There’s a lot of discussion around grading and specifically how traditional grading falls short of informing how well students are doing in a class. Letter grades and percentages do not inform students and their parents as to how well they are learning the material. That one final letter or final percentage includes way too much information to be of any real value. And it’s further complicated when behavior is included in that grade not too mention how many teachers still give extra points for kids who bring all their supplies or kids who bring in something that has nothing to do with what they are learning. Those final grades are very convenient, especially for busy parents who don’t have time to read over lengthy narratives but they fall short of what we’d like them to actually do, which is tell what our students are learning and what they have yet to learn.
Typically we wonder about grading when taking into account the following different types of students:
Student A who doesn’t do any work, acts out in class yet can pass tests or shows the he or she can meet standard.
Student B who does all the work, is cooperative in class and even helpful to other students but doesn’t do well on tests or even more doesn’t show that he or she can meet standard. This is more than just a student who doesn’t test well, this student truly needs more time to understand the topics/concepts being studied.
In a traditional grading class both Student A and B might average out to a C final grade. And if that doesn’t seem right, or fair, to the teacher then Student A can get a C- and student can get a C+. A fudge in the final grade to account for the difference in behaviors and attitude and work ethic. Maybe the fudging even goes so far as to give Student A a D+ and Student B a B-! That may seem more fair but is it valid?
The conversation with parents for Student A focuses on the student’s potential because he or she can meet standard but isn’t completing work. Student A isn’t behaving in an appropriate manner for school or in a manner to be successful in school.
While the conversation with Student B’s parents focuses on how hard he or she works, how much he or she tries and what a great person and/or student he or she is but how he or she isn’t meeting standard. The conversation then will need to gravitate to how this student can learn the material.
Both Student A and B need very different interventions and shouldn’t be getting the same letter grade imho but often in traditional grading they will end up with the same grade. On paper they look very similar, average as they say, but in fact they are very different.
Now what about those who say that Student A is rare and there just aren’t that many of them? Then let’s take into account Student C. Now this student, like Student A, doesn’t do work, maybe acts out and also does poorly on tests or doesn’t standard. Only by giving that student extra credit or inflating anything he or she does turn in can that student get a D or a C- if the teacher doesn’t want to fail the student. Typically that student will get an F. For Student C and those like him or her that F will always be a punishment, a reminder that they just can’t succeed in school.
Now let’s look at Students A, B and C in a Standards-Based Graded (SBG) class.
Using a 4-point scale where a 0 means incomplete, no evidence of meeting standard (not a zero in the same way zeroes are used in traditional grading classes so this zero will not be averaged in any way, it just means that the teacher needs more evidence and when the teacher gets more evidence the student will be able to meet standard just like everyone else), a 1 means that even with help the student does not show understanding, a 2 means that the student has a basic understanding of the concept, a 3 means that the child has met standard or shows understanding of the concept, and a 4 means that the child exceeds the standard, which can mean being able to show understanding independently, consistently, and/or is able to teach it to others.
Student A will have a 1 for behavior and a 3 or 4 for the academic concepts.
Student B will have a 4 for behavior and a 1 or a 2 for each academic concept that he or she doesn’t quite get.
Student C will have a 1 for behavior and a 1 or a 2 for each academic concept.
An SBG progress report seems more valid and more informative to me. As the teacher I know what interventions are needed for those students and I can communicate that more easily to their parents.
And let’s not forget students that have been considered average students in traditional classes, or C students (but unlike Students A or B because they do some of their work and they show understanding of some of their concepts), they might get 2’s on their behavior and 2’s or 3’s on specific academic concepts.
Alone those 1’s, 2’s and 3’s provide some information but when they are attached to what are called proficiency scales showing exactly what skills, knowledge, ideas, etc. the student needs to show or learn to meet standard then they become tools students, parents and teachers can use to improve. Proficiency Scales, much like rubrics, provide specific information as to what is needed to learn the material. Those scales can be used by the teacher to provide targeted and individualized feedback to students so they can tell if they are getting the concepts or not. As I wrote in an earlier blog post I would share theses proficiency scales with students only after they’ve had a chance to explore and learn without fear of getting low scores (in other words, the work they do while learning provide me with formative assessment that I wouldn’t necessarily score but that can inform my instruction and my justification of a future score – I won’t say final because I feel students should able to improve if they want to).
With the SBG parents and students can see what they need to work on if they want to improve and it’s much more informative than one letter grade or percentage that combines behavior, and who knows what else, with academic progress.
In the end we as teachers want the data we gather, whether it’s observation, formative assessments, or anything else we get from our students, to help us see whether it is the behavior causing the academic problems or whether it is the academic problems causing the behavior problems. Either way, our interventions have to be different depending on what our students need. I can use SBG more efficiently to tailor interventions to my student’s individual needs.
In the Marzano Research Laboratory online course I’m taking on Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading a distinction was made between Rubrics and what are known as Proficiency Scales. I have to admit that I’m having a difficult time understanding the difference between the two. Honestly, they both seem like rubrics to me!
I searched for proficiency scales vs rubrics and found this Prezi by Kathy Verschoor too:
I’m getting it, slowly, but I need to see more examples so I looked at some proficiency scales and some rubrics on the topic of the water cycle to see if I could maybe see the difference. Here are some rubrics I found online when I searched for water cycle rubrics:
Here is a proficiency scale that someone, I’m so sorry but I don’t remember where I got this from, made using Marzano’s proficiency scale outline using the WA State Science Standard for the water cycle.
They are quite different and frankly, for scoring a student’s understanding of the water cycle I find the proficiency scale much more helpful. The rubric seems like an all purpose, project guide. I might share a rubric with students way before I share the proficiency scales with them, as I’ve written about before.
I’m taking an online course, Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading, from the Marzano Research Laboratory, and it’s reinforcing what I’ve believed about how subjective it is to grade and score kids on their learning. As teachers we strive to assess our students’ learning as accurately as possible. The truth is that an A in my class is not the same as an A in someone else’s class. I’m not even certain that a, “Meets this Standard,” in my class is the same as, “Meets this Standard,” in a similar class. Letter grades or standards-based grades are snapshots of a complicated process and change all the time. That being said I do prefer standards-based grading for many reasons as long as the “grading” period doesn’t happen often. I’d much rather give my students feedback most of the time to help them learn than cloud that feedback with letters or numbers that reduce their learning.
Here’s a great example from the formative assessment course I’m taking:
Let’s take this one type of test -
Questions 1-10 are basic, simple recall questions, probably multiple choice or fill in the blank, about content that was explicitly taught.
Questions 11-14 are more complex questions, probably short answer, still about content that was explicitly taught.
Questions 15-16 are complex questions, probably short answer, that ask students to apply what they learned. Content was NOT explicitly taught.
So let’s say the same exact test is given to students in three different classes, a common assessment. I took the test and got all of the first 10 questions correct, I got half of the second set of questions correct and I got none of the last two questions correct.
Take into account this scenario of my test being scored in each of the three different classes:
In class 1 the teacher weighs the first set of questions, 1-10 at 20%, the second set of questions, 11-14 at 20%, and the third set of questions, 15-16 at 40%.
So in class 1 I got 20% + 10% + 0% = 30%, I got an F.
In class 2 the teacher weighs the first set of questions, 1-10 at 60%, the second set of questions, 11-14 at 30%, and the third set of questions, 15-16 at 10%.
So in class 2 with the same test getting the same questions correct I got 60% + 15% + 0% = 75%, I got a C.
In class 3 the teacher weighs the first set of questions, 1-10 at 80%, the second set of questions, 11-14 at 20%, and the third set of questions, 15-16 at 0% because that teacher feels he or she cannot hold students accountable for content he or she did NOT explicitly teach.
So in class 3 I got 80% + 10% = 90%, I got an A-!
How can I take the same test and depending on the class, or specifically depending on the way the questions types are weighted, get anywhere from an F to an A-?!
“There’s measurement error in any test no matter how well we design them, there’s going to be measurement error. Let me give you an example. One of the readability analyses, there’s a lot of different ones you can use to find out what’s the readability level on any kind of a passage. One of those in particular has a 1.5, what would be considered a year and a half measurement error. What if I’m a First Grade teacher, I want that readability to be spot on, don’t I? So if I happen to see that it says 2.0, that’s the readability, 2.0, and let’s pretend that it only has one measurement error, one grade level span at measurement error, that means that 2.0 could be as low as First Grade, could be as high as Third Grade. That’s what we call measurement error. There’s error inherent in every kind of measurement, which is why you don’t want to base big decisions only on a couple of assessments, and certainly not only on just one assessment, you want to use multiple pieces of evidence.”
Marzano Research Laboratory Vice President Dr. Tammy Heflebower, from Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading course.
We need to figure out what we want out of our assessments. If it’s to help students learn then feedback is the probably the best way to go. If it’s to report to students and their families what they have learned, or what they’ve shown that they have learned, then using rubrics and student self-assessment with teacher input (standards-based grading) is useful. If you’re stuck having to reduce student learning to letter grades then try having conversations with students as to what their, “final grade,” should be. Usually what ends up happening here is some elaborate math to convert standards-based grades to letter grades or percentages. It sucks that we have to do that just because that’s the way it’s been done.
After retweeting this Science Teacher’s blog post on Twitter about sharing standards with Science students I had this conversation with David Grossman:
— Alfonso Gonzalez (@educatoral) June 21, 2014
@tkSciGuy I hear ya. I go back and forth on that one. I typically post standards after kids figure stuff out on their own.
— Alfonso Gonzalez (@educatoral) June 21, 2014
Sharing Learning Expectations is one of the strategies of formative assessment or assessment for learning (AfL) and I’ve often questioned that particular strategy in a Science, or inquiry based, classroom. I’m not saying keep students in the dark but rather, as I tweeted to David above, give students a chance to discover a learning target for themselves then share the learning expectation or learning target with them instead of giving it away. The chance to discover something for themselves is something I don’t want to take away from my students.
Here’s an example of Middle School Life Science NGSS:
LS1A: Structure and Function
All living things are made up of cells, which is the smallest unit that can be said to be alive. An organism may consist of one single cell (unicellular) or many different numbers and types of cells (multicellular). (MS-LS1-1)
Within cells, special structures are responsible for particular functions, and the cell membrane forms the boundary that controls what enters and leaves the cell. (MS-LS1-2)
In multicellular organisms, the body is a system of multiple interacting subsystems. These subsystems are groups of cells that work together to form tissues and organs that are specialized for particular body functions. (MS-LS1-3)
The above standards are very similar to the WA State standards that I used before the NGSS came out:
Life Science (6-8 LS1A): All organisms are composed of cells, which carry on the many functions needed to sustain life.
Life Science (6-8 LS1B): One-celled organisms must contain parts to carry out all life functions.
Life Science (6-8 LS1C): Multicellular organisms have specialized cells that perform different functions. These cells join together to form tissues that give organs their structure and enable the organs to perform specialized functions within organ systems.
Life Science (6-8 LS1D): Both plant and animal cells must carry on life functions, so they have parts in common, such as nuclei, cytoplasm, cell membranes, and mitochondria. But plants have specialized cell parts, such as chloroplasts and cell walls, because they are producers and do not move.
If I start by sharing those standards with students they will see that living things are made up of cells. A harmless bit of knowledge but after years of starting my 8th grade Life Science course with the question, “what is living,” I’ve noticed that living things being made of cells is one of the characteristics that students don’t think about as being a specific characteristic of being a living thing.
We spend time discussing what it takes to be considered a living thing. We look at microscopic organisms as well as use our prior knowledge of multicellular organisms. Different classes have come up with different numbers of characteristics of living things, such as living things need to consume food to rebuild and for energy, living things need water, living things respond to stimuli or move with a purpose, etc. Figuring out that all living things are made up of cells is something that we usually figure out later in the process. That discovery helps students understand why the cell is the basic unit of living things, which is a rather abstract notion.
It is at this point that I feel confident sharing the standards as the goal for their learning. Considering that all the learning we’ve done up to this point, learning that has been fraught with errors, learning that has been excellent formative information to guide my instruction, makes it unnecessary for rubrics or for formal assessment. I wouldn’t score anything done during this time because I will NOT penalize students for what they haven’t learned yet or for what they are in the process of figuring out and discovering.
Once they’ve discovered it and learned it, then the teacher can craft a more summative assessment based on the learning target/standard using a rubric of some sort. David’s idea is also an excellent one, have students write their own learning target which the teacher can then compare to his or her learning target.
So sometimes it’s best to share learning expectations after some learning has occurred and NOT at the onset of new learning experiences.
I’ve been reflecting on my first attempt at using a commercial off the shelf (CoTS) game in class for student learning, in this case World of Warcraft (WoW). I took a risk and tried to use the power of WoW to leverage some Science learning, in this case classification of living things. There are many ways students could practice classifying living things, from collecting samples at home, in the woods, or around campus, to collecting photos via image searches. My idea was to have students use fantastic creatures not found on Earth to get them to really think about how to categorize different living things. I still think the idea is a good one and yet it bombed.
Before I get to the way using WoW to have students classify living things did not work I will first share the ways playing WoW in class worked splendidly.
- My 8th graders, who throughout this past school year did not engage 100% with anything I offered them (not even dissections!) were 100% completely engaged in playing WoW.
- Not only were they engaged in playing their character and either getting the character around its virtual world exploring or completing quests and leveling up, many of them did complete many quests and leveled their character up quite successfully.
- They were actively problem solving the whole time they were playing, whether that was completing quests or figuring out how to get around and explore their surroundings (or even just figuring out how to control their character).
- While engaged playing their individual characters students were communicating with each other in the computer lab helping each other. Students would ask for help and help was given either by verbally giving ideas of what to do or, for those who’s characters were near other characters, coming over to lend a helping hand.
- Students grouped themselves when they could and worked on quests together.
- Students talked about the game outside of class and looked forward to the days when we would be in the lab playing again.
- There were times when everyone was in the moment, what in gaming is called flow, focused on their game and talking that was going on was not distracting to the whole group.
- There were times when obstacles were overcome and joyful exclamations were heard, what in gaming is called fiero.
- I was in the game as well so I participated with my students as an equal and we enjoyed each other’s company as well as helped each other.
Overall, it was a very positive experience and the level of collaboration, communication, and learning was higher than the whole rest of the year. A seeming success, except that my course is a Science course, specifically a Life Science or Biology course.
In terms of the Science very few of my 8th graders went on to complete the classification project. They played the game and then after we played our final day in the lab many did other things instead of working on the project. So if I evaluate the effectiveness of this project from a purely scientific point of view, did students learn about classifying living things, it wasn’t very effective.
Tegan Ashleigh Larter wrote a fabulous follow-up blog post where she compares using WoW to teach classification of living things vs Minecraft. One of my 8th graders also follow-up on Tegan’s post by listing his 10 reasons why Minecraft would be better than WoW (great reasons!).
Next year I won’t be teaching 8th grade Life Science and even if were I wouldn’t use WoW in that way again. I would try Minecraft though. That being said I did get approval from my principal to teach a separate 6th grade class using WoW for literacy! That’s the way WoW in School was originally used, successfully I might add, so I’m very excited about getting to do that for kids.
Here’s looking to next year and using WoW again!
Here’s the process:
WoW in Science (My use of World of Warcraft in Science class!)
Day 1 WoW in Science (Our first day playing WoW in Science class!)
Day 2 WoW in Science
Day 3 WoW in Science
Day 4 WoW in Science
Day 5 WoW in Science
Day 6 WoW in Science
Days 7, 8, and 9 WoW in Science
Days 10, 11, 12, 13 WoW in Science
The week of May 19th six of the ten middle school teachers from my school went to Camp David Jr with our 8th grade students for an Olympic Odyssey outdoor learning experience. It was a fantastic week!
Part of our outdoor experience is some hiking. There are some incredibly beautiful places to hike in WA State and we had the best weather I’ve ever seen the week we were there. We had some shorter hikes to get to Second Beach and to view Tatoosh Island from Cape Flattery but we also had a couple of longer hikes. Ozette Beach makes a triangle for a roughly nine and half mile hike. We also hiked the Spruce Railroad Trail along Lake Crescent on Monday to give kids a fun way to get to camp (a misunderstanding where kids thought it was a four mile hike got them rather upset after hiking six and a half miles and getting picked up by our buses so we wouldn’t be too late getting to camp).
We got to hike about 20 miles total that week. I noticed something in those hikes that made me think about the kind of educator I am. There were parts of the hikes where the trails were pretty narrow and since staying on the trail is important for protecting the natural habitat passing was discouraged. When the trails widened or when hiking on the beach the faster hikers led the way and the rest of the hikers settled into their comfortable paces from the middle to the end. I often found myself alone in the middle.
It was quite nice to have the time to hike and reflect and enjoy the scenery, which got me to thinking. Why was I alone in the middle? Where did everyone go? There were high school counselors, 8th graders and sometimes even teachers who were going just fast enough that I didn’t want to keep up with them (or just plain couldn’t!). I was going at my pace and pretty soon I’d look ahead and couldn’t see anyone.
Those who were with me and were walking more slowly than me eventually fell behind so that when I turned to look back, I couldn’t see anyone. That made me think about my teaching career. For most of my 23 years of teaching grades 4 through 8 I’ve often found myself alone in the middle.
I’ve never been quick enough to try the newest and latest thing first. By the time I was making webpages using HTML and having my students do the same, many others had been there and had been doing that. But no one in my school was. By the time I was having students blog many others had already been doing that. But no one in my school was. You get the picture. I was the first, and often only, teacher in my school to do things but not the first by a long shot when I’d widen my search.
It became very apparent when I started using Twitter and connecting with other educators that I was somewhere in the middle, and alone. There are so many teachers doing things way before I do, yet I’m still way ahead of the teachers I work with. I’m not fast enough to keep up with the super fast adopters but I’m still an early adopter because I do jump on faster than many others.
While enjoying my solitary hike it occurred to me that being in the middle like this is actually pretty good. I get to learn from the earlier adopters and those ahead of me. Then I can take all that experience, my own and that of those who are ahead of me, and use it to help those behind me. Being alone in the middle can be pretty cool.
Here’s a pedometer screenshot of the Ozette hike:
Here’s the Ozette hike without the mile markers:
Here’s the Cape Flattery hike:
Use of the above infographic does not constitute endorsement of the authors/creators of the infographic. I was merely giving credit to the owners/creators.
I’m finding that the hallmark of 21st Century learning is a move away from the traditional, 19th and 20th century focus on the three R’s (Reading, wRiting, aRithmetic) and a move to the C’s. I say the C’s because when I first read about the 21st Century C’s there were three, Connect, Collaborate, Create.
The more I read I noticed the three C’s became the four C’s, Connect, Communicate, Collaborate, and Create.
Then people started to add Curate bringing our total to five C’s!
Now I see another C added that I do agree is quite essential for 21st Century learning, Critical Thinking.
So now we have the six C’s of 21st Century Learning, Connect, Communicate, Collaborate, Curate, Create, using Critical Thinking.
The more I think about the six I think we still have four if we do a little cleaning up. To me Connecting/Communicating/Collaborating go together excellently. I see those as ONE C.
So I say we still have four C’s (can’t seem to get it down to three) and they are:
using Critical Thinking!
Last year our middle school staff agreed to stop choosing Student’s of the Month and to stop giving out monthly awards for behaviors in which we want our students to engage. My advisory students conducted a survey and we found out that a majority of students reported feeling left out and not appreciated by our monthly awards assemblies. The assemblies were okay for students who play the game of school well but even they were often embarrassed for being chosen for an award or a certificate because it singled them out. This is what happens when a few are given accolades for things that are imposed on them. Academic awards are not something everyone would even want to compete for yet they are automatically competing. And if you think those who don’t get chosen for an award aren’t forced to compete then why are they made to feel that they “could have” gotten an award or could get it still? We either tell them all to go for the awards or we imply that they should. Even if school is not something they are good at!
We replaced our monthly awards assemblies with assemblies that were put together by students for students! What a concept! Students could highlight their talents in fun and engaging ways without handing out a single certificate or singling out anyone who didn’t want to be included.
This school year there were some changes, including having a new principal. For whatever reason our monthly assemblies didn’t happen. That coupled with the loss of monthly awards and student of the month awards the year before has caused some students undue stress. I heard from a couple of families of high achieving kids that some of our students are so upset at having no ways to be acknowledged for their hard work and wonderful achievements that they are starting to feel, “why bother?” One of the reasons we chose to abolish awarding kids certificates for getting good grades is to avoid having our children feel they shouldn’t bother doing well if they are not getting rewarded for it. Even the parents I spoke to agreed on that point. But is there a difference between getting rewarded for doing well and being acknowledged for doing well?
I think so. We live in a world where anything and everything we do can be shared easily through social media. Kids are sharing all the time, 24/7 (even during school), when they win a game, get good grades, complete wonderful pieces of art, play great music, etc. We as a species crave acknowledgement for doing well and for doing great things. That seems different than being rewarded for doing well. So how does a school acknowledge their students without rewarding some and punishing others?
I think having our students put together assemblies where they choose how to highlight the great things they are doing is a great way. And I think it was working well last year so we should bring it back somehow. I also heard that our ASB brought up this same topic at their ASB executive meetings. Our ASB advisor understands why we chose to abolish rewarding students for doing the right thing so she asked the ASB to come up with some ideas for acknowledging students. She wondered what they wanted and what follows is what she found out.
[I'm paraphrasing here.] Our ASB students thought that if each teacher chose a student to highlight—and it could be for any reason— and we keep a list of students chosen, then more students could be recognized. We would do this monthly and then take a picture and post the teacher’s short write up about the students in the showcase outside the office. That works out to about 15 students per month—x9 months is 135 students, and we have about 240ish. So that would get half of them—so if we added a PE teacher and a Choir teacher then we get about 30 more. This list includes all advisory teachers too. [End paraphrase.]
So as a school we have students who are craving acknowledgement for all the wonderful things they are doing, not just academic/school. We have some ideas for how we can do something about that. I’m wondering if we can satisfy their need for acknowledgement with student-run assemblies and teachers choosing students to highlight each month. I’m wondering if that’s how can we help our students not feel, “why bother,” if they are not rewarded for doing well in school? It’s our fault they feel that way because we’ve trained them since elementary that if you do well in school you can be chosen to get an award or be chosen for the coveted, “Student of the Month,” recognition. Will it ever be enough? What if we hold out a bit longer, will they feel pride without being recognized by their teachers?
Then I read this blog by Grant Wiggins, Engagement and Personalization: Feedback part 2. I especially focused on these parts:
Here are the three key questions from the Gallup survey, on a strongly agree-strongly disagree scale:
- My teachers make me feel my schoolwork is important.
- At this school, I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day.
- In the last seven days, I have received recognition or praise for doing good schoolwork.
It’s no wonder that students enjoy sports, performing arts, robotics, and other such offerings as much as they do since they get to play to strengths, help the greater good, and routinely receive some positive feedback.
As Gallup summarizes in its findings:
Students’ engagement at school may be influenced by innumerable factors largely outside a school’s control. However, there are fundamental strategies schools can focus on to dramatically raise the likelihood that students will be emotionally engaged in the classroom on any given day.
Those strategies include providing students with opportunities to discover and develop their talents, and with teachers who inspire a sense of optimism about what they can achieve with those talents.
So now I’m wondering if there’s a way we can give our students feedback instead of acknowledgement? Is there a difference? Sports, performing arts, and other such offerings allow students to play to their strengths and coaching provides them constant feedback. How do we incorporate that into school? Yeah, we often have students taking classes they wouldn’t choose to take because they don’t play to their strengths. Adults make kids take classes we feel will provide them with skills they will need to succeed in life.
So we have students doing well in school and students doing well in other areas with many of them craving some sort of positive feedback or acknowledgement. Our job as educators is to provide that without rewards and punishment. Oh boy.
What if the purpose was to help teachers do their job better? What if the purpose was to help teachers better serve the students they are working with each and every year? Having one administrator alone be responsible for that is a daunting task. Administrators are also overworked so teacher growth and development should be a team effort.
So let’s begin by changing Teacher Evaluation to Teacher Growth Plan or Teacher Growth Team. That right there changes the dynamic and the focus to improving student learning and to making education relevant to today’s learners as opposed to “evaluating” teachers. Begin by developing or making use of building Professional Learning Communities or PLCs to be part of every teacher’s professional development. Then come up with a plan to use those PLC teams to observe each other and determine what the team needs to best serve their students!
In my experience, working with a Science PLC has helped me improve my Science instruction for my students more than attending different workshops throughout the school year. Now add to that PLC team a Personal Learning Network or PLN using a tool like Twitter and you have the formula for a powerful professional development experience for all teachers!
Our middle school Science and Math teams are working on putting together an application for an innovative professional development or PD project for next year. It’s being offered by Washington STEM and the purpose is to provide teachers the ability to do what a majority says would be powerful PD but that they rarely if ever get to do:
observe models of instruction,
practice what we observe and/or want to do in our classrooms,
have the opportunity for real time feedback,
get peer coaching (better if it’s an outside source such as your school’s service district)
Let’s put our focus where it belongs, providing the best learning opportunities and experiences for today’s learners.