Tag: Problem-Based Learning

The Right Change for the Right Reason

Published on by teachingandlearningnotebook1 Comment

I ran across the statement, “Right Change for the Right Reason,” this week while I was doing some online reading.  I began thinking about the many innovations that teachers (like myself) are asked to implement, and we do not necessarily see or understand the rationale behind why we need to change. Please see my previous post “The Ups and Downs of Self-Initiated Growth,” which discusses the reasons why I have resisted change- valid and invalid.  I would say improving students’ capacity is the key reason for a change.  I believe the focus for change needs to equip students with SKILL SETS (literacy, numeracy, inquiry, ICT, critical thinking, problem-solving etc.), a GROWTH MINDSET, and CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE.  When I specify critical knowledge, I mean the knowledge that students need to access 40 months and 40 years from now, not trivia.

So how does one go about building student capacity in 2016?  Where does a teacher need to start on opening day?  If this was a wiki instead of a blog, I would assume that I would receive differing opinions on where a teacher might start.  I’m going to stick my neck out and propose that student engagement would be a key aspect. I believe student engagement is one of those terms that throws up different mental pictures for educators. Just like the slideshow below .

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

 Some might say student engagement is about building relationships, another might say that it is giving student greater autonomy in what they learn, another might propose that it involves knowing the types of learners you have in your classroom, and others might advocate the use of flexible groups to close student skill gaps, which would foster student engagement.  You see student engagement is a messy term; and often I think that when this term is thrown out amongst a group of teachers, there is an assumption that everyone has the same mental image in their head.  From my experience, I have found the exact opposite.

So is there a problem with having differing opinions about what constitutes student engagement?  My response to this question is yes and no.  I think  that often in education we blindly go where we think no person has gone before.  We (educational leaders, consultants/specialist, and teachers) often rush into innovations and do not determine the purpose or what success indicators will look like, sound like, and feel like for both the teacher and student.   I would not disagree that all of the above-mentioned ideas are definitely linked to  student engagement.  I think throwing out all possibilities in a collaborative an open environment is a must, BUT I believe that there is merit distinguishing the type engagement we are striving to hit.  Different dimensions of engagement draw upon different skill sets from teachers. If we are unclear on our target and purpose, our results will be messy and ineffective.

 The Canadian Education Associations report, “What Did You Do Today in School” outlines three dimensions of student engagement- social, institutional/academic, and intellectual.

Social Engagement Meaningful participation in the life of the school
Institutional/Academic  Engagement Active participation in the requirements for school success
Intellectual  Engagement A serious emotional and cognitive investment in learning

I have attached one of the reports and as well the website below.

Report :  Engagement CEA    Website:  CEA LINK  . They have some really interesting pieces.

Intellectual engagement is the focus of my problem-base learning project.  I want to have students deeply invested in their learning.  The picture in my head with regards to intellectual engagement requires a teacher to possess some pretty sophisticated skill sets. From a curriculum perspective, a teacher will need to be able to extract the big ideas from the curriculum, and formulate enduring understandings (EUs) and essential questions to guide student inquiry.  A teacher must have clear learning indicators established to know whether or not the student is meeting the enduring understandings. All of these aspects are easy to type in a blog, BUT this is extremely challenging work. I need to  UNDERSTAND what the curriculum targets are asking of my students, which in turn requires me to be strong at outcome deconstruction in order effectively coach my students towards the essential learning targets (EUs). Teachers will need to be extremely nimble in being able to scaffold student learning effectively to meet curriculum targets. When I talk about scaffolding, I mean coaching of students towards the essential learning targets.  As well, the teacher must be strong at taking in formative assessment data and on the flip of a switch be able to change instruction to meet the needs of the student (s) – hello readiness groupings.  Again, I’m assuming that this is the picture that all teacher would have in their head when trying to facilitate intellectual engagement, and I know from experience this won’t be the case.

Teachers love to focus on activities, and I am no exception.  I believe that this is one aspect of planning that connects to the title of my blog- Right Change For The Right Reason. Wiggins and McTighe (creator of Understanding By Design) highlights that activity planning is one of the  “Twin Sins” in curriculum and instructional designing.  I believe that moving away from focusing on activities first (Pinterest, Teacher Pay Teacher) is a right change for the right reason.  The following is taken from Edutopia. org which explains what Wiggins and McTighe perspective on the “Twin Sins.”

More generally, weak educational design involves two kinds of purposelessness, visible throughout the educational world from kindergarten through graduate school. We call these the “twin sins” of traditional design. The error of activity-oriented design might be called “hands-on without being minds-on”—engaging experiences that lead only accidentally, if at all, to insight or achievement. The activities, though fun and interesting, do not lead anywhere intellectually. Such activity-oriented curricula lack an explicit focus on important ideas and appropriate evidence of learning, especially in the minds of the learners.

 A second form of aimlessness goes by the name of “coverage,” an approach in which students march through a textbook, page by page (or teachers through lecture notes) in a valiant attempt to traverse all the factual material within a prescribed time. Coverage is thus like a whirlwind tour of Europe, perfectly summarized by the old movie title If It’s Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium, which properly suggests that no overarching goals inform the tour.

As a broad generalization, the activity focus is more typical at the elementary and lower middle school levels, whereas coverage is a prevalent secondary school and college problem. No guiding intellectual purpose or clear priorities frame the learning experience. In neither case can students see and answer such questions as these: What’s the point? What’s the big idea here? What does this help us understand or be able to do? To what does this relate? Why should we learn this? Hence, the students try to engage and follow as best they can, hoping that meaning will emerge.”

Since I began planning with Understanding by Design, I am more focused on targets and assessment first, and then I select activities that will scaffold towards the learning targets.  The concern with focusing on activities is that requirements of essential learning targets are overlooked.  If we do not deconstruct the outcomes and understand what is required then how will we know which activities are truly worthwhile?    Thus, the kids can be jazzed and highly engaged in an activity but if the activity doesn’t meet what the essential targets require then how can we be excited about this type of student engagement and most importantly student learning?

Right now, I do believe that I am making the right change for the right reason.  I believe that I moving towards a learning environment that will facilitate deeper intellectual engagement.  My kids deserve this.  I am fully aware, and I think that I am prepared for the many, many unknown road bumps that I will face.  l also realize that I will be immersing myself into what Understanding by Design is all about.  I know that I haven’t been ready to take this jump until now. I think this realization is powerful.  Prior to this point in my teaching career, I didn’t have the skill sets to dive into the Ubd that McTighe and Wiggins talk about. I think that as a specialist,  I need to remember this fact when working with staff.  Whether you call it problem -based learning or you call it teaching for understanding, constant ongoing support is needed and constant reflection and team analysis of evidence is required.  This type of learning can only be provided with embedded professional development during the school day for teachers.  I feel that this type of environment is the right change for the right reason because greater student capacity will be created. With that said, in fairness to teachers, we need to have clear  and measurable teacher growth targets that we can work towards. How can I know where I need to move towards if there aren’t any clear targets outlined?  These targets can be used for teacher growth plans, which then teachers could use for personal growth and reflection.  I think that I will need to be

 Whether you call it problem -based learning or you call it teaching for understanding, constant ongoing support is needed and constant reflection and team analysis of evidence is required.  This type of learning can only be provided with embedded professional development during the school day for teachers.  I feel that this type of environment is the right change for the right reason because greater student capacity will be created. With that said, in fairness to teachers, we need to have clear  and measurable teacher growth targets that we can work towards. How can I know where I need to move towards if there aren’t any clear targets outlined?  These targets can be used for teacher growth plans, which then teachers could use for personal growth and reflection.  I think that I will need to be VERY cautious at looking at superficial teacher and student growth versus deep personal pedagogical and strong student intellectual engagement and skill growth.  Finally, if I am wanting to see strong intellectual engagement, I will need to develop some core criteria of what that look like. Lots more work to do but again I feel that I am making the right change for the right reason.

 It will be an interesting ride!

All best,

Ingrid

The Ups And Downs Of Self-Initiated Growth

Published on by teachingandlearningnotebookLeave a comment

I ran across this on my Facebook page a week or so ago, and the message really resonated with me.

IMG_0741

I kept this message in the back of my mind as I met for my second problem-based learning meeting with my colleagues Kevin, and Kelli. I am hoping to add an additional colleague from our dual track high school to make this a Tri-High project.  The above message has caused me to reflect on the following questions:  Where exactly am I stuck?  If I had not started this problem-based learning journey would I ever realize the degree to which I am stuck?  I see myself as being stuck because I know that my classroom  is not a student-centered teaching and learning environment.  I am stuck because I cling to the mindset that good classroom instruction requires strong teacher driven instruction  with minimal student choice. I don’t want to leave the impression with my readers that I am a chalk and talk teacher because I am not.  I use cooperative  groups, ongoing formative assessment, and differentiated instruction; but if you were to ask me to what degree is my coaching and scaffolding teacher lead versus student driven, my honest answer would be 90:10.

I must admit that I am still having a hard time with the fear of the unknown, and I am finding this process a tad stressful. I’m not a person who takes leaps of faith. . . . EVER.  I realise that relinquishing a large percentage of control is not at all going to be easy for me, and I’m not totally convinced this is necessarily a good thing for all students. In the same breath, Kelli has never said that this model is for all learners nor has she ever said that I won’t have to be prepared for Plan B if some students just do not flourish.  Thus, I question WHY does my mind constantly throw up red flags? There is no covert operation taking place because I initiated this process.  Again, I am making the assumption that students will recoil against this type of learning environment, which I have no hard data to support.  I have not considered that fact that students might just dive in and not look back.

From our second meeting, I am really excited by the types of problems that we have sketched out for the Gr. 11 Canadian History course.  These problems focus on inequities facing Aboriginal learners, Canada and Immigration, and finally Canadian conflict. I do believe that many students will be engaged based on how the problems are designed, and learning will NOT be focused on recognition and recall.  Their learning is definitely going to be pushed to the upper levels of Blooms’ taxonomy. During the meeting, Kevin and I discussed how we will navigate our planning around the curriculum’s use of enduring understandings.  We created a OneNote binder in which we sat down and started sketching out content that students would need to explore and began discussing the types of process skills that we want students to walk away with.

This brings me to my next problem, developing CLEAR and MEASURABLE learning targets. The Province of Manitoba’s  Gr. 11 Canadian History curriculum has been formulated around enduring understandings (EUs). There are MANY EUs in our curriculum.  The concepts of EUs comes from Wiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design (Ubd) planning approach.  I am HUGE advocate of this approach.   Although I have worked with Ubd for almost fifteen years, I struggle with developing assessments around EUs.  I have developed EUs from outcomes, but  my assessments focused more on measuring the outcomes versus the EUs.  Basically, the EUs got pushed to the side.  I have been creating assessments that link to the finite knowledge and skills embedded in  outcomes.   I find myself wanting to use the following deconstruction tool to deconstruct what the EUs are asking of kids to demonstrate. I feel the need to put in the EU and then work backward but my gut tells me that I’m missing the boat.  I am starting to doubt how well I do actually understand Ubd, or maybe I need to  realize that this is the next level in my learning journey. I always advocate that learning is a journey and not a destination. I am good at giving advice but maybe not so great at taking it.

Microsoft Word - Deconstruction outcomes.docx

 

Without clear and measurable learning targets,  I feel that I can not move forward.  Since I do not have any Ubd experts that I know of in my province, I took  a wild card shot and contacted Dr. Jay McTighe.  What have I got to lose?  I sent off an email last night and low and behold, he responded. He said that he would be able to chat regarding my question today.  Holy crap!  I don’t know if I could be any more excited if Mark Messier, Bjorn Borg, or Daniel Craig responded back. If you are reading this and wondering who these men are, Google them!  Maybe this problem-based and personalized learning approach does have merits for adult learners!

In his email, I received this  blog link which I have found extremely helpful, and I’m starting to see some glimmers of light through the grey haze in my processing.  The blog is called  Performance Tasks. com.  After looking at some of the posts, I am now starting to see a key roadblock in my application of Ubd.  First, the blunt fact is that I haven’t been creating performance task assessments and therefore, I am hypothesizing, this is a key reason why I struggle with using  EUs. I have been creating assessments that link to the finite knowledge and skills embedded in curricular outcomes.  I am fluid and competent in planning backwards from outcomes, but I am not confident in using EUS to develop open-ended performance tasks that will take student learning to a much deeper level.  I still have this NAGGING  question of what am I missing?   I do not believe that Ubd is about a willy-nilly exploration of whatever a student wants to look at.   I can’t wait to discuss this with Dr. McTighe, and I am hoping to walk away with a much clearer picture

My next epiphany from reading Dr. McTighe’s blog is around the assessment of performance-based tasks.  He outlines four different types of rubrics and the DIFFERENT PURPOSES that they serve.  I found this read really interesting.  His rationale around analytical and holistic rubrics has really made me think about where I need to go with my assessment tools.

I just finished my conversation with Dr. McTighe.  What a kind man and a great educational ambassador! I now feel that I can get back on my problem-based learning journey.  Here is what I learned and relearned about the Ubd process, which problem-based learning is directly tied to.  First, one needs to focus developing curriculum around the big transferable ideas that can be integrated within and between curricula. I knew this because I have honestly read the Ubd text and workbook from cover to cover many times, but I recognize that I really didn’t understand it. I had an “aha” moment when he was talking to me about this.  Things started to click with what he was saying.  Growth is like peeling back the layers of an onion.

I find that our Gr. 11 Canadian History Enduring Understandings are very content driven versus big ideas driven.  For example, if we want students to understand that power in the hands of a majority doesn’t necessarily ensure that the needs of all citizens will be equitably met and this reality results in the manifestation of deeply rooted social, economic and political problems that our present day society needs to not only address but collectively solve, then our EUs should be woven around the concept of power versus EUs woven around content concepts.

I explained to Dr. McTighe that Manitoba’s Gr. 11 Canadian History curriculum had approximately 50 plus enduring understandings. He felt that this amount was much too high. If I could have reached through the telephone line and hugged him, I would have.  What a relieve!  I wasn’t totally crazy. I was trying to madly process every ounce of what he was telling me.  Things started clicking for me and then I tossed out an idea to see if I was understanding his coaching correctly. What if Kevin and I were to sit down and review all of the enduring understandings in the curriculum and then from this review we would pull out the big transferable ideas that we want kids to uncover.  Once we have our transferable ideas for both process and content, we would then create essential questions that our enduring understandings would evolve from.  I would hope that we could condense some of the ones that are presently in our curriculum.  He felt that this would be a good place to start.  As a team, we would have a clear picture of the content and process that would connect to the big ideas, EU and EQs from which we could build our performance-based tasks around.   Dr. McTighe also advocated for us to post our essential questions in the rooms so that students could constantly use them to guide their learning.

I can’t wait to talk to Kevin, Kelli, and Linda in the next few days to share my thought and ideas.  I think that we can easily connect our big transferable ideas to the problems that we have created.  We now just need to look at EQs and EUs.  Well, my brain is hurting tremendously, so I am going to close off for this entry.  Exciting day and tons more learning to take place.

Best Wishes,

Ingrid

Walking the Walk NOT Just Talking the Talk-Problem-Based Learning

Published on by teachingandlearningnotebook1 Comment

problem-based-learning-projects

As a staff development specialist, there is great potential for my staff to view my role in a hypocritical light.  My job focuses on shifting  pedagogical practices and mindsets, but how often (in the present staff development structure that I work in) am I in the trenches demonstrating to staff what the messy professional growth process looks like, sounds like, and feels like?  Am I willing to open my classroom door and have colleagues come in and observe my practices, at any given time of day, with the expectation that they will provide me with feedback for growth?  Am I willing to be vulnerable in an environment that expects perfectionism?  Am I willing to take on the workload that is necessary to bring about better teaching?  Are my practices truly KID CENTERED?   Basically, am I willing to walk the walk and not just talk the talk?

The answer to this question is, ABSOLUTELY!

Does diving in face first scare me a bit? Absolutely! Do I feel vulnerable? Totally! But the bottom line is that if I expect my staff to make changes to their craft, I better be willing to pony up to the table and prove to them that I am willing to work just as hard as they are. As well, I better be willing to place myself in a situation that most likely will cause great frustration and that does not possess a 100% satisfaction guarantee.  I believe wholeheartedly that my students (every student in my school, not just the ones that I personally teach) deserve highly engaging, relevant, and student-centered learning opportunities. Research shows that teacher-centered instruction facilitates very low student engagement levels and minimal deep learning opportunities.  In addition, teacher-centered  classrooms fail to nurture ongoing authentic problem-solving and critical thinking opportunities.

Being able to meet the needs of my staff is a key reason for moving towards a classroom-driven staff development model. They are great people who deserve the very best.   I want to be a staff development specialist who can authentically demonstrate what teacher renewal looks like, sounds like, and feels like, on a daily basis, and have staff collaboratively involved in improving my practice.  My staff has a collaborative responsibility to improve my craft as an educator, just as I have a responsibility to help improve their craft.  Staff development is not about one person being seen as an expert, but rather a person who is willing to collaborate, share expertise, and take away some of the fear that is associated with change.

The work by the late Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe has had a profound influence on my teaching.  Understanding by Design (Ubd) is a powerful framework that facilitates teaching around curricular big ideas that provide students with more relevant and powerful learning experiences. I know that I am much better at assessment and planning, due to my Ubd studies. Yet, I know that I need further growth in this area because I have not hit the bull’s eye on having kids reach the enduring understanding level.   In a conversation with my good friend and mentor, Kelli, who is our Divisional Communication and Technology Specialist, I shared my frustration at this point.  Now, Kelli is a dynamic thinker, and she is definitely a risk taker.  She passionately believes in personalizing student learning. It was in this conversation that Kelli introduced me to the concept of problem-based learning.

For all of you out there in Blogland who are unfamiliar with this approach, the following overview is what my research and Kelli’s conversation has highlighted to date.  Please note that problem-based learning is COMPLETELY different from project-based learning. The following is what I have compiled with regards to problem-based learning:

1) Problem-based learning involves:

a) students being provided with a problem, and they:

  • identify pertinent learning goals
  • learn and teach each other the knowledge and skills
  • use the new knowledge to solve the initial problem
  • elaborate the new knowledge.

b) students learning the material on a need to know basis

c) students being empowered with most of the learning activities

2) The biggest difficulties faced in implementing problem-based learning are:

  • the mistaken attitude that teachers just pose a problem and then wonderful things happen.
  • the mistaken attitude that students can not learn a subject correctly on their own; “I need to lecture them first and then pose the problem”.
  • the mistaken attitude that students will enthusiastically embrace this approach; teachers fail to prepare students well for the transition.

3)  Problem-based learning (PBL) lends itself to authentic assessment

PBL encourages this by doing the following:

  • It lets the teacher have multiple assessment opportunities.
  • It allows a child to demonstrate his or her capabilities while working independently.
  • It shows the child’s ability to apply desired skills such as doing research.
  • It develops the child’s ability to work with his or her peers, building teamwork and group skills.
  • It allows the teacher to learn more about the child as a person.
  • It helps the teacher communicate in progressive and meaningful ways with the child or a group of children on a range of issues.

I was really intrigued, but I would be lying if I didn’t also say that my anxiety level soared a little.  The structural aspects of problem-based learning did not really freak me out because this structure draws upon Ubd planning.   As well, students still require coaching on at various levels.  What did get my anxiety going was that once the problem was presented to my students, they were in the driver’s seat on how the learning would be accomplished and how their achievement would be expressed. YIKES!!!!  What about students who don’t attend regularly?  How will I be able to meet the needs of students’ going in different directions?  What will my formative and summative assessment look like in this environment?  How will I transition students into this type of environment?  And the list goes on folks!

So with my anxiety in hand, I plan on walking the walk and enter into a problem-based learning approach.  Over the next five months, I will be collaboratively developing a Gr. 11 Canadian History scope and sequence using this approach, and then in 2016-2017 I will teach a section.  I am lucky to be working with another divisional colleague whose is presently  involved in the divisional personalized learning project.  I will be posting articles, materials that we develop for feedback, my successes, and frustrations.  I would greatly appreciate any support that my readers are willing to provide.

It is my great hope that this project will provide me with amazing growth opportunities.  In turn, this will make me a better staff development specialist.  As my brother, Garth would say, “Go big or go home!”

Kindest regards,

Ingrid

 

Photo is taken from:

Using Problem-Based Learning in Homes and School [Web log post]. (2013, April 4). Retrieved February 7, 2016, from http://ontariooakville.ca/problem-based-learning-schools-homes/