Marshall Memo 811
A Weekly Round-up of Important Ideas and Research in K-12 Education
November 11, 2019
1. What is personalized learning, and does it work?
2. Knowledge as the key to closing the reading achievement gap
3. Orchestrating an effective coaching plan
5. Paul Bambrick-Santoyo on small teaching moves with outsize impact
6. Mentoring versus coaching of school principals
7. What is Shakespeare’s place in the modern English curriculum?
8. Nine questions for a PLC data meeting
9. Recommended nonfiction books with Latinx authors and topics
10. Short item: A scientific literacy curriculum
“Anything high schools can do to increase the amount and the complexity of writing that students do across the disciplines will have an enormous payoff in their college experiences.”
Kim McCollum-Clark in “Making the College Transition” in Principal Leadership,
November 2019 (Vol. 20, #3, pp. 48-51), https://bit.ly/2pSENiG; the author can be
reached at [email protected].
“Perhaps more than any other subject, writing demands a supportive environment, in which students want to become better writers because they love the opportunity to express themselves, and to interact in writing with valued peers and teachers.”
Jill Barshay in “Scientific Evidence on How to Teach Writing Is Slim,” a Hechinger
Report, November 4, 2019, https://bit.ly/2KbKG1g
“The value of individual, job-embedded support for teachers and principals, both novice and veteran, is well established.”
Jackie Wilson and Gary Bloom (see item #6)
“There will always be scenarios in which people simply need to be told what to do.”
Herminia Ibarra and Anne Scoular (see item #4)
“I have learned that teachers will never ask to be filmed. They will, however, agree to have a great lesson be recorded.”
David O’Shell in “Using Video to Showcase Great Teaching” in Educational
Leadership, November 2019 (Vol. 77, #3, pp. 50-52), available to ASCD members or
for purchase at https://bit.ly/2O5okzu; O’Shell is at David_O’[email protected].
In this Education Week article, Benjamin Herold explores whether personalized learning is a transformational development in K-12 education or a “billionaire-backed boondoggle, aimed primarily at replacing teachers and extracting data from children.” His questions:
• What exactly is personalized learning? The term is being used to mean “just about anything,” Herold reports. To some, it’s adaptive software that adjusts computer instruction to each student’s current level of proficiency. To others, it’s a way of using digital data to group students and make instructional decisions. To still others, it’s a philosophy of giving students more voice and choice in what and how they learn and demonstrate mastery. It can also be a way to push schools to nurture each child’s social, emotional, and physical development.
• What are the aspirational goals? The big-picture aim is to customize learning experiences to each student’s skills, abilities, preferences, background, and experiences. Many educators have always wanted to do this, and recent developments in digital technology have made it possible to use student data to cater more precisely to individual skills and preferences.
• What are the philosophical roots? One strand is the “engineering” model (think B.F. Skinner), with experts defining what children need to learn, diagnosing their current status, and creating an efficient (often self-paced) pathway to mastery. A competing model comes from the progressive tradition (think John Dewey and project-based learning), with students’ interests, questions, and explorations driving the curriculum. “In both cases,” says Herold, “what is new is the way in which technology – from big data to online collaboration tools to social media – is being used to amplify methods educators have been using more or less forever.”
• Who’s pushing it? In the last decade, personalized learning (in its many forms) has been promoted by the Obama-era Race to the Top legislation, the Gates Foundation, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, and many states, nonprofits, and advocacy groups.
• What has been the reaction in U.S. schools? A 2018 survey of principals found that more than half saw personalized learning as promising or potentially transformational, and 97 percent said they were using technology to personalize learning to some degree.
• Is personalized learning effective? We can’t get a clear answer to this question, says Herold, because of the myriad ways the concept is being implemented. To the extent that personalized learning involves rapid, accurate feedback to students and meaningful differentiation, there’s solid research support, but on other aspects, results are mixed. “The evidence base is very weak at this point,” says John Pane of the RAND Corporation. And the Summit Public Schools, a California-based charter network designed by Dianne Tavenner to implement the personalized learning philosophy (and supported by the Chan/Zuckerberg Initiative), have declined to undergo independent third-party evaluation.
“The PL Explainer” by Benjamin Herold in Education Week, November 6, 2019 (Vol. 39, #12, p. 10-11), https://bit.ly/2X8UIW7
In this Education Gadfly article, author Natalie Wexler says it’s problematic to talk about a student reading “below grade level.” Cognitive scientists have established that students’ reading levels depend to a great degree on their knowledge of the topic. One study (which has been replicated many times) found that when seventh and eighth graders were tested on a passage about baseball, students who knew a lot about the game did well and those who knew less did poorly – in both cases regardless of their reading levels. “In fact,” says Wexler, “the ‘poor’ readers who knew a lot about baseball did significantly better than the ‘good’ readers who didn’t.”
But U.S. schools continue to judge students’ reading ability on standardized tests that measure reading skills by having students read and respond to questions on passages on random topics – thus, says Wexler, “unintentionally privileging students from educated families, who are most likely to pick up that kind of knowledge at home.” This approach spills over into instruction, with teachers drilling skills like finding the main idea and making inferences, grouping students by their tested reading levels, and putting together baskets of “just right” books on a variety of topics. All this prevents most students from spending enough time on one topic to master the knowledge and vocabulary that go with it.
The result is a gap-widening snowball effect: students who enter school with more information and words find reading easier and more enjoyable, read more in school and at home, get more out of classroom lectures and discussions, and surge ahead, while the opposite often happens with students who enter school with less background knowledge. To make matters worse, subjects that could potentially close knowledge gaps – including science and social studies – are often marginalized as more time is devoted to building generic reading skills.
Of course some students really don’t have the reading skills to comprehend texts, no matter how much they know. Wexler’s suggestions:
• Determine if the problem is decoding or comprehension. “Standardized reading tests don’t distinguish between decoding and comprehension,” she says, “so it’s impossible to tell whether a low score means a student couldn’t readthe passages or couldn’t understand them.” If the problem is decoding, which should be ascertained with a different type of test, then students need systematic phonics instruction (regardless of their grade level) so they can crack the code and read fluently.
• Give all students access to the same complex content through listening. For most kids, listening comprehension is stronger than reading comprehension through middle school. But the way many elementary classrooms operate, a lot of material is presented in grade-level texts that students are expected to read on their own. “If students are going to acquire knowledge of the world and become familiar with the conventions of written language,” says Wexler, “it’s crucial for them to hear those concepts and conventions in complex text before they’re expected to understand them independently.” Audio books are helpful, as is the teacher reading complex texts aloud and reinforcing the content and vocabulary with questions, discussions, and activities.
• Have students actively grapple with common content through writing. “Perhaps the most powerful lever for building knowledge is to have all students write about what they’re learning,” says Wexler. Writing has students retrieve information from memory and put it in their own words – two sure-fire ways of consolidating and improving knowledge and skills. The key is having all students working with the same content while differentiating the kind of writing they do – essays, paragraphs, outlines, working with sentence-starters.
• Assess proficiency through tests tied to the content that’s been taught. “It can be demoralizing for both students and teachers to have achievement measured solely on the basis of general knowledge of random topics,” says Wexler. She urges schools to follow the lead of Louisiana, which is piloting reading tests geared to the specific content being taught in each grade level’s ELA and social studies classes. Of course at some point students need to have enough general knowledge and vocabulary to make sense of passages on subjects they haven’t studied, as long as the passages aren’t poorly written or too technical. But it’s hard to say when that point will be reached. The challenge, says Wexler, is to get all students to that level.
“If Instructional Coaching Really Works, Why Isn’t It Working?” by Michael Moody in Educational Leadership, November 2019 (Vol. 77, #3, pp. 30-35), available to ASCD members and for purchase at https://bit.ly/2O0JWgv
In this Harvard Business Review article, Herminia Ibarra (London Business School) and Anne Scoular (Meyler Campbell) say managers often need to put on their coaching hats. “An effective manager-as-coach,” say Ibarra and Scoular, “asks questions instead of providing answers, supports employees instead of judging them, and facilitates their development instead of dictating what has to be done.”
There are four different styles of coaching, say the authors, based on how directive the coach wants to be (how much information is put in) and how much energy the coachee takes away from the interaction:
• Directive – This is the mentor role – an experienced and senior manager giving advice to a subordinate, who listens carefully. However, say the authors, because the advice “consists of stating what to do and how to do it, it unleashes little energy in the person being coached…” It may even be demotivating and fail to build organizational capacity. There’s also the possibility that the manager doesn’t understand what’s going on and gives unhelpful or clueless advice.
• Laissez-faire – When people are working productively, the manager doesn’t need to coach or tell anyone what to do; best to leave them alone.
• Nondirective – This kind of coaching involves listening, questioning, and withholding judgment (less information in), and is aimed at eliciting wisdom, insight, and creativity from others so they can solve problems on their own (more energy taken away). This can be “highly energizing for those being coached,” say Ibarra and Scoular, “but it doesn’t come naturally to most managers, who tend to be more comfortable in ‘tell’ mode.”
• Situational – This is the sweet spot, they believe, balancing directive and nondirective styles based on the facts on the ground.
A helpful approach to coaching conversations, they believe, is the GROW model (developed by Sir John Whitmore in the 1980s):
“The Leader as Coach” by Herminia Ibarra and Anne Scoular in Harvard Business Review, November-December 2019 (Vol. 97, #6, pp. 110-119), https://bit.ly/2NAbTww; the authors can be reached at [email protected] and [email protected].
(Originally titled “What You Practice Is What You Value”)
In this Educational Leadership article, Paul Bambrick-Santoyo (Uncommon Schools) says that for novice teachers, being coached on seemingly minor points – for example, standing still and facing the class when asking students to stop talking and come back together at the end of a turn-and-talk – can be transformational. But for this kind of coaching to work, a school needs a culture that includes a shared language of effective pedagogy and a norm of frequent, low-stakes feedback and practice. “In effective cultures,” says Bambrick-Santoyo, “people use words everyone can understand to describe actions that committed members consistently put into practice.”
Over a period of years, he and his colleagues have compiled a list of teaching behaviors that are granular, observable, and high-leverage. These are skills each of which can be learned within a week, produce immediate improvements in classroom dynamics and student learning, and accelerate what is often a painfully slow learning curve for novice educators. “Rather than wait for years of trial-and-error experience to perfect their craft,” says Bambrick-Santoyo, “new teachers can actually grow quickly, step by step.” Picking up the pace is a moral imperative, he believes; students can’t afford to wait for incremental improvement in teaching, especially in high-need schools with a large proportion of rookie teachers.
Below are some of the action steps in Bambrick-Santoyo’s “Get Better Faster” playbook. They parallel the kinds of small, easy-to-learn-and-practice skills that musicians and athletes learn with their coaches as they rapidly improve performance:
“The value of individual, job-embedded support for teachers and principals, both novice and veteran, is well established,” say Jackie Wilson (Delaware Academy for School Leadership) and Gary Bloom (University of California/Santa Cruz) in this article in Principal Leadership. At its best, support improves school leaders’ job performance and retention, and their students’ academic achievement.
But there are two quite different ways of providing support, one of which has much greater potential for positive impact:
• Mentoring – An informal relationship, usually between fellow principals, with the mentor often having more seniority and a track record of success. Meetings are driven by the mentee’s need of the moment, often occurring on the phone, online, or off-site over coffee. Mentors are expected to be nurturing and supportive, and are usually volunteers, with duties added on to their day job. The district makes little or no financial commitment.
• Coaching – A formal relationship between a client (the principal) and a coach selected and trained for the role (often a retired successful principal, not necessarily senior to the coachee, sometimes from a different district). Meetings are scheduled and are usually on-site, including classroom visits and debriefs. Coaches provide candid feedback and challenge their clients to improve performance in ways that may push comfort levels. Coaches have a formal role and are compensated for their time, which involves a financial commitment by the district.
Wilson and Bloom have found that mentoring can be helpful but is often sporadic and has a mixed record of helping principals grow and improve. Coaching is more systematic, hard-hitting, and effective, provided that coaches are chosen well and supported as they work with principals. Support includes supervision, regular meetings of coaches, and accountability. Using the analogy of golf, mentors are like an experienced friend who provides you with a few tips while playing 18 holes; a pro meets with you regularly, is committed to your growth, and has a deep understanding of the coaching process.
“In working with hundreds of principals and coaches,” say Wilson and Bloom, “we’ve had the opportunity to observe the professional growth that can occur when a principal is paired with a coach who has been trained to listen and ask the right questions.” Coaching can be facilitative – helping principals develop habits of mind and internal capacity (most helpful for novice principals); instructional – sharing expertise, advice, and resources; and blended – supporting the development of positive dispositions and emotional intelligence.
In this article in Education Week Teacher, Hawaii high-school teacher Christina Torres says that for the last few years, assigning Shakespeare to her high-school students has been “tinged with guilt.” She heard about Yale students’ 2016 petition to “decolonize” the university’s reading lists, in part by removing the Shakespeare requirement, and about other suggestions that the English curriculum is too dominated by white, male, European authors. In addition, some of Shakespeare’s work has been criticized as perpetuating outdated and problematic ideas about women and historically oppressed cultures. Torres wondered whether the Bard was relevant to her students and whether they deserved to study more works that “represent and validate their experiences and cultures.”
But she also grappled with the downside of eliminating Shakespeare: “His work is referenced in novels, movies, Levi’s commercials, and board games. If I remove Shakespeare from my students’ experience, I remove access to cultural capital that could help them understand some aspects of American society.” She knew that, like it or not, her students would enter a world “permeated with Shakespeare’s language and stories.” And Shakespeare in the only author named in the Common Core ELA standards.
Torres’s post-guilt position is that her students should study Shakespeare, not because they need to be exposed to “classic” literature, but for them to take a critical look at why this man has had such an outsized impact on the American zeitgeist and form their own opinions about his work. “Students can better disrupt the narrative of Shakespeare as inherently good, classic literature,” she says, “if they have some knowledge of his work and the history of his influence.”
Torres does believe that many schools overdo Shakespeare – for example, having students read one of his plays every year from sixth grade to senior year. In her own school, she plans to advocate cutting down from three to to one or two Shakespeare plays from grade 9 to 12. Torres also suggests taking a critical look at the balance between the Bard’s works and those of James Baldwin, Lois-Ann Yamanaka, Toni Morrison, and Gabriel Garcia Márquez. And she wants teachers to use Shakespeare’s work to discuss important social issues – for example, toxic masculinity in Romeo and Juliet, anti-Semitism in The Merchant of Venice, racism in Othello, colonialism in The Tempest, and misogyny in The Taming of the Shrew.
Torres is considering having her students watch the NPR “Code Switch” episode in which Ayanna Thompson says that three Shakespeare plays are “toxic” and “resist rehabilitation and appropriation.” Students would then study one of the plays, decide if they agree, and possibly recommend a less problematic work. “Students deserve to interrogate, disagree with, and even dislike Shakespeare’s plays,” she concludes.
“Why I’m Rethinking Teaching Shakespeare in My English Classroom” by Christina Torres in Education Week Teacher, October 1, 2019, https://bit.ly/32E7I7p
In this sidebar in All Things PLC, Robert Eaker and Janel Keating suggest an agenda for a grade-level teacher team looking at the results of an assessment given to all students. They suggest about five minutes for each item, with more time for two toward the end:
A scientific literacy curriculum – “Resisting Scientific Misinformation” is available free at https://tumblehomebooks.org/services/resisting-scientific-misinformation/. Authored by Andy Zucker and Penny Noyce in collaboration with WGBH Nova in Boston, it’s for grades 6-12. There are five lessons, a teacher’s guide, handouts, and brief videos. The lessons: Misleading Advertising; “The Science is Uncertain;” Asking the Right Questions; Understanding the Scientific Process, Part I; and Understanding the Scientific Process, Part II.
© Copyright 2019 Marshall Memo LLC
About the Marshall Memo
Mission and focus:
This weekly memo is designed to keep principals, teachers, superintendents, and other educators very well-informed on current research and effective practices in K-12 education. Kim Marshall, drawing on 50 years’ experience as a teacher, principal, central office administrator, writer, and consultant lightens the load of busy educators by serving as their “designated reader.”
To produce the Marshall Memo, Kim subscribes to 60 carefully-chosen publications (see list to the right), sifts through more than a hundred articles each week, and selects 5-10 that have the greatest potential to improve teaching, leadership, and learning. He then writes a brief summary of each article, pulls out several striking quotes, provides e-links to full articles when available, and e-mails the Memo to subscribers every Monday evening (with occasional breaks; there are 50 issues a year). Every week there’s a podcast and HTML version as well.
Individual subscriptions are $50 for a year. Rates decline steeply for multiple readers within the same organization. See the website for these rates and how to pay by check, credit card, or purchase order.
Website:
If you go to http://www.marshallmemo.com you will find detailed information on:
• How to subscribe or renew
• A detailed rationale for the Marshall Memo
• Publications (with a count of articles from each)
• Article selection criteria
• Topics (with a running count of articles)
• Headlines for all issues
• Reader opinions
• About Kim Marshall (bio, writings, consulting)
• A free sample issue
Subscribers have access to the Members’ Area of the website, which has:
• The current issue (in Word and PDF)
• All back issues (Word and PDF) and podcasts
• An easily searchable archive of all articles so far
• The “classic” articles from all 14+ years
Core list of publications covered
Those read this week are underlined.
All Things PLC
American Educational Research Journal
American Educator
American Journal of Education
AMLE Magazine
ASCA School Counselor
District Management Journal
Ed. Magazine
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Educational Horizons
Educational Leadership
Elementary School Journal
English Journal
Essential Teacher
Exceptional Children
Go Teach
Harvard Business Review
Harvard Educational Review
Independent School
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy
Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk (JESPAR)
Kappa Delta Pi Record
Knowledge Quest
Language Arts
Literacy Today (formerly Reading Today)
Mathematics Teacher
Middle School Journal
Peabody Journal of Education
Phi Delta Kappan
Principal
Principal Leadership
Reading Research Quarterly
Responsive Classroom Newsletter
Rethinking Schools
Review of Educational Research
School Administrator
School Library Journal
Social Education
Social Studies and the Young Learner
Teaching Children Mathematics
Teaching Exceptional Children
The Atlantic
The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Journal of the Learning Sciences
The Language Educator
The Learning Professional (formerly Journal of Staff Development)
The Reading Teacher
Theory Into Practice
Time Magazine