What Do We Teach?

 I just read this article, Does America’s Math Curriculum Add Up? It says we should teach more “data analysis and problem solving; and linear equations.” This made me think of my freshman year in high school in 1961. The teacher told us we were only taking algebra to get into college. Most of us would never put algebra to any practical use, but all of us would benefit from going to college. I obviously remembered that conversation from nearly 60 years ago. Sounds like it is still true today. The article goes on to tell how difficult it is to get the public and many colleges to accept this new math reality. They want algebra and geometry, just like they had in high school.

This made me think about other subjects, like history. There are so many historical names, places, and dates that every students should know. Would any U.S. History course be complete without a unit on the great Wobblies movement, founded in 1905, or the Battle of Bunker Hill, Korean War, 1952. How embarrassing to not know these names and dates. 

There is so much historical information available now that it is mind boggling. Robert Caro spent ten years researching for his 3000 page magnum opus The Years of Lyndon Johnson. If students need to learn data analysis in math, they certainly need to learn research skills in their history classes. This boils down to data analysis. Math deals mostly with numbers. History deals mostly with events. But, when it comes down to it, both are trying to make sense of data. In both cases it is not the data that needs to be learned, it is the crunching of the data. 

I am no math expert, but I do know that it is impossible to cover the California history content standards in the time allotted, especially if we take seriously the need for research and analysis. We have only so much time available. This year, it seems like so much less time. How do we spend this time? How do we divide the covering of information with the deep dives that involve real research and analysis. How much time do we spend remembering, and how much time do we spend understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating? This is such a basic question. Why is it so far from being resolved?


Redos, Retakes, and Do-Overs

Rick Wormeli

Who is Rick Wormeli? Keep reading to discover why I included a photo of this forward looking educator. Hint: It is not because he has grey hair.

More and more I have been encouraging students to redo essay assignments. Essays are my high stakes proof of understanding assignments. I break down essay assignments into four parts.

Students begin by turning in a research assignment. This consists of a list of references with quotes, notes and summaries for each reference. I often let teams do the research, with each team member being responsible for finding a certain number of references. Team members then discuss the value of each reference and help each other assemble their individual list of references. Once the references are turned in I give a small grade indicating my confidence that these references and notes will lead to a successful paper.

After the research has been approved students are required to individually write an outline for their paper. What is the criteria for a good outline? I tell them that someone should be able to write a good essay using nothing but the material they find in the outline. The thesis, the claims, and the evidence should all be included in the outline. The outline also receives a small grade.

Next the students write the essay. When the essay is complete each student must have one or two other students read and critique the essay. While the critiques are happening the essay writer must ask questions from and take notes on a prepared form. The essay writer then goes back and edits her essay and submits it along with the evaluation form.

If after all of this is done, if the essay writer is not satisfied with her grade, she may rewrite the essay one time for regrading. This has been pretty successful, especially with students who received poor essay grades. They read my notes. They ask me questions. They rewrite their essays and almost always receive a higher grade. Sounds good. Maybe I have this whole thing figured out.

But then I listened to a couple of Rick Wormeli videos and started rethinking this process. He is a standards based grading guy. This is something I have been looking at more and more. With a standards based system students do and redo until they meet the standards. When they meet one set of standards, they move onto the next set. At various points these can be translated into letter grades, but the focus should always be on meeting the standards.

To be honest, my school back in the ’70’s went to standards based grading and it was pretty much a bust. There were lots of check lists and lots of writing, and little understanding by anyone. Standards based grading has come a long way since then. We have the C3 Framework. We have digital portfolios. We know much more about standards now than we did a half century ago. (Yes, I am that old.) I am eager to revisit standards based grading and will be looking for inspiration and edification from Rick Wormeli’s videos and books.

If you would like to join me in exploring standards based grading, watch these two videos. See if they make you want to do something different. Send me a reply.

Rick Wormeli: Redos, Retakes, and Do-Overs, Part One

Rick Wormeli: Redos, Retakes, and Do-Overs, Part Two