Transcript FINDING THE TASK IN CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS

INSTRUCTIONAL ROUNDS AND SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT
RICHARD F. ELMORE
HARVARD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
LIASCD
APRIL 2011
WHAT WE WILL DO TODAY
• Explore the Rationale for Instructional Rounds
• Introduce the Practice of Rounds
• Explore the Relationship Between Rounds and the
More General Processes of School Improvement
THE PROBLEMS OF THE WHOLE ARE THE
PROBLEMS OF THE SMALLEST UNIT
MEMORIZE THIS
PROPORTION OF VARIANCE IN STUDENT GAIN
SCORES-- READING, MATH-- EXPLAINED BY LEVEL-PROSPECTS STUDY
STUDENTS
28% R
19% M
CLASS
60%
READING
52-72%
MATH
SCHOOLS
12% R
10-30 M
ROWAN, ET AL., “. . .PROSPECTS. . .”
TEACHERS COLLEGE RECORD
(2002).
BLOOM’S TAXONOMY
• KNOWLEDGE: RECALL, ACCURACY, DESCRIBE, ENUMERATE,
IDENTIFY, REPRODUCE
• COMPREHENSION: EXEMPLIFY, EXPLAIN, RESTATE,
PARAPHRASE
• APPLICATION: ARTICULATE, COMPUTE, DEMONSTRATE
• ANALYSIS: CATEGORIZE, COMPARE, CONTRAST
• SYNTHESIS: HYPOTHESIZE, INTEGRATE, MODEL
• EVALUATION: CRITIQUE, DEFEND, JUSTIFY, REFRAME
What do you see?
Source: Education Trust; John Holton, South Carolina Department of Education, analysis of assignments from 362
Elementary and Middle Schools in SC.
As Grade Level Increases, the Assignments Given to
Students Fall Further and Further Behind Grade Level
Standards, and this Pattern Continues in High School
Source: Education Trust; John Holton, South Carolina Department of Education, analysis of English Language Art
Assignments in14 High Schools in South Carolina
OBSERVING AND ANALYZING THE TASK
• WHAT IS THE ACTUAL WORK THAT STUDENTS ARE BEING ASKED TO DO?
• WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO KNOW IN ORDER TO ENGAGE THE TASK?
• WHAT IS THE ACTUAL PRODUCT OF THE TASK?
• WHAT IS THE DISTRIBUTION OF PERFORMANCE AMONG STUDENTS IN THE
CLASS ON THE TASK?
• IF YOU WERE A STUDENT AND DID THE TASK, WHAT WOULD YOU KNOW
HOW TO DO?
THE INSTRUCTIONAL CORE
•Principle #1: Increases in
student learning occur only as a
consequence of improvements
in the level of content, teachers’
knowledge and skill, and
student engagement.
CONTENT
•Principle #2: If you change one
element of the instructional
core, you have to change the
other two.
•Principle #3: If you can’t see it
in the core, it’s not there.
TAS
K
TEACHER
•Principle #4: Task predicts
performance.
STUDENT
•Principle #5: The real
accountability system is in the
tasks that students are asked to
do.
•Principle #6: We learn to do the
work by doing the work.
•Principle #7: Description before
analysis, analysis before
prediction, prediction before
evaluation.
WHAT ROUNDS IS AND IS NOT
IS. . .
• A practice
• A culture-building activity,
focusing on the actual
conditions of teaching and
learning in classrooms
• ONE school improvement
practice, among many
• Difficult, demanding, and
counter-intuitive
• Challenging to existing beliefs
about “good” teaching
IS NOT. . .
• A process
• A supervision and
evaluation tool
• THE practice that will
improve your school
• Easy and fun
• A way to confirm you beliefs
about “good” teaching
WHAT ROUNDS CAN AND CAN’T DO FOR YOU
CAN DO. . .
CAN’T DO. . .
• STRENGTHEN AND DEEPEN AN
EXISTING IMPROVEMENT
STRATEGY
• BUILD AND REINFORCE A
CULTURE OF IMPROVEMENT
• PROVIDE CLARITY AND FOCUS
FOR EXISTING PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
• BUILD PATHWAYS INTO MULTIPLE
LEADERSHIP ROLES
• COMPENSTATE FOR THE LACK OF
AN IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY
• REPAIR A PATHOLOGICAL
CULTURE
• COMPENSATE FOR LACK OF
FOCUSED PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
• COMPENSATE FOR A WEAK
HUMAN RESOURCE STRATEGY
SO, WHY ROUNDS. . .?
• BUILD CULTURAL COHERENCE AROUND
INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICE
• DEVELOP AND REWARD EXPERTISE IN
INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICE AS A REQUIREMENT OF
LEADERSHIP
• PROVIDE A SETTING FOR CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT OF PRATICE AND STRATEGY
• PROVIDE A SETTING FOR RECRUITMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT OF LEADERSHIP
INSTRUCTIONAL ROUNDS: THE PRACTICE
• FOCUS ON THE INSTRUCTIONAL CORE
• DEVELOP DESCRIPTIVE/DIAGNOSTIC
PRACTICE, RATHER THAN EVALUATIVE
• CREATE STRONG PEER, CROSS-ROLE CULTURE
OF INSTRUCTION THROUGH DISCOURSE AND
PRACTICE
• STRENGTHEN LATERAL ACCOUNTABILITY
INSTRUCTIONAL ROUNDS:
GROUNDING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE IN THE
INSTRUCTIONAL CORE
THE ROUNDS PROCESS
PROBLEM OF
PRACTICE
PRESCRIPTION
C
PREDICTION
OBSERVATION
T
S
ANALYSIS
Using Descriptive Language
Specificity
Descriptive
Objectivity
Judgmental
Specific
General
“The choice of Huckleberry
Finn as text was inappropriate
for this age group”
“The teacher did a fabulous
job of holding the students’
attention”
“At about three minutes into
the lesson, the teacher asked
two students to respond to
the question, “Why did Huck
decide to leave?”
“The teacher introduced a
writing prompt”
TASK PREDICTS PERFORMANCE
ANALYZE THIS TASK
THE TEACHER ANNOUNCES THAT THE UNIT WILL BE THE STUDY OF
AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY. SHE ASSIGNS READING FROM THE
TEXTBOOK AS HOMEWORK. SHE LECTURES FROM AN OUTLINE
PROVIDED BY THE TEXTBOOK PUBLISHER, KEYED TO THE STATE
STANDARDS FOR SOCIAL STUDIES. THE LECTURE COVERS THE
THE HISTORY OF FOREIGN POLICY IN THE U.S. FROM THE PERIOD
IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING WORLD WAR II TO THE END OF THE
COLD WAR. THIS LECTURE TAKES TWO FULL PERIODS. SHE ASKS
STUDENTS TO OUTLINE THE CHAPTER IN THE TEXTBOOK THAT
DEALS WITH THE SUBJECT, AND TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THE
END OF THE UNIT.
SHE REVIEWS STUDENT OUTLINES AND THEIR ANSWERS TO UNIT
QUESTIONS, PROVIDES FEEDBACK ON HOW WELL STUDENTS
HAVE CAPTURED THE MAJOR THEMES, AND ADMINISTERS A UNIT
TEST, TAKEN FROM THE SUPPORTING MATERIALS PROVIDED BY
THE TEXTBOOK PUBLISHER, AND ASSIGNS GRADES.
ANALYZE THIS TASK
THE TEACHER EXPLAINS THE PURPOSE OF THE LESSON: TO DEVELOP A
FOREIGN POLICY FOR THE U.S. FOR THE NEXT DECADE. STUDENTS ARE
ASSIGNED TO FIVE GROUPS ACCORDING TO VARIOUS “FUTURES” FOR
AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, AND ONE GROUP IS ASSIGNED THE ROLE OF
THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE, WHICH WILL REVIEW AND
CRITIQUE THE PROPOSALS OF THE OTHER GROUPS. THE TEACHER
PRESENTS EACH GROUP WITH A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVE
FUTURES– E.G., THE U.S. AS GUARANTOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS, THE U.S. AS
THE CUSTODIAN OF DEMOCRACY IN THE WORLD, THE U.S. AS AGENT OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ETC.– ACCOMPANIED BY A LIST OF POSSIBLE
SOURCES THE STUDENTS MIGHT USE TO GET STARTED. THE ASSIGNMENT IS
FOR EACH GROUP TO PRODUCE A WELL-RESEARCHED PROPOSAL, PRESENT
IT TO THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE AND DEFEND IT IN
PRESENCE OF QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE. STUDENT
PRESENTATIONS ARE PUBLISHED AND DISTRIBUTED TO STUDENTS IN OTHER
CLASSES.
THIS WORK OCCURS OVER A FIVE-DAY PERIOD. THE STUDENTS’ WORK IS
EVALUATED BY THEMSELVES, BY THEIR PEERS, AND BY THE TEACHER
ACCORDING TO A RUBRIC THAT THE TEACHER HAS PREPARED.
OBSERVING AND ANALYZING THE TASK
• WHAT IS THE ACTUAL WORK THAT STUDENTS ARE BEING ASKED TO DO?
• WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO KNOW IN ORDER TO ENGAGE THE TASK?
• WHAT IS THE ACTUAL PRODUCT OF THE TASK?
• WHAT IS THE DISTRIBUTION OF PERFORMANCE AMONG STUDENTS IN THE
CLASS ON THE TASK?
• IF YOU WERE A STUDENT AND DID THE TASK, WHAT WOULD YOU KNOW
HOW TO DO?
ANALYZE THIS TASK
STUDENTS ARE SITTING GROUPS, FACING EACH OTHER. THE TEACHER
BEGINS THE LESSON BY INTRODUCING STUDENTS TO THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN LINEAR EQUATIONS AND LINEAR INEQUALITIES. SHE
DEMONSTRATES HOW TO GRAPH A LINEAR INEQUALITY FOR STUDENTS
USING THE FOLLOWING EXAMPLE:
y > ax+b
THE TEACHER PASSES OUT A WORKSHEET WITH FIVE EXAMPLES OF
LINEAR INEQUALITIES THAT FOLLOW THE FORM OF THE EXAMPLE, AND SHE
INSTRUCTS STUDENTS TO GRAPH THEM FOLLOWING HER EXAMPLE. SOME
STUDENTS COMPLETE THE WORKSHEET BEFORE OTHERS. THE TEACHER
CIRCULATES THROUGH THE ROOM ANSWERING STUDENTS’ QUESTIONS.
OTHER STUDENTS ASK THE TEACHER TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
AN EQUATION AND INEQUALITIES, TO WHICH SHE RESPONDS BY REPEATING
WHAT SHE SAID EARLIER. AT THE END OF CLASS, SHE ASSIGNS EIGHT MORE
EXAMPLES LIKE THE ONES SHE ASKED STUDENTS TO DO IN CLASS FOR
HOMEWORK.
LINEAR EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIES
Y
y = ax + b
y < ax +b
y > ax+ b
X
ANALYZE THIS TASK
STUDENTS ARE SITTING IN GROUPS FACING EACH OTHER. THE TEACHER BRIEFLY PRESENTS THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN A LINEAR EQUATION AND A LINEAR INEQUALITY. THE TEACHER THEN DISTRIBUTES A SCATTER PLOT
OF DATA SHOWING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LEVEL OF HYDROCARBONS IN THE ATMOSPHERE (X-AXIS)
AND THE PREVALENCE OF RESPIRATORY DISORDERS IN THE HUMAN POPULATION (Y-AXIS). SHE INSTRUCTS
STUDENTS TO FIND A LINE THAT REPRESENTS THE “BEST FIT” FOR THE DATA IN THE SCATTER PLOT, TO WRITE
AN EQUATION THAT DESCRIBES THAT LINE, AND TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE LINE TELLS US ABOUT THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HYDROCARBONS AND RESPIRATORY DISORDERS. SHE CIRCULATES THROUGH THE
GROUPS ANSWERING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROBLEM.
THE TEACHER THEN ASKS TWO GROUPS, WITH DIFFERENT ANSWERS, TO PRESENT THEIR WORK, AND ASKS THE
CLASS TO CRITIQUE THEIR SOLUTIONS AND EXPLANATIONS.
THE TEACHER THEN ASKS, “SUPPOSE YOU WANTED TO RESTRICT RESPIRATORY DISORDERS BY CONTROLLING
AIR QUALITY. CAN YOU REPRESENT WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE USING A LINEAR INEQUALITY EXPRESSION?
CAN YOU USE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LINEAR EQUATION AND THE INEQUALITY TO DISCUSS HOW
MUCH IT MIGHT COST TO REDUCE RESPIRATORY DISORDERS?”
STUDENTS GRAPH AND WRITE VARIOUS INEQUALITY EXPRESSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE TEACHER’S QUESTION.
THE TEACHER ASKS TWO GROUPS TO PRESENT THEIR WORK, AND INVITES THE CLASS TO CRITIQUE THEIR
SOLUTIONS AND EXPLANATIONS.
THE HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT IS TO WRITE A TWO-PARAGRAPH EXPLANATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN ATMOSPHERIC HYDROCARBONS AND RESPIRATORY DISORDERS, IN THE FORM OF A LETTER TO THE
EDITOR OF THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER, AND TO EXPLAIN HOW THE EVIDENCE MIGHT BE USED TO ESTIMATE THE
COST OF REDUCING RESPIRATORY DISORDERS. STUDENTS WILL PRESENT THEIR EXPLANATIONS AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE NEXT DAY’S CLASS.
ATMOSPHERIC HYDROCARBONS/RESPIRATORY DISORDERS
RESPIRATORY
MORBIDITY/MORT
ALITY PER 10,000
HYDROCARBON
PARTICULATES PPM
ATMOSPHERIC HYDROCARBONS/RESPIRATORY DISORDERS
MORBIDITY/MORT
ALITY PER 10,000
HYDROCARBON PPM
UNPACKING RIGOR
CONTENT
LOW
HIGH
COGNITIVE DEMAND
LOW
PROCEDURAL,
RECALL TASKS;
EXPLICIT
TEACHING OF
RECALL
STRATEGIES
EXPLICT
TEACHING OF
PREREQUISITE
KNOWLEDGE;
RIGHT ANSWERS
HIGH
SPEED, FLUENCY
IN RECALL AND
PROCEDURAL
TASKS; EXPLICIT
TEACHING OF
COMPLEX RECALL
STRATEGIES
MULTIPLE POINTS OF
ENTRY; MULTIPLE
STRATEGIES;
INDIVIDUAL
STUDENTS WORKING
AT THE EDGE OF
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
FIXED AND INCREMENTAL VIEWS OF
INTELLIGENCE AND LEARNING
FIXED
• Individuals Differ in Their
Aptitude for Academic Work
• These Differences Manifest
Themselves in Differences in
Measureable Academic
Performance
• Performance is the Basis for
Judgments of Students’ Work
• Performance Improves with
Positive Reinforcement
INCREMENTAL
• Aptitude is Malleable,
Depending on the Conditions
of Learning
• Effort and Persistence Heavily
Influence Both Learning and
Attitudes Toward Competence
• Positive Reinforcement for
Effort and Persistence,
Coupled With Self-Analysis of
Performance Improve Learning
Leadership
Practice
Organizational
Processes
Model public learning
Structures in place
Create environment
supportive of risk-taking
(psychological safety)
Instructional mandate
(vertical accountability)
Focus on structures,
processes and content
of team work
Explicit focus on group
commitments
Examine available
instructional supports /
PD
Attention to processes
Individual and
Collective Efficacy
Beliefs
Increased exposure to
instructional strategies and
practices (individual)
Increased expectation of
group success leads to
“normative press” (lateral
accountability)
Press leads to greater risktaking, perseverance,
resilience in face of failure
Student
Achievement
Individual efficacy linked
to classroom behaviors
Collective efficacy a
strong predictor of wholeschool achievement
IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES
[C]
[A]
P/Q
[B]
T
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
Organizational Learning and Accountability
• A Developmental Process
– Different Stages, Different Problems
– Each Stage Creates a Set-Point
• Learning Organizations are Problem-Seekers
– Built-In Diagnostic Capacity
– Distributed Cognition
– Psychological Safety
• Reciprocity
– Each Level of Performance Produces Its Own Demands for
Knowledge, Support
• Symmetry
– Requirements for Learning are Symmetrical Across Levels
– Transparency Creates Psychological Safety