Vermont Council on Reading Spring 2015 Conference: Lucy Calkins and Katherine Paterson!

Vermont Council on Reading

2015 Spring Conference

The Common Core and More:

Pathways and Bridges to Literate Lives

A Day with

Lucy Calkins

and

Katherine Paterson

Friday May 29, 2015

Sheraton Conference Center
870 Williston Road
Burlington, VT 05403

Conference Agenda and Registration Information

The First Amendment, a Captive Audience, and "The Grinch Memo"

Find this image on Flickr

           Over some years as a Curriculum Coordinator in more than one Vermont school district, I was dismayed to discover the degree to which Christmas was routinely observed and celebrated in our schools and classrooms.  Christmas was everywhere: Christmas decorations in school lobbies, halls and classrooms; secret Santa gift giving; un-secret Santas in costume; school-sponsored Christmas bazaars; Christmas concerts featuring Christmas carols; Christmas plays; Christmas classroom parties during the school day, featuring Christmas cookies and other Christmas treats.  In the midst of all of this, I kept picturing a non-Christian child or adult - Baha’i, Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, Sikh, Atheist, or Agnostic - facing the deluge of Christmas in school for weeks, fearful about disclosing her/his “otherness”.                    

            The First Amendment of the Constitution carries important obligations. Public schools may not endorse religious activity or doctrine, nor coerce participation in religious activity.  The right of religious expression in school DOES NOT include the right to have a “captive audience” listen, or the right to compel other students to participate, actively or passively.

           

            Eventually I raised this issue with a listening superintendent.  She and I worked with the supervisory union attorney to craft what came to be known (ultimately fondly) as "The Grinch Memo". I’ve written countless memos in my career as an educator.  This is one still makes me proud.  We intentionally sent it early in the school year, giving everyone time to make plans for the winter months.  We knew it would cause a stir, and it did.  But for many years afterwards, principals would often ask me for a copy of it…because it made sense to them, too.

            The purpose of public schools is to engage students and prepare them to live as productive citizens in a democracy.  We serve this purpose poorly by ignoring the religious, ethnic, and economic diversity of our society; by assuming that our own community is homogenous. 

            Please feel free to use or adapt "The Grinch Memo" to raise awareness in your school district.  

Memorandum

To:       Teachers and Administrators

From:   Superintendent and Curriculum Coordinator

Re:       Guidelines on Religious Observances and Symbolism in Schools

The topic of religious expression in public schools encompasses a wide array of issues and raises a multitude of questions under the First Amendment.  The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”  The First Amendment applies to state governments and therefore to public schools as agents of the state.

Two Basic and Equally Important Obligations of the First Amendment:

1) Schools may not discriminate against religious expression by students.  Schools must give students the same right to engage in religious activity and discussion as they have to engage in other comparable activity.

2) Schools may not endorse religious activity or doctrine, nor coerce participation in religious activity.  The right of religious expression in school DOES NOT include the right to have a “captive audience” listen, or the right to compel other students to participate, actively or passively. 

Guidelines for Schools in Keeping with the First Amendment:

a.  No religious belief or non-belief should be promoted by the school district or its employees and none should be disparaged.

b.  The district should use all opportunities to foster understanding and mutual respect among students and parents, whether it involves race, culture, economic background, or religious beliefs.

c. The district recognizes that one of its educational goals is to advance students’ knowledge of, and appreciation for, the role that religious heritage has played in the social, cultural, and historical development of civilization.  Information about historical and contemporary values and the origin of religious holidays may be appropriately provided in an unbiased and objective manner without sectarian indoctrination and as described by the curriculum.

d. Music, art, literature, and drama having religious themes or religious basis are permitted, as part of the curriculum, in portraying the cultural and religious heritage of a particular holiday.  The emphasis on religious themes will be only as extensive as necessary for a balanced and comprehensive study or presentation.  Religious content included in student performances will be selected on the basis of independent educational merit and aesthetic value, and will seek exposure to a variety of religious customs, beliefs, and forms of expression. 

e.  Schools will not observe holidays as religious events, or promote such observance by students.  Concerts will avoid programs dominated by religious music, especially when these coincide with a particular religious holiday.  Celebrations and observances sponsored by the school will be limited to secular aspects of any particular holiday. 

f. The use of religious symbols such as a cross, menorah, crescent, Star of David, crèche, symbols of Native American religions, or other symbols is acceptable when displayed as an example of the cultural and religious heritage of the holiday and are temporary in nature.  They may not be used as decorations.  Please note: Symbols of religious holidays which have acquired secular meaning, such as Christmas trees, may be permissible decorations, although the courts have not ruled on this specific issue.

g. In the spirit of tolerance, students and staff members should be excused from participating in practices that are contrary to their religious beliefs unless there are clear issues of overriding concern that would prevent it.                                                                                                                   

In making decisions about music selections, artistic displays, etc., teachers and administrators should use the following “litmus test”.

            Answer the question:

            “Why do we want to display this item or perform this particular music?” 

                        If the answer is “To celebrate Christmas”

                        (or any other religious holiday), then the school will not be able to allow this display                           or performance.

                        If the answer is “To teach about Christmas (or any other religious holiday) as part of a                         planned and balanced approach to teaching about the role of religious heritage in its                             social, cultural, and historic context around the world”, then the school will be able to                           allow this display or performance.

Sump Pumps, Perseverance and Our Work

          Tory Riley, principal of the Lincoln Community School, wrote the following letter to her school district colleagues, in anticipation of the beginning of the new school year.
Although we're well into October now, the letter's message remains compelling.

My Dear Colleagues,

            This is the twelfth time I’ve sat down in August to write to you (or some variation on the present configuration of “you”). I can’t say it gets any easier. Based on past experience and the knowledge that I am capable of writing a letter, however, I stick to it, get it done, and pop it in the mail. Is this perseverance? I’m not so sure. I can write and I have the self­-discipline to do something even when I don’t feel like it (albeit a week later than I had hoped). By definition, perseverance includes difficulty and/or delay in success. In that sense, my completing this letter qualifies. But I think there’s more. What about when a task is entirely unfamiliar? Or when it raises self­-doubt or anxiety? Or when failure with a similar task­­or within a subject or category­­has been rampant in one’s life? What if the task is in a field that one has steadfastly avoided due to discomfort? Or one that someone has told you you’re not good at?           

          Persevering is part of the fabric in our schools, and I had been thinking that I’m not so bad at it. Now, I think I’ve been cheating over the past few years. Honestly, I think I avoid much of the stuff of life that is persistently difficult for me. I do persist in the face of difficulty, but not necessarily when confronted with the makes-­me-­squirm hard stuff. I know my strengths and challenges well enough to focus on the former. Not that I don’t persist when faced with some uncomfortable aspects of life. But I wouldn’t say I seek out challenges. But challenges are persistent themselves and have sought me out. Of late, they have presented themselves in the form of mechanical failure. Equipment in my house has been breaking down with alarming regularity.

            Late last week, standing water in my basement suggested a failed, ­­or at least troubled­­, sump pump. The flooded basement was the least of it. It was the daunting, “What is that thing down in that barrel of water sunken into the basement floor and what do I do now that it runs but pumps no water?” that had me beside myself. My first response was to panic. Then to worry that I had no idea what category of people fix sump pumps. Then to fret about how I don’t understand anything mechanical. By this point - ­­all of 90 seconds - ­­I had rendered myself incapable of identifying, let alone taking, a reasonable next step. The rational part of my brain had shut down and I was operating from my amygdala. Being the grown up in the house, I panicked in only a mild sort of way to Isaiah, my 14­ year-old son. He doesn’t panic­­ - not with mechanical problems. He hauled the sump pump out of the pit of water onto the damp concrete floor while I feared that he would electrocute himself as he mixed water and electricity. He was nonplussed and all curiosity. Silently, he checked switches and connections; he breathed evenly and simply wondered. I hovered, trying not to. I was so uncomfortable, not understanding, hardly even able to formulate questions. My understanding of this wet, mysterious chunk of valves and motor was so limited. It was best that I go away, which I did.

            Surmising that the pump was not working properly, he tried an old, cast ­iron pump he found. No luck. Then he found a small green plastic number which he determined worked. I have lived in this house for a couple of decades and had never noticed either of these pumps. He found both, then miraculously produced a hose to fit on the outflow valve, attached it to a garden hose, fed the hose into the drainage system, and turned on the pump. The small pump hummed casually and sent the water out of our basement. Temporary flood prevention.

            We took the broken sump pump to Jim Brown, mechanical savior, in the center of town. The prognosis was not good, and we ended up at Martin’s buying a new one. We were in a hurry, so at home Isaiah put it together and installed it. He doesn’t generally read directions, and much to my chagrin, it usually doesn’t matter. I fear explosion followed by death if I don’t read directions. My role: I shone the light into the sump while Isaiah installed and tested. I know I was not demonstrating perseverance, ­­just coping. The pump worked. We hugged each other, because we had done it together (I've left out all the parts where we got really mad with each other).

            The next morning, the pump was running but was pumping no water. Determined to solve this problem, I read the instruction manual, especially the troubleshooting part. All by myself. And figured out the most likely cause for the problem. I kept breathing. I used my analytical skills. And then, I just messed around with the pump. This is the perseverance for me - ­­the messing around while not knowing, the staying open and curious; sticking with it when I have no idea what is going to happen next or what is useful to do. Does this ever make me squirm. I hauled the pump out of the water. I moved pieces around. I tried the same thing changing one variable at a time. And at last, after playing and not panicking, I got the darn thing to pump water. All over the basement floor, but that was OK. I had played and persevered and the pump pumped water. Then Isaiah and I implemented the (more or less) lasting solution together.

            Here’s how this connects with what I’m thinking about our work as educators. Multiple times every day, we ask children to do things that make them squirm. New learning may be exciting and welcomed, or it may be terrifying or simply not compelling. Let’s give all of us time and space to

explore by ourselves, quietly ­­and bring discoveries to one another. Let’s keep playing - ­­all of us. Let’s remember that learning is hard. And that the stuff that is hard for each of us and for our students to learn can feel really scary and worth avoiding at all sorts of costs. And that avoidance may manifest in peculiar, unsettling, frustrating, and unproductive ways. Let’s remember that we are coaching young human beings, and that they are fragile and resilient and wondrous and loving and mysterious and curious and eager. And that going to work in a place where there are people who have been on this planet only five years alongside many who have been here for over five decades is a gift, a blessing - especially when that place focuses on contributing and belonging, on being of service, on caring and loving and forgiving and learning and laughing and growing. 

          Lucky us, that this is our work.

Tory Riley

Lincoln, Vermont

Teaching Grammar: Inductive or Deductive Approach...or Both?

Should grammar be taught inductively, or deductively?
In this post from "Teaching English" (British Council/BBC) Paul Kaye describes an inductive and deductive approach to the teaching of grammar, and lists the advantages of each approach.

Too Bad that Algebra Application Problems Have Not Changed Much Through Recorded History, however...

However, in Dan Meyers' blog post,  Same and Different as it Ever Was, you'll find a link to a fascinating 1909 book: Problems Without Figures for 4th to 8th Grade, that features 309 arithmetic problems that don't include any numbers!

Two Great Professional Development Opportunities

Two Great Professional Development Opportunities

Below please see the links to two flyers - each for a series of incredible workshops being offered by colleagues of mine. Please consider attending and/or forward them to educators you think might be interested.

The first, Using Neuroscience to Make Standards Work for ALL Students, is a series of four workshops (Oct 9, Nov 21, March 6, and May 1).  These workshops can each be taken as stand-alone, or they can be taken as a series with an opportunity to earn 3 graduate credits.  They focus on using standards to create learning targets and scales; designing performance-based assessment; getting to standards-based grading; and using data tools to report student learning.  The VT Higher Ed Collaborative (VT-HEC) ran them last year and they were so successful (teachers, principals, and curriculum leaders participated) that they are being offered again this year.

The second, Using Principles of Neuroscience to Lead Schools in the 21st Century, is also a series of four workshops (Oct 3, Nov 7, Jan 23, April 3).  This series is focused on designing, implementing, and sustaining a systemic approach to standards-based learning, and is for leaders in schools.  The first session, Oct 3, is a repeat of a VPA strand offered this summer.  If you want to attend any of the remaining 3 sessions, you need to have attended the VPA strand OR this Oct 3 workshop OR be a TASS school.  You are encouraged to come alone or bring a team to this series.

Jay McTighe’s Suggested Curriculum Unit Planning Resources

Jay McTighe, co-author with Grant Wiggins of the Understanding by Design series, has updated an annotated list of free resources that support curriculum unit planning using the UbD framework. This 31-page list of sites can be accessed at www.jaymctighe.com (click on Resources at the top and then the Websites icon). Here’s what it includes:

-   Several exemplary state, district, and regional service agency websites;

-   Big ideas and essential questions in career education, counseling, health and physical education, English language arts, library/media, science, social studies, visual and performing arts, technology, theater/dance, and world/foreign languages;

-   Performance assessments and rubrics in those subject areas;

-   A few of McTighe’s most highly recommended general resource materials.

********************************

From the Marshall Memo Issue #549.  The Marshall Memo is a TERRIFIC resource!

Learn more at www.marshallmemo.com 

New VT State Board of Ed Resolution Breathes Sanity into Assessment Practices!

          On August 19, shortly after the publication of Secretary Holcombe's heroic letter 

          to Vermont parents and caregivers, the Vermont State Board of Education adopted 

          a statement and resolution that should give all VT educators (and educators throughout 

          the US) even more cause for celebration.  The full text appears below:

Vermont State Board of Education

Statement and Resolution on Assessment and Accountability

Adopted August 19, 2014

The Vermont State Board of Education is committed to ensuring that all students develop the knowledge, capabilities and dispositions they need to thrive as citizens in their communities, higher education and their careers in the 21st century. The Board of Education’s Education Quality Standards (EQS) rules aim to ensure that all students in Vermont public schools are afforded educational opportunities that are substantially equal in quality, and enable them to achieve or exceed the standards approved by the State Board of Education.

These rules were designed to ensure continuous improvement in student performance, instruction and leadership, so that all students are able to develop high levels of skill and capability across seven essential domains: literacy, mathematics, scientific inquiry and knowledge, global citizenship, physical and health education and wellness, artistic expression, and transferable 21st century skills.

To achieve these goals, educators need to make use of diverse indicators of student learning and strengths, in order to comprehensively assess student progress and adjust their practice to continuously improve learning. They also need to document the opportunities schools provide to further the goals of equity and growth.

Uniform standardized tests, administered across all schools, are a critical tool for schools’ improvement efforts. Without some stable and valid external measure, we cannot evaluate how effective we are in our efforts to improve schools and learning. Standardized tests – along with teacher-developed assessments and student work samples -- can give educators and citizens insight into the skills, knowledge and capabilities our students have developed.

What standardized tests can do that teacher developed tests cannot do is give us reliable, comparative data. We can use test scores to tell whether we are doing better over time. Of particular note, standardized tests help monitor how well we serve students with different life circumstances and challenges. When used appropriately, standardized tests are a sound and objective way to evaluate student progress.

Despite their value, there are many things tests cannot tell us. Standardized tests like the NECAP and soon, the SBAC, can tell us something about how students are doing in a limited set of narrowly defined subjects overall, as measured at a given time. However, they cannot tell us how to help students do even better. Nor can they adequately capture the strengths of all children, nor the growth that can be ascribed to individual teachers. And under high-stakes conditions, when schools feel extraordinary pressure to raise scores, even rising scores may not be a signal that students are actually learning more. At best, a standardized test is an incomplete picture of learning: without additional measures, a single test is inadequate to capture a years’ worth of learning and growth.

Along a related dimension, the American Psychological Association wrote:
“(N)o test is valid for all purposes. Indeed, tests vary in their intended uses and in their ability to provide meaningful assessments of student learning. Therefore, while the goal of using large-scale testing to measure and improve student and school system performance is laudable, it is also critical that such tests are sound, are scored properly, and are used appropriately.”
Unfortunately, the way in which standardized tests have been used under federal law as almost the single measure of school quality has resulted in the frequent misuse of these instruments across the nation.

Because of the risk of inappropriate uses of testing, the Vermont State Board of Education herewith adopts a series of guiding principles for the appropriate use of standardized tests to support continuous improvements of learning.

1. The Proper Role of Standardized Testing – The purpose of any large scale assessment must be clearly stated and the assessments must be demonstrated as scientifically and empirically valid for that purpose(s) prior to their use. This includes research and verification as to whether a student’s performance on tests is actually predictive of performance on other indicators we care about, including post-secondary success, graduation rates and future employment.
   In addition, standardized test results should be used only in concert with a diverse set of measures that capture evidence of student growth and school impact across all important outcomes outlined in the Education Quality Standards.
   
2. Public Reporting Requirement - It is a state and local obligation to report on the quality of the schools to the citizenry. Standardized testing is part of this reporting obligation. The state board encourages local public reporting of a diverse and comprehensive set of school quality indicators in local school, faculty and community communications.
   
3. Judicious and Proportionate Testing - The State Board of Education advocates for reducing the amount of time spent on summative, standardized testing and encourages the federal government to reduce the current requirements for annual testing in multiple subjects in every grade, 3-8, and then again in high school. Excessive testing diverts resources and time away from learning while providing little additional value for accountability purposes.
   
4. Test Development Criteria - Any broad scale standardized assessment used in the state of Vermont must be developed and used appropriately in accord with the principles adopted by the American Educational Research Association, the National Council on Measurement in Education, and the American Psychological Association.
5. Value-added scores – Although the federal government is encouraging states to use value added scores for teacher, principal and school evaluations, this policy direction is not appropriate. A strong body of recent research has found that there is no valid method of calculating “value-added” scores which compare pass rates from one year to the next, nor do current value-added models adequately account for factors outside the school that influence student performance scores. Thus, other than for research or experimental purposes, this technique will not be employed in Vermont schools for any consequential purpose.
6. Mastery level or Cut-Off scores – While the federal government continues to require the use of subjectively determined, cut-off scores; employing such metrics lacks scientific foundation. The skills needed for success in society are rich and diverse. Consequently, there is no single point on a testing scale that has proven accurate in measuring the success of a school or in measuring the talents of an individual. Claims to the contrary are technically indefensible and their application would be unethical. The use of cut-off scores reports findings only at one point on a statistical distribution. Scale scores provide significantly more information. They allow a more valid disaggregation of scores by sub-group, provide better measures of progress and provide a more comprehensive view of achievement gaps.
7. Use of cut scores and proficiency categories for reporting purposes - Under NCLB states are required to report school level test results in terms of the Percentage of Proficient Students. The federally mandated reporting method has several well-documented negative effects that compromise our ability to meaningfully examine schools’ improvement efforts:

• Interpretations based on “percent proficient” hides the full range of scores and how they have changed. Thus, underlying trends in performance are often hidden.
• The targets established for proficiency are subjectively determined and are not based on research. Interpretations based on “percent proficient” also lack predictive validity.
• Modest changes to these subjective cut scores can dramatically affect the percent of students who meet the target. Whether a cut score is set high or low arbitrarily changes the size of the achievement gap independent of the students’ learning. Thus, the results can be misleading.

So that we can more validly and meaningfully describe school- and state-level progress, the State Board of Education endorses reporting performance in terms of scale scores and standard deviations rather than percent proficient. We will comply with federal requirements, but will emphasize defensible and useful reporting metrics. 

8. The Federal, State and Local Obligation for Assuring Adequacy and Equality of Opportunity – Much as the state must insure a high quality education for all children, the school must be provided with adequate and equitable resources from the federal, state and local governments and must use these resources wisely and judiciously. Thus, any report on a school based on the state’s EQS standards must also include a report on the adequacy of resources provided by or to that school in light of the school’s unique needs. Such evaluations shall address the adequacy of resources, the judicious use of resources and identify any deficiencies.

Resolution on Assessment and Accountability

Vermont State Board of Education

WHEREAS, our nation and Vermont's future well-being relies on a high-quality public education system that prepares all students for college, careers, citizenship and lifelong learning, and strengthens the nation’s and the state’s social and economic well-being; and

WHEREAS, our nation's school systems have been spending growing amounts of time, money and energy on high-stakes standardized testing, in which student performance on standardized tests is used to make major decisions affecting individual students, educators and schools; and

WHEREAS, the overreliance on high-stakes standardized testing in state and federal accountability systems is undermining educational quality and equity in the nation’s public schools by hampering educators' efforts to focus on the broad range of learning experiences that promote the innovation, creativity, problem solving, collaboration, communication, critical thinking and deep subject-matter knowledge that will allow students to thrive in a democracy and an increasingly global society and economy; and

WHEREAS, it is widely recognized that standardized testing is an inadequate and often unreliable measure of both student learning and educator effectiveness; and

WHEREAS, a compelling body of national research shows the over-emphasis on standardized testing has caused considerable collateral damage in areas such as narrowing the curriculum, teaching to the test, reducing love of learning, pushing students out of school, and undermining school climate; and

WHEREAS, high-stakes standardized testing has negative effects for students from all backgrounds, and especially for low-income students, English language learners, children of color, and those with disabilities; and

WHEREAS, the culture and structure of the systems in which students learn must change in order to foster engaging school experiences that promote joy in learning, depth of thought and breadth of knowledge for students; therefore be it

RESOLVED that the Vermont State Board of Education requests that the Secretary of Education reexamine public school accountability systems in this state, and develop a system based on multiple forms of assessment which has at its center qualitative assessments, does not require extensive standardized testing, more accurately reflects the broad range of student learning, decreases the role of compliance monitoring, and is used to support students and improve schools; and

RESOLVED, that the Vermont State Board of Education calls on the United States Congress and Administration to accordingly amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (currently known as the “No Child Left Behind Act") to reduce the testing mandates, promote multiple forms of evidence of student learning and school quality, eschew the use of student test scores in evaluating educators, and allow flexibility that reflects the unique circumstances of all states; and

RESOLVED that the Vermont State Board of Education calls on other state and national organizations to act in concert with these goals to improve and broaden educational goals, provide adequate resources, and ensure a high quality education for all children of the state and the nation.