time being used, and how will this acitivity lead them to the greater skills and understanding that we are striving toward? I love that we are all eagerly working toward making this process more specific and measurable.
I have to go check on my kids. More later. I hope everyone is having a great summer!
Woohoo, I am coming in LATE! Hey Joe, have you checked to make sure that the person writing in an Asian alphabet is being appropriate on your blog? Just curious.
You guys have covered the questions pretty well at this point; that's definitely the issue with being so tardy to the conversation. However, the benefit is getting to compare and contrast all your thoughts. Such smart folks. :) I have been thinking along the same lines as Jenay throughout this summer-- The district's SBE policy is giving us the line of thinking we need to use, complete with a common language in which to discuss what we are doing. Thanks to classes such as this, Altona, I feel, is way ahead of the curve in developing professional language and organizing the way we do things. Now we wait for the district to catch up!
It is very exciting to see the 21st Century Skills section attached to the standards. Library and research skills are very much a part of that, so it's nice to see us being somewhat embedded in the works. We have been guided for a few years by our own 21st Century standards (http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/learningstandards/AASL_LearningStandards.pdf), so I look forward to finding correlation with yours and being of more service to you!
I was curious to see what the revised state standards would look like this year. Although there were a few things I didn’t particularly like about the old version, I thought they were pretty effective for English. The revised standards are in a different format, but not drastically different. The Evidence Outcomes have not changed much, and I think they are appropriate. I really like the Relevance and Application section, and I think it will be beneficial to students and teachers alike. The students always want to know why something is important, and sometimes we, as teachers, need to be reminded why we are teaching certain things. I have mixed feelings about the Inquiry Questions. For the most part I liked them, but I found a few of them to be unclear, and can imagine that they would be confusing to the students. It definitely is a step in the right direction, and will help me shape some of my lessons as I answer the questions myself. And, as has been mentioned several times, it is essential that we focus on critical thinking skills at this level.
While I am able to state my goals on a daily basis, sometimes I am unsure what to use as the Objective part of DSOAH. Do I write the overall unit objectives, or the daily objective? I usually take my info straight from the standards. I hope that we will be able to clarify some of this next year when we adopt a new format and achieve more consistency. It is refreshing to see that we are always striving to improve what we already have in place, even if the process is sometimes frustrating.
Post a Comment