Rigor in a Standards-Based Classroom: What It Looks Like and How To Get It!

1. Rigor in a Standards-Based Classroom: What It Looks Like and How To Get It! Dr. Sally Krisel Assistant Director of Teaching & Learning Hall County Schools sally.krisel@hallco.org

2. We Have a Fundamental Decision to Make: -Culture of Excellence-Enrichment, Creativity, Disciplined Inquiry-High Expectations, Calculated Risk, High Support, Celebration-Focus on Unlimited Potential of ALL OR -Culture of Adequacy-Remediation and Narrow Focus-Low Expectations, Fear, Anger, Anxiety-Focus on “Most Fragile”-Frustration of our “Most Able”

3. What if . . . . . . the best way to improve our schools is to focus on EXCELLENCE, not ADEQUACY? . . . schools could help their students climb WAY beyond PROFICIENCY by focusing on engagement and RIGOR?

4. Rigor? What do we mean by that term? For whom is rigor the appropriate focus?

5. Is this realistic for all students? Today, when there seems such an urgent need for change and yet the prevailing conditions are so unfavorable, the potential for frustration is greater than ever. What we need is precisely a triumph of hope over experience. But we will not find it in false promises or forced confidence. Nor will we find it in naïve optimism or pie-in-the-sky dreaming. Real hope doesn’t ignore the dilemmas of real life; it is a commitment that bridges reach and realism. We can find it only in ourselves. The Human Side of School Change, Robert Evans

6. Equity and excellence in our schools will most likely result from: Extension of the Pedagogy Once Thought To Be the Exclusive Domain of Gifted Education, e.g., High Expectation, Constructivism, Authenticity Combined with Combined with Best practice literacy and scaffolding Best practice extension of challenge for for Typical and struggling learners Advanced and advancing learners in order to in order to Provide access to equity and excellence Retain and extend access to equity and excellence in an environment of High Ceilings/High Personalization Adapted from Tomlinson (2007)

7. Rigor for ALL: Three “Tests” #1 -- Construction of Knowledge In what ways are we asking students to USE what they have learned, not just repeat it?  How does this assignment push students to grapple with information and ideas by synthesizing, generalizing, explaining, and drawing conclusions that produce new understandings for them? (Based on work of Fred Newmann)

8. #2 -- Sustained inquiry into important concepts In what ways does my instruction/this assignment focus on important concepts within the discipline?  Does it require students to elaborate on their learning and/or discuss subject matter in depth with classmates and teachers in ways that build improved understanding? (Based on work of Fred Newmann)

9. #3 -- Meaningful connections to students’ lives outside the classroom Does this curriculum have clear connections to students' lives?  Do my students see the connections between substantive knowledge and either public problems or personal experiences in their lives outside of school? (Based on work of Fred Newmann)

10. The Global Achievement GapTony Wagner (2008) “The rigor that matters most for the twenty-first century is demonstrated mastery of the core content for work, citizenship, and life-long learning. Studying academic content is the means of developing competencies, instead of being the goal, as it has been traditionally. In today’s world, it’s no longer how much you know that matters; it’s what you can do with what you know.”

11. Rigorous Curriculum for All Students • All students should be engaged in Authentic Intellectual Work (AIW), i.e., work that requires them to: construct knowledge, demonstrate in-depth understanding of important disciplinary concepts, and elaborate on their understandings. • The work should have a clear connection to students’ lives. • Authentic curriculum calls on students to work and be increasingly more like experts.

12. Rigorous, based on our definition? Write a fraction to show how much of the shape is shaded. 1.   2.   Do students . . . • construct knowledge, • demonstrate in-depth understanding of important disciplinary concepts, • elaborate on their understandings. • understand connection to their lives, • work like “experts” in the discipline?

13. Rigorous, based on our definition? Pick a stock. You have $10,000 to invest. Calculate how many shares you can buy at the current price. Every week for the next 10 weeks you will check in the newspaper whether your stock has gone up or down. You will chart the progress of your stock on the bulletin board. The chart is organized to record prices in ¼ points, but the newspaper reports the prices in 1/16 points, so you will need to convert. At the end of the 10 weeks . . . Do students . . . • construct knowledge, • demonstrate in-depth understanding of important disciplinary concepts, • elaborate on their understandings. • understand connection to their lives, • work like “experts” in the discipline?

14. Standards for Assignments in Mathematics • Standard 1. Construction of Knowledge • The assignment asks students to organize and interpret information in addressing a mathematical concept, problem, or issue.   • Standard 2. Disciplined Inquiry: Mathematical Communication • The assignment asks students to elaborate on their understanding, explanations, or conclusions through extended writing and/or discussion; for example, by explaining a solution path through prose, tables, equations, or diagrams. • Standard 3. Value Beyond School: Connection to Students' Lives • The assignment asks students to address a mathematical concept, problem or issue that is similar to one that they have encountered or are likely to encounter in daily life outside of school.

15. Let’s look at one more -- THE TASK: Individually and then (if you like) with others sitting near you, analyze the example of a tiered assignment provided in your handout. THINK ABOUT: • Based on The Equalizer, what has been differentiated? • How well does it follow our “Rules of Rigor”? • In what ways might you make it more rigorous, based on our rules?

16. Questions for Reflection on Authenticity/Rigor In what ways are we asking students to USE what they have learned, not just repeat it?  How does this assignment push students to grapple with information and ideas by synthesizing, generalizing, explaining, and drawing conclusions that produce new understandings for them? In what ways does my instruction/this assignment focus on important concepts within the discipline?  Does it require students to elaborate on their learning and/or discuss subject matter in depthwith classmates and teachers in ways that build improved understanding? Does this curriculum have clear connections to students' lives?  Do my students see the connections between substantive knowledge and either public problems or personal experiences in their lives outside of school?

17. ELA10RL3 The student deepens understanding of literary works by relating them to contemporary context or historical background, as well as to works from other time periods. The student Relates a literary work to non-literary documents and/or other texts from its literary period. Relates a literary work to non-literary documents and/or other texts relevant to its historical setting. Sample Task for ELA10RL3 The student researches an archetypal story (e.g., Cinderella, or Little Red Riding Hood) as it changes over time and across cultures, relates the various versions to their contemporary contexts and/or historical backgrounds, classifies the various versions as to their purpose (e.g., to entertain, to instruct, to promote/support cultural or societal values) then presents the results of this research in a verbal or written form.

18. Differentiated Task #3 Students independently research an archetypal story (e.g., Cinderella, Little Red Riding Hood) in three different versions that they select. These versions may be from different time periods or from different parts of the world. Students then prepare an original chart or diagram to compare and contrast the major elements of each story. Next, students research the time and place in which each of the stories was written. They then meet with two peers to discuss connections between the time and place of their stories’ production and the differing characteristics of the stories, including the reasons why each was written (e.g., to entertain, to instruct, to promote/support cultural or societal values). Finally, each student focuses on one or more characters from the story s/he researched and creates a cartoon or a comic strip that parodies some event from the time in which the character(s) lived.

19. Differentiated Task #2 The student meets with two peers, and each selects three different versions of the same story from a number of versions provided by the teacher. Each student then uses a number of resources provided by the teacher to research the time and place of production for each of his/her versions of the story. The students then meet together to select from several sample graphic organizers the one that can best represent the connections between the stories they read and the results of their research. Next the students categorize all their stories according to purpose (e.g., to entertain, to instruct, to promote/support cultural or societal values) and specify the reason(s) why each story best fits in the specified category. Finally, each student composes a dialogue between a character or characters from two different versions of the story; this dialogue should demonstrate the student’s understanding of the cultural and/or historical differences between the two versions of the story.

20. Differentiated Task #1 Using a teacher-prepared graphic organizer, the student works with two peers to analyze the characters and events in three, pre-selected versions of an archetypal story (e.g., Cinderella, or Little Red Riding Hood). Still working in the group, the student matches these stories to three historical and/or cultural scenarios provided in his/her learning packet. Each student in the group then takes one of the stories and explains to the others why it is representative of the period or culture in the chosen scenario. Next, the students determine the purpose of each of the three stories (e.g., to entertain, to instruct, to promote/support cultural or societal values). Finally, each student individually rewrites one of the stories so that it reflects one or more characteristics of the time and place in which s/he lives.

21. Examples of Rigorous Curriculum?

22. See handout, pp. 1-3.

23. Rigor Additions to GAPSS Classroom Observation Instrument

24. Relationship of GPS and Criteria for Rigor Stage 1: Identify Desired Results What do I want my students to know and be able to do? Big Ideas  Enduring Understandings  Essential Questions Standards Above, plus Skills and Knowledge Elements Stage 2: Determine Acceptable Evidence How will I know whether my students have acquired the requisite knowledge, skills, and understandings? (to assess student progress toward desired results) AIW: As they design balanced assessments, teachers ask: What kinds of assessment would require students to construct knowledge, demonstrate in-depth understanding of important disciplinary concepts, and elaborate on their understandings? Above, plus Standards Tasks Student Work Teacher Commentary Stage 3: Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction What will need to be done to provide my students with multiple opportunities to acquire the knowledge, skills, and understandings? (to support student success on assessments, leading to desired results) AIW: As they plan tasks and units, teachers ask: Does this task/unit require students to organize and interpret info in addressing concepts, problems, or issues relevant to the discipline? To elaborate on theirunderstandings? Does it have a connection to students’ lives? All Above

25. Aim High:The Importance of Taking a Proficiency View of Students • Key principle of curriculum differentiation – When in doubt, teach up! • What might happen if . . . • . . . we intentionally took a proficiency view of all students? • . . . we intentionally sought and taught toward their strengths? • . . . we really believed that we could develop in many children the abilities that we used to believe existed innately in only a few?

26. Advantages of Aiming High As a Starting Point of Instructional Planning • Best way to maximize chances for: • meaning making rich ideas • high-level thought relevance • intellectual rigor connectivity • creativity application and extension of skills and ideas • Compliments the capacity of all learners • Improves quality of conversations for all learners • More beneficial for all learners to scaffold for upward movement • Puts focus on expertise rather than adequacy • Teacher growth in capacity to provide high-end instruction • Promotes both equity and excellence

27. A Pedagogy of Poverty • Giving information • Asking right answer questions • Giving directions • Giving low level tasks • Monitoring seatwork • Reviewing • Giving tests • Going over tests • Assigning homework • Going over homework • Settling disputes • Punishing noncompliance • Grading papers • Giving grades (Haberman, 1991)

28. A Pedagogy of Plenty (Hodges, 2001) • Authentic tasks • Meaning-driven curriculum • Literacy-rich environment • Quality resources • Connecting school with home, culture and community • Problem-focused learning • Varied social configurations • Cognition and metacognition in the context of purposeful activities • Collaborative work on issues of deep concern to the students • Engagement in substantive dialogue, discussion, debate about the essence of content • Making meaning

29. At first glance . . . . . . it may seem that more rigorous academic demands are appropriate in higher-level classes. After all, the students assigned to advanced classes have higher achievement at the beginning of the year. A closer look, however, shows that variance in academic demands between the tracks contributes to an expanding achievement gap. Moreover, when low-track students have an opportunity to respond to more rigorous academic work, they make more progress than when they encounter diluted academic standards (Valli, 1990; Gamoran, 1993). American Educational Research Journal Vol. 40, Number 3, Fall 2003

30. Differences Between High and Low-Performing Students . . . on average, after initial differences among them are taken into account, low-performing students increase their grasp of advanced skills at least as much as their high-achieving counterparts when both experience instruction aimed at meaning and understanding. And for both groups, this approach to instruction produces results superior to those of conventional practices. Relevant Research for School Decisions: Academic Challenge for the Children of Poverty, Educational Research Service, Arlington, VA, p. 27

31. Why Rigor for All ? • Students enrolled in lower-level courses were more likely to earn a D or F in those courses despite their ability. (SREB, 2004) • Students are more likely to pass high- level courses than low-level courses. (Brookings Institution, 2002)

32. Why Rigor for All? • A high school program of high academic intensity and quality is the single best predictor of college success. • ALL students benefit from schools that genuinely challenge them with rigorous courses, even after controlling for differences in SES, aptitude, and prior achievement. • The impact of rigorous high school curriculum was far more pronounced for African-American and Latino students than was any other pre-college indicator of academic success. (Adelman, 1999)

33. Learning to Differentiate: Renovating Teachers’ Visions The Metaphor of the House • Imbeau (University of Arkansas) • Carolyn Callahan, Catherine Brighton & Holly Hertberg (UVA)

34. Teacher Responses to Differentiation Initiatives Resistors Accessorizers Redecorators Renovators

35. Resistors • Overt Resistors • Covert Resistors (Creative Avoidance) • Diverse forms, but each communicated a conflict between the teacher and initiative goals, methods • Demonstrated strong avoidance behaviors, fabricated elaborate excuses why deadlines couldn’t be met, assessments completed, etc.

36. Accessorizers • Intermittent involvement with initiative • Motivation: pleasing supervisors, improving personal position • No tolerance for ambiguity; strong need to retain sense of competence • Misunderstandings about instructional innovation • Strong command of classroom management • Provide moderate challenge to students • Personal definition of success as teacher; students well behaved, strong parental approval; high status in school

37. Accessorizers often feel that they are differentiating when they are not.

38. Redecorators Targeted implementers, focusing efforts in specific areas of the curriculum, incorporating only those practices that align with deeply held beliefs about teaching and learning Generally possess strong command of their discipline and are effective classroom managers Most are veterans – average greater than 20 years in teaching

39. Generally less showy than Accessorizers’ classrooms – no “dog and pony show” for visitors Seem to harbor a belief that they know better than innovators/leaders about what is most appropriate for their classrooms Technically accurate interpretations of selective components of innovations (e.g., differentiation, performance assessment) Traditional, mostly effective teaching practices

40. Renovators Seek comprehensive understanding of innovation Constantly trying to implement and improve innovation Motivated by feeling of responsibility to students and personal need to grow Strong command of content, pedagogy, and classroom management Believe that all professional educators must constantly learn Understand that risk taking, discomfort and failure are part of growth process

41. Why Teachers Resist Change State/Administration mandated the change. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. If I need to change, then I must be wrong. (I believe what I’m doing is right.) Fear of rejection or the perception of incompetence Basic insecurity (particularly about classroom management) Don’t have the time Lack of knowledge and understanding of different methods

42. Calling on teachers to change their practice invites them to experience “the humiliation of becoming a raw novice at a new trade after having been a master craftsman at an old one.” Kauffman in The Human Side of Change, p. 36 (1996)

43. As instructional leader, where do you begin to leverage change? • Articulate clear vision, definition, expectations. • Don’t be in such a hurry to establish the practices that you neglect to discuss a variety of related concerns, implications, e.g., fairness issues related to having students doing different work. • Changes in beliefs and understanding are the foundation for achieving lasting reform. The New Meaning of Educational Change, Michael Fullan

44. As instructional leader, where do you begin to leverage change? Recognize stages of teachers’ willingness and ability to embrace emphasis on rigor and provide matching support. You have to change enough quickly enough so that gravity doesn’t drag you back. Invest heavily at the outset in teachers whose skill and will make them likely to change.

45. As instructional leader, where do you begin to leverage change? • Resources: training, time, assistance, materials • What encouragers are in place to support change for more rigorous classrooms? (e.g., time for planning, multi-specialty team members, training, knowledgeable building-level leaders who are in classrooms) • What discouragers are in place to work against change for rigorous teaching? (e.g., initiatives that pull teachers in many directions, restrictive pacing guides, grading policies)

46. As instructional leader, where do you begin to leverage change? • Persist! • A long trail of abandoned “reforms” have caused teachers to be suspicious of change and to adopt a wait-it-out mentality; it is better not to attempt change and to accept the status quo than to once again set out on a course we will not keep. • A quick fix increases the likelihood of a slow death.

47. As instructional leader, where do you begin to leverage change? Articulate clear vision, definition, expectations. Recognize stages of teachers’ willingness and ability to deliver a more rigorous curriculum and provide matching support. Resources: training, time, assistance, materials Persist!

48. Rigorous Curriculum for All Students • All students should be engaged in Authentic Intellectual Work (AIW), i.e., work that requires them to: construct knowledge, demonstrate in-depth understanding of important disciplinary concepts, and elaborate on their understandings. • The work should have a clear connection to students’ lives. • Authentic curriculum calls on students to work and be increasingly more like experts.

49. Preparation for High-End Differentiation (Rigor) • Begin small.  Start with one lesson a week and gradually increase the frequency.  • Start with favorite and familiar topics.  Select your favorite unit or content area as your starting point to increased rigor. • Consider working in teams.  Teams give support and encouragement to the individual teacher and greatly add to the knowledge and experience base.

50. High Expectations for ALL Students! All students should have access to curriculum that: • evokes meaning, • stimulates curiosity, • necessitates grappling with issues, • results in knowledge construction, • and opens doors to promising futures. Tomlinson, 2006