Together, we’ve created three distinct endorsements that high school graduates may work toward as they complete a pathway through the business department and onward into the world of work or higher education:

• Entrepreneurial Leadership
• Organizational Leadership and Human Resource Development
• Information Technology Leadership

Each endorsement requires students to complete coursework within these strands:

• Entrepreneurship
• Marketing and Management
• Finance
• Global Leadership
• Technology

Several new courses will be designed over the coming year, including Innovation and Creativity, Social Entrepreneurship, and Social Media Marketing. We’ve only just begun, but I cannot wait to see where these teachers and students go with this project. This year has been about establishing a vision, outcomes, big ideas, and essential questions. One of the greater outcomes? Engaging every student in every course in the work of a collaborative service-learning project. Kids will engage in inquiry that will enable them to define a community problem, propose potential solutions, and evaluate the most viable option. Then, they will work together to get the job done, relying on their varied expertise across courses.

Days years like these make me feel very fortunate for the work that I get to do and the people that I get to do it with.

Never a dull moment.

Now…synthesize?

Many of us have been aware of the shift toward distinct literacy and literary forms/artistic craft strands for some time. The intention is to distinguish literacy as the domain of all content areas and literary forms/artistic craft as the domain of the English Language Arts classroom specifically. Some reference was made to our currently “bloated” standards, and a conversation ensued around the call for performance indicators that were measurable and demonstrable. Apparently, a debate transpired during planning sessions around the inclusion of “creativity” within the document. Some on the panel argued against this, suggesting that creativity cannot be measured. At this time, it is included in the draft. There was some discussion about representation within the panel, and a quick reference to involvement from the Partnership for 21st Century Skills was also made. One of the goals of this group was to “future proof” this document, and while there are clear and very specific expectations throughout the entire document about the integration of digital technologies, connectivity, and authentic learning, specific tools are not named.

The new standards aim to support students in the development of reading, writing, listening, speaking, viewing, and presenting skills, but these domains are only divided within the literacy strand. They are blended within the literature strand. The new standards will include lists of suggested books at each grade level.

Questions were asked about the roll-out process, including what it might look like in local regions and what sort of support SED intended to provide around this work. Budget cuts have compromised planning in this area, and the recession has also impacted the timely release of the standards, which will be submitted in draft form to the Board of Regents on November 16th. Ideally, the final draft will be released in February. No mention of the 3-8 assessments was made, but a brief discussion about revisions to the Regents examination took place, and it was suggested that there is anticipated movement toward a three hour examination 2011-2012.

My first impressions:

• The new document is definitely “debloated”
• Substantially fewer performance indicators seem to articulate increased complexity in skills and the creation of authentic products created with varied forms of media for real audiences
• I was excited to see writing defined and supported as a recursive PROCESS
• It seems that greater attention was paid to the vertical scaffolding of skills, although they are articulated with what appears to be far less specificity
• This document might provide individual districts tremendous latitude around when skills are mastered….and how that will happen
• It may provide an increased level of autonomy to teachers as well
• It is inclusive of ESL
• It emphasizes the need for an inclusive and very diverse cannon that moves far beyond “dead white guys” and the notion that the word “text” merely references hard print

A closing conversation unfolded around this important reality: SED is wrangling with three different sets of standards that must align and support one another, in order to influence the level of change envisioned by this panel. This isn’t merely about content standards. It’s about teacher standards as well, and it’s also about the establishment of standards for infrastructure. The panel hopes to provide a curriculum guidance document in order to provide much needed support around effective instruction, but at this time, the project has been put on hold due to cost.

• They have incredible interests and curiosities, and when they write from these places, they become deeply attached to their creations. When I ask Studio kids about their writing, they become animated in much the same way that new parents often are. They share their discoveries and confess their frustrations and uncertainties in a way that reveals a powerful kind of intimacy.  I never noticed this when I was in the classroom, routinely assigning students essay topics and providing them tightly defined paths toward addressing them.

• They are eager to get themselves to connected to others who are just as interested in writing as they are and just as skilled in providing support and feedback. When I chat with Studio writers about finding and building communities for themselves, they mention how alone they often feel in their pursuit of this inside of their schools. They often wonder aloud why all kids aren’t as excited about writing as they are. They want an engaged, supportive community of young writers to blossom up around them as they sit inside of their English classrooms each day. I wonder if this is even possible? I wonder what it would take to move kids from passive to active to leading the learning.

Last week, Paula White and Steve Shann provoked much larger conversations around related themes (and more), and since then, I’ve been reflecting quite a bit on the effect that choice has on our ability to learn, grow, and establish truly meaningful relationships with people. I’m not suggesting that we do not benefit from experiences that are assigned to us. I’m just considering how different things might be if we all felt AS obligated to help kids discover who they are and what they really love to do as we feel compelled to prepare them for fourhundredthousand assignments that have little to do with this at all…. “for their own good.”

I’m thinking kids might have an easier time finding community as well–online and off. That was the basic gist of my conversation with Sarah and Alyssa last week. They want to write about the things that matter to them and be surrounded by others who are doing the same and who are excited about it. When they have these opportunities, their writing simply flows. They are in the zone. As a teacher it’s hard for me not to interfere with all of us. I feel pressured to teach and direct and enthrall them all the time, because I CAN, that’s why! And if I’m not, then I begin to worry that  perhaps I’m not earning my keep. Keeping my fingers off of the controls is a tall order, and the reality is that Studio brings fewer of the challenges that teaching writing within the system might.

These are the questions that scare me a bit: how much of our time are we wasting? How much of theirs? And how much talent is being squandered?

If we were somehow able to better nurture the unique talents and passions and needs of our students, I wonder if they would perform better and benefit even more from assigned experiences that they may be less interested in, simply because they had greater expertise in defined areas of interest and a signficantly stronger sense of self.

I think so much of this has to do with shifting from the positioning of teaching/telling to facilitating/questioning and more importantly–sitting quietly and inviting them to explore and inquire as well. Not around the things we are interested in or most passionate about….but around the things that make them who they are and who they are longing to be. Incidentally, this might have little to do with writing. Or mathematics. Or science. Or history. Or……….the use of technology.

What do you think?

I’ve been using Wordle to begin conversations around standards this year, and I have to admit, it’s kinda neat to pull these posters out and watch teachers get excited about the New York State Core Curriculum. It’s amazing what can happen when you switch up the visual, isn’t it? The Wordle above represents the speaking standards and performance indicators for grade eleven, and today, I got to spend a bit of time talking possibilities with a group of high school English teachers.

Frequency determines the size of words, and understanding this invites some great conversation around what our standards and performance indicators ask of teachers…..and more importantly, of students.

What would happen if we asked students to bring artifacts to class that represented the real work of their real lives? You know—the stuff they care about. Like the stories they write on their own time, the videos they make, their journal entries, and their song lyrics. What if we invited them to demonstrate how they are learning when we’re not around, and then what if we used visuals like the one above to begin speaking with them about what it means to attend to standards? What if we projected Wordles like these on the walls of our classrooms and allowed kids to color  in their own alignment? What if conversations about standards were colorful celebrations of all that is AWESOME about our kids? Might be fun.

I know that a few people have blogged the whole concept of projecting Wordles and asking kids to color in the terms. I also know that the first post  I saw about this contained a great photo of that very process. If this was YOU, would you leave me a link? I’d like to send readers your way, so that they might see what I mean…..especially since it was your idea that inspired mine.

In the meantime, have a peek at what these creative folks are up to with Wordle:

Rodd Lucier shares The Top Twenty Uses of Wordle

Mike Fisher blogs the Wonders of Wordle

Angela Maiers teaches readers how to Add Images to Wordle…images that could include, I’m thinking, photos of those artifacts I mentioned above. Hmmmm…..

So, we’re going to play a little game with ELA standards for a minute. I don’t care whose standards they are. Could be the ones from my state or your state or whoever’s state.

Now, I’m wondering what would happen if we took the real work of kids, the work that they do outside of school, on their own time (because they love doing it) and we introduced them to the standards and asked them to begin thinking about how this work of theirs aligns?

I know. This is craziness.

Still here?

Okay, one more thing: what if we THEN asked kids to identify which standards they haven’t yet addressed in their own work on their own time?

And then? Then?

What if we studied this a bit ourselves….the work they do, the standards they meet, and the gaps that may exist….and we help them fill in the blanks in ways that matter to them? I know this is but a dream. I know that there are all sorts of rational and sane reasons why this will *never* work. I know what we are already doing is working so much better. I know. I know. I’m sorry.

Thank you for bearing with me.

I’m finished now…….hey wait…is that a siren I hear in the background?

“Unfortunately, the term is often bandied about with little rigor, definition or clarity so that many pedestrian and insignificant questions slip in under the term simply because they are large, sweeping and grand in some respects. Essential questions are not simply BIG questions covering lots of ground.”

This distinction caught my attention for several reasons, but I’m particularly drawn to the word “rigor” here, as well McKenzie’s call for “definition” and “clarity.” The phenomenon he describes happens elsewhere in our profession fairly often, doesn’t it?

Essential question writing is critical thinking at it’s best, and critical thinking is not necessarily quick or painless. It can get messy and uncomfortable and downright frustrating. Good essential questions are the work of revision and rethinking. Operating under pressure often tempts us to simply get the job done, and while everyone can appreciate the value of teaching with essential questions, it’s easy to understand how rigor, definition, and clarity are often lost.

Many of us are interested in working efficiently. Massive curricula, short class periods, huge class sizes, and varied perceptions regarding accountability do little to provide the space and time that teaching with intention requires. And that’s what essential question writing is really all about.

Maybe we need to reconsider what it means to be efficient. It can feel very satisfying to get the job done. Whipping through the daily agendas that drive our work and ticking off the items on our professional to do lists can seem like productivity, but when the work that we produce lacks the sort of rigor, definition, and clarity that McKenzie speaks to, how does it end up serving kids in the end? How does it end up serving us?

Efficiency is not merely about turning out products. It’s about gaining new understandings, expanding our own schema, and refining the processes that we use to create the products that we do. Products rarely last forever. Eventually, they stop serving us as well as they could, requiring us to recreate or replace them. On first attempt, getting the job done might look like efficiency, particularly when we are rewarded for that by those that we aim to please. Ultimately, though, our processes are what sustain us. They are what enable us to produce increasingly better products. Our inability to do that well is what leads to stagnation. It’s what leads to this sort of disconnect:

Cultivating true efficiency, then, might require us to think more critically and move at a rate that is just a few paces slower than we are accustomed to. Ironically, this can help us progress at a rate that is a few paces faster than we’re accustomed to. It’s sad, sometimes, how little progress is made in the name of efficiency.

What does this have to do with essential question writing? Well, if the essential questions we ask can become more than “BIG ideas covering lots of ground” and if we teach with them purposefully, then it’s possible that our students might become less interested in simply getting the job done. It’s possible that we can teach them that process is more valuable than product, that their ability to think is what will serve them better in the long run, and that what happens in school has value far beyond the four walls of our classrooms.

We can do that, I’m thinking. But we have to model it in our own practice first.

WNY EDUCATION ASSOCIATES FRONT PAGE

Initially, this wasn’t easy, but eventually, I came to understand the difference between a question that is truly essential and one that is simply leading. Coming to know this was much like cracking the visual code on one of those Magic Eye pictures that were all the rage about ten years ago. With enough study, a clear picture began to emerge, and then suddenly, I could identify essential questions with far greater ease. This was a relief, to be sure, but like every “accomplishment” I’ve enjoyed as an educator, this new learning experience merely gave birth to more compelling questions.

For instance? Uh….what do we do with essential questions once we’ve written them?

In my experience, far too many teachers sweat far too much over the construction of essential questions simply because they’ve been mandated to do so, it’s difficult, and they are working under time restraints. This breaks my heart a little, if you want to know the truth, and it’s a perfect example of how easy it is to veer off course and begin focusing on the right thing for the wrong reasons. Teaching around essential questions is a powerful practice, but writing them isn’t the greater challenge (or at least it shouldn’t be). It certainly isn’t where the greater reward lies either. The pay-off for using essential questions happens where all great things do: inside of classrooms, where kids can get their hands and their minds around them.

It’s true that learning how to write essential questions transformed the way in which I planned my lessons and designed my assessments, but using essential questions in the classroom with my students completely transformed my practice and their learning experiences. This month, I’m revisiting the art and science of powerful essential question writing. I’m also thinking more about what happens after the writing is over. I’m remembering the better ways in which I used essential questions in my own classroom, and I’m asking a lot of other teachers what they are currently doing as well. Stop back to read about all that I learn over the next few weeks, and feel free to share your own thoughts as well.

WNY EDUCATION ASSOCIATES FRONT PAGE

When Niagara Academy took the stage at our recent WNY-PLP celebration, the people at my table were audibly impressed, not only by their accomplishments, but by their level of excitement and their level of energy as well. This team of teachers spent the year helping all of the educators in their building develop a greater level of comfort with a variety of technology tools. The fact that all of their teachers are blogging now is cool enough, but what resonated with me most was their description of the PD model that employed in making all of that happen.

Those who do what I do often spend a good amount of time exploring Pearson and Gallagher’s Gradual Release of Responsibility model and encouraging teachers to use this instructional approach with their students. We speak about the need for consistent modeling and the power of guided practice and teamwork. We suggest allowing kids to pair up as they practice…to work together before they are held accountable for demonstrating mastery alone. In this way, learning becomes a community effort, mistakes are not as threatening, and learning is scaffolded in ways that nurture learners rather than pressuring them.

The PLP team from Niagara Academy understands this, and they understand it in a big way. They worked with teachers one on one throughout the year to coach them in their blogging practices. They built learning relationships with their colleagues slowly and over time, and they allowed them room to question and to practice and to make mistakes in a smaller setting, where trust could be established.

I wish that all professional development models could look like this. Gradually releasing the responsibility for learning isn’t a notion that is only relevant to our youngest learners. It’s what most brains require when they confront new processes and information. Yet, too much of what we do in the adult learning environment still doesn’t allow for that as much as it should. What Niagara Academy has accomplished this year speaks volumes about the potential for this approach. It’s exciting to witness professional development that works.