Putting Down Roots
by Alicia Moore, Professional Learning Specialist

Standard #1: Content knowledge aligned with appropriate instruction
Quality Indicator #4: Interdisciplinary instruction

As a third grader, I was awed by a Weekly Reader article about the giant sequoias and redwoods of California. There was a picture of a car driving through a tunnel in the trunk of a redwood. Another tree was so big that my entire class would have barely been able to encircle it holding hands.

If we borrow an old analogy, teachers plant seeds of knowledge in young minds. And aren’t we all hoping to grow some metaphorical redwoods and sequoias? How exactly can we cultivate minds that reach such unbelievable heights?

One characteristic of those towering trees offers insight for educators. It turns out that they grow to such amazing heights not because of their innate strength, but because they depend upon each other. Each tree stretches out its roots, and the roots fuse with all the other trees in the area. The result is a forest of giants with the stability and resourcefulness to live thousands of years.

This idea relates to one especially helpful framework for thinking about student learning—the structure of observed learning outcomes, usually called the SOLO model (Hattie, 2012, p. 54). This model names four levels of learning:

• Uni-structural: one idea
• Multi-structural: many ideas
• Relational: relating ideas
• Extended abstract: extending ideas

The uni-structural and multi-structural levels encompass surface-level understanding, whereas the next two levels of learning go deeper. The message of this model is that when we connect concepts across content areas, we allow students to expand and fuse their academic root systems.

Learning surface level concepts is an important first step, of course. As John Hattie and Gregory Yates say, “you must have something to think about before you can relate, extend, critique, and enquire” (2014). Helping students to transfer their knowledge to new situations can be a daunting task, though, so deeper learning sometimes feels out-of-reach.

Project-based learning (PBL) includes an interdisciplinary teaching philosophy, and that’s one reason that it has generated a lot of excitement among educators. This approach to learning provides a template for bringing different content areas together so that students can find a relevant application for what they know. If you’re interested in learning more about PBL, check out this 4 minute video.

When we help our students apply their learning to various contexts, we help them cultivate a forest of knowledge. Their scientific reasoning skills lend clarity to writing; their writing skills give voice to their political stances. One idea supports and is supported by all others, creating students whose learning is as impressive as the redwood forests. 


References:

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hattie, J., & Yates, G. (2014). Visible learning and the science of how we learn. New York, NY: Routledge.

Thinking Cooperatively
by Myki Williamson, Professional Learning Specialist

Standard #4: Teaching for Critical Thinking
Quality Indicator:3: Cooperative Learning
 

Cooperative Learning is an excellent way to reinforce the 3 C’s (Collaborate, Communicate, and Critically Think) while also teaching required content. No matter the grade level you teach, selecting an appropriate structure can engage your students in all three capabilities.  As Spencer Kagan (2009) notes, “We want both critical and creative thinking to become habits of mind in our students. We use critical thinking as we reflect on ideas….and creative thinking as we generate ideas” (p. 6.18).

The advantage of using Cooperative Learning to instill these habits of mind is the filter of P.I.E.S. in each structure.  As we support all students in becoming critical and creative thinkers, Positive Interdependence, Individual Accountability, Equal Participation, and Simultaneous Interaction ensure active participation from all our students. When teachers create a classroom culture based on cooperation and collaboration, students feel safe to share their creativity and thinking with each other, and the results last a lifetime.  After all, “Lessons are one-time events, but any skill not repeatedly practiced does not become a habit of mind.  Changing how we teach actually results in better acquisition of…any thinking skill than does changing what we teach” (Kagan, 2009, p. 6.18). 

So, as you consider ways to engage your students in all of the capabilities simultaneously, what structures might you choose this week to help develop these habits of mind? Here are a few ideas from your Cooperative Learning text to get you started:

Critical Thinking

• Analyzing:  Match Mine (6.28), Same-Different (10.23-10.25)
• Deducing: Timed-Pair-Share (6.38), Inside-Outside Circle(6.27), Numbered Heads Together (6.30)
• Problem Solving:  RallyCoach (6.32), Jigsaw Problem solving (17.5)

Creative Thinking

• Brainstorming: Jot Thoughts (6.28)
• Questioning: Fan-N-Pick (6.25), Team Interview (10.8)
• Symbolizing: Formations (9.5, 9.16, , Think-Draw-RoundRobin (variation of 6.33)
• Synthesizing: RoundRobin(6.33), Team Projects (Chapter 13), Team Statements (10.36) 

Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing.

Questions to Engage
by Curtis Cunningham, Professional Learning Specialist

Standard #4: Critical Thinking

Quality Indicator #1: Instructional strategies leading to student engagement in problem solving and critical thinking.

Questions are such a powerful tool. One question can rattle around in your head for days and help you see the world in a completely different light. Another question can make you ashamed and leave you feeling unworthy. Still another question can irritate you, sending you into an orbit of frustration.

Questions are a funny thing, and they can have a profound impact on our work as educators. However, questioning is not a natural approach to teaching. Our inclination is to tell our students the information they should learn rather than asking questions that will encourage them to discover the information for themselves. While the former approach might be more efficient, the latter approach will have more lasting effects (Hattie, 2012) provided that the questions are targeting higher levels of thinking.

As teachers, our challenge is to use questioning to ignite student curiosity and to compel them to engage in meaningful inquiry. “Successful inquiry leads us to ‘see’ and ‘grasp’ and ‘make sense’ of things that were initially puzzling, murky or fragmented; thus questioning is meant to culminate in new and more revealing meaning” (McTighe and Wiggins, 2013). Effective questioning that encourages inquiry will oftentimes lead to more questions. When we use questioning as McTighe and Wiggins suggest, we see a continuous cycle of inquiry, questions, discovery, questions, and further inquiry. Students will naturally be engaged in this cycle of learning.

It might be worth exploring your students’ perception of your questions compared with your own. A strategically placed video camera or voice recorder might allow for some analysis and reflection on the number and nature of the questions you ask (Prensky, 2010). As you consider embarking on this analysis, you might consider the four types of questions described by McTighe and Wiggins (2013):

Questions that hook are designed to pique the interest of students and are typically delivered in kid-friendly language.

Questions that lead typically have one right answer and support students in recalling information.

Questions that guide are typically open-ended and might be asked throughout a unit of study to encourage further exploration of the topic.

Finally, essential questions spark discussion and debate, and often generate more questions. 

Asking questions is simple enough; however, asking questions that will propel our students toward their learning goal is quite challenging. For more information on the topic of questioning you might be interested in the Questioning module located in Glass Classroom.

I leave you with this question: How will your students benefit from your use of questions? 

 

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2013). Essential questions: Opening doors to student understanding. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Resolutions Made SMARTer
by Angela Mansel, Professional Learning Specialist

STANDARD # 2: Understanding and Encouraging Student Learning, Growth and Development
Quality Indicator #2: Student goals

At the first of the year we make our resolutions in hopes that this year will be different. We’re finally going to lose that weight, find time to exercise, or save more money for the future. All too often, December rolls around and we haven’t even come close to meeting those lofty January expectations. What goes wrong? Why are these personal goals just so hard to keep?

While many of us don’t stick to our personal resolutions, teachers are experts at setting and reaching goals in our professional lives. We set out at the beginning of the school year with a list of learning goals that must be covered before the end of the year or even the end of the semester. We track those learning goals and monitor the success of our students and ourselves along the way. Then, once we get to the end of the year or semester, we reflect on how we did and what we can do better next time.

What is the difference between failed resolutions and successful learning goals? The answer to this question might improve our New Year’s Resolutions, but, more importantly, it will empower us to teach our students to set and keep goals. Both John Hattie (2012) and Robert Marzano (2007) refer to goal setting by students as one of the most effective learning strategies. It encourages a more active learning environment, which in turn leads to higher success for students. High quality goal setting does not come naturally, though. It is a strategy that needs to be taught in order to keep the goals from looking like the resolutions we don’t keep. One way of introducing goal setting is a widely used acronym, S.M.A.R.T.

S- Specific: Use language that is not vague.
Instead of “I’m going to be a good student in science this year,” say “I’m going to do all of my homework and complete the study guides to help me prepare for the tests in science. I will also pay attention in class and ask questions if I don’t understand.”

M- Measurable: How are you going to show progress towards your goal?
Ask these questions: How will I monitor my progress? What data am I going to use to show my progress? How will I know when I have reached my goal?

A - Attainable: Make it a goal that means something to you and that you can reach.
Remember not to make your goal so out of reach it isn’t worth trying for or so easy that it is accomplished without much effort.

R- Relevant: Is it something that relates to what you are doing right now?
The more relevant the goal, the more likely you’ll succeed.

T- Timely: What time limit have you put on yourself to meet this goal?
A time frame creates a sense of urgency and sets the goal in action.

The beginning of the calendar year is a great time to make those learning goals with our students, whether we are beginning a new semester with them or reflecting on their middle of the year testing. When students create their own goals and begin to see results, they gain more confidence, perform at a higher level, and are more motivated to learn—all of this just by including them in the goal setting that we already do naturally as teachers (Marzano, 2007).

So as we begin a New Year and think about crafting our resolutions, let’s be sure to think about our students’ goal-setting skills as well.  What might be some upcoming opportunities for you to expose your students to SMART learning goals?


Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Marzano, R.J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Know Your Students
by Alma Pettenger, Professional Learning Specialist

Standard # 2: Understanding and Encouraging Student Learning, Growth and Development
Quality Indicator #5: Prior experiences, learning styles, multiple intelligences, strengths, and needs

Is your classroom designed around the content you are teaching or the students who are learning the content? It is imperative to understand that teachers do not just teach content; they teach content to students. For effective instruction to occur, teachers must not only know the content well, but they also must know the students to whom they intend to teach that content. Heacox (2007) writes, “Today’s classrooms reflect astonishing levels of academic diversity, and teachers report that the diversity of students seems to increase each year” (p. 19).  With this reality in mind, teachers must be intentional about developing strategies that allow them to know their students in order to lead them to academic success.

Although there are many important aspects about each student, the differentiated instruction philosophy suggests that teachers focus on just three: interest, readiness, and learning profile (Tomlinson, 1999).

·       Interest draws on the students’ passions or curiosities regardless of readiness levels and learning profile.  When I talk to teachers about the struggles they may be experiencing in the classroom, lack of motivation is often at the top of the list.  Even though teachers know that personal or situational interest is a motivator for students, translating that knowledge into lessons and strategies is a challenge.  How can teachers identify the interests of their students? One way is to have them fill out an interest survey. These surveys can yield valuable data that the teacher can use to differentiate instruction.  If students are interested, their level of motivation to learn is increased. “Allowing students to make choices based on their interests empowers them as learners and allows them to work more quickly and effectively through their work” (Turville, 2007, p. 5).

·       Readiness is where the student is in relationship to a particular learning goal.  An effective teacher assesses students’ levels of readiness prior to (pre-assessment), during (formative assessment), and at the end of (summative assessment) the lesson or unit.  “In a differentiated classroom we don’t separate assessment from instruction. We weave these two essential components of teaching together on the premise that we cannot have good assessment that does not instruct, and we cannot have good instruction that does not assess” (Wormeli, 2007, p. 67).  For differentiation to be effective, teachers need to know where each student begins and where he or she is in his or her journey towards meeting the success criteria of the lesson (Hattie, 2012).  It is this knowledge that allows teachers to respond to the learning needs of their students, determining where, when, and how differentiation might be needed. 

·       Learning Profile refers to ways in which we learn best as individuals. There are four factors that teachers can use to plan instruction that fit learners’ profiles: learning style, intelligence preference, gender, and culture (Tomlinson, 2001, p. 60).  These factors may suggest some ways of thinking about learning that can impact the way we plan instruction to meet students’ needs.   In her book How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed Ability Classrooms, Carol Ann Tomlinson (2001) shares some useful guidelines when responding to learning preferences:

o   Remember that some, but not all your students share your learning preference.

o   Help your students reflect on their own preferences. 

o   Use both teacher-structured and student-choice avenues to differentiation.

o   Start small; select a few learning-profile categories for emphasis as you begin.

o   Be a student of your students; learn as much as you can about them.

As we move into second semester, consider how you might look for opportunities to determine who your students are, where they are, and what they need to make the most of the months ahead.

Hattie, John (2012). Visible learning for teachers. New York, NY: Routledge.

Heacox, Diane (2007). Making Differentiation a Habit. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.

Tomlinson, Carol Ann (2001). How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Tomlinson, Carol Ann (1999). The Differentiated Classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASDC.

Turville, Joni (2007). Differentiating by Student Interest.  New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.

Wormeli, Rick (2007). Differentiation: From Planning to Practice. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

One Room Schoolhouses: What Might They Teach Us About Differentiation?
by Alma Pettenger, SPS Professional Learning Specialist

Standard #3: Curriculum Implementation 
Quality Indicator #2: Develop lessons for diverse learners

I have fond memories of watching the American television drama Little House on the Prairie when I was a child. I enjoyed learning about the simplicity of life in the 1800’s.  As an educator I marvel at the challenges the teacher, Laura Ingalls, faced in a one room schoolhouse. She had to divide her time, her resources, and the content between students who didn't know the basic skill of holding a pencil and students who were already proficient readers. 

“Students are more diverse than ever – culturally, emotionally, economically, physically, and intellectually” (Wormeli, 2007, p.3).  Although the one room schoolhouse model is almost extinct in the United States, its underlying theme of differentiation is very much alive in our schools today.

Why did one room schoolhouses work?

A safe classroom environment is one of the fundamental building blocks of effective differentiation.  Josh Getlin, a New York City writer, spent some time at a one room schoolhouse in South Dakota. When he asked the teacher this very question, her answer was: “It works because we are basically one large family unit…” (One-Room School – Little School House on the Prairie).  If we are to implement effective differentiated instruction, teachers must learn to build trusting learning environments where students feel free to take risks and make mistakes.  By teaching the value of effort over talent and ability, a teacher creates a safe classroom environment and communicates clearly that every student can succeed. “No matter what your ability is, effort is what ignites that ability and turns it into accomplishment” (Dweck, p. 20).

Assessment is critical in academically diverse classrooms; it is how teachers know the readiness levels of their students.  Readiness is a student’s entry point relative to a particular understanding or skill (Tomlinson, p. 11).  In the old, one room schoolhouse, students moved on as they mastered goals and skills.   Today, to achieve effective differentiation, assessment must be ongoing and diagnostic (Tomlinson, p. 10). The teacher must ask, “What do my students know before the instructional sequence begins? How is their learning progressing?  How did they measure at the end of the unit? What should I plan next for them? Assessment informs instruction; without it, purposeful differentiation is simply not possible (Heacox, p.25).   

Knowledge of students is what allows effective teachers to make appropriate decisions about the learning experiences that will lead learners to academic achievement.  Keith Hall is a 13 year old boy who attends a one room school house in Alabama.  When asked about his success in his current school compared to his previous school, he said: “This one is different… At my old school, it would take them half the year just to know you.  Here, they keep track of stuff…” (Wilgoren, 2000). In addition to knowing students’ readiness levels, effective teachers seek to know students’ interest and learning profile.  Interest refers to a student’s affinity, curiosity, or passion for a particular topic or skill while learning profile has to do with how we learn (Tomlinson, p. 11).

Some educators consider differentiation  a passing fad. However, the one room schoolhouse has taught us that effective teachers have long been differentiating instruction. “Going forward, teachers will need the strategies of differentiation until the day they walk into classrooms where all students are at the same readiness level, learn at the same pace in the same way, and exhibit similar interests. Obviously, this day is unlikely to arrive” (Heacox, p. 19).

What might be some changes you could implement in your instruction to meet the diverse needs in your own one room schoolhouse?


Dweck, Carol S (2006). Mindset. The New Psychology of Success. New York: Ballatine Books

Getlin, Josh (1997).  One-Room School – Little School House on the Prairie. Deadwood Magazine.  Black Hills, South Dakota.  Web. Nov. 2014.

Heacox, Diane (2007). Making Differentiation a Habit. Free Spirit Publishing.

Tomlinson, Carol Ann (1999). The Differentiated Classroom. ASDC.

Wilgoren, Jodi (August 6, 2000). The one-room schoolhouse. The New York Times on the Web.  Web. Nov. 2014.

Wormeli, Rick (2007). Differentiation: From Planning to Practice. Stenhouse Publishers. 

Standard #3 of the New Missouri Teacher Evaluation System – Curriculum Implementation 
by Hope Gallamore, SPS Secondary Reading Support Specialist and Ann Wallenmeyer, SPS Coordinator, Strategic Instruction

As our world becomes more complex, the expectations for student learning have increased. The sheer quantity of standards our students must “know and be able to do” requires a thoughtful integration of standards across the curriculum. Teachers are called to move from teaching any objectives to intentionally selecting essential national, state and district standards.  

The new Missouri teacher evaluation system captures this expectation for teachers in Standard #3: Curriculum Implementation.  This standard includes three quality indicators:  implementation of curriculum standards, lessons for diverse learners, and instructional goals and differentiated instructional strategies. 

To assist classrooms with the implementation of these rigorous standards, teacher teams in SPS meet to select aligned resources and create curriculum guides.  These guides, created “for teachers, by teachers,” include success criteria, formative and summative assessments, instructional strategies, and differentiated activities.  Teacher teams are also working to identify prioritized standards along with proficiency rubrics to help focus instruction around the curriculum standards.  The guides are housed in Canvas for easy access: https://springfieldpublicschools.instructure.com/courses/181130/pages/curriculum.

In SPS, “learning is personal” and teachers continue to work to integrate process skills seamlessly with content by creating real-world applications that engage students. Teachers are finding additional support for student enrichment and intervention with products such as ALEKS, i-Ready, READ 180, System 44, and supplemental materials found in the current SPS adopted resources.  Teams provide additional support for the workshop model, guided reading, and writing across the content areas to help differentiate learning and engage students. 

The Curriculum Team continues to listen to your input as they seek additional ways to support learning for ALL students.

For your reference, this is the description of Standard #3: Curriculum Implementation:

The teacher recognizes the importance of long-range planning and curriculum development. The teacher develops, implements, and evaluates curriculum based upon student, district and state standards data. [SB 291 Section 160.045.2 (1) Students actively participate and are successful in the learning process; (2) Various forms of assessment are used to monitor and manage student learning; (3) The teacher is prepared and knowledgeable of the content and effectively maintains students’ on-task behavior; (5) The teacher keeps current on instructional knowledge and seeks and explores teaching behaviors that will improve student performance.]

Quality Indicator 1: Implementation of curriculum standards
Quality Indicator 2: Lessons for diverse learners
Quality Indicator 3: Instructional goals and differentiated instructional strategies