It’s Like Riding a Bike- Chapters 10-12

In 2017 my first book on educational methods, titled It’s Like Riding a Bike-How to make learning last a lifetime, was published. With more than 10,000 copies printed, I decided that now is the time to share my thoughts with the world for FREE.

Over ten weeks in the summer/fall of 2023 a chapter of the book will be shared each week via this blog. Feel free to read in any order that works for you. Feel free to bookmark entries to read all at once at a later date. Feel free to share with others. Feel free to disagree with anything you read or to scream your affirmations from the mountain tops. This is for YOU. This is for our kids. This is how we teach so that it lasts a lifetime.

Chapter 10

Don’t Label Your Box

Recently at my school, we did an activity that required each staff member to bring in a picture of him/herself from middle school to display along with the following message, “It’s not about who you were, it’s who you are that determines who you will be.” This activity helped us show our students who we were as children and give them hope for their future. Beyond that, it allowed each of us a chance to take a trip down memory lane by flipping through old photo albums. While I was flipping through one of mine, I stumbled upon a picture I had long ago forgotten about. It was an image of me as a twelve-year-old boy sitting in a large cardboard box.

         I grew up as a Navy brat. Having a father who served in the military meant that my family was asked to relocate often. As a matter of fact, I attended sixteen different schools growing up. While we were relocating, so were all our household goods. I spent a great deal of my childhood packing and unpacking. The image displayed in this forgotten-about photograph showed a picture of me soon after making one of our many moves. My family had just moved into a new house and all my toys and clothes had just been delivered. Looking back on it now, I remember that I had been asked to spend a month surviving with only the items that could fit into one suitcase. On the day this picture was taken, all my other personal possessions had arrived. All my toys, clothes, sports equipment, everything. When my parents came into my room to take this picture with what I assume was a recently unpacked camera they assumed I would be playing with a huge pile of toys, instead, they found a pile of my toys sitting on the floor next to me and me seated inside a large box, with a hat on my head turned backward, and sunglasses on. I had turned one of our packing boxes into a fighter jet and I was the pilot. What the picture did not show was that the next day that same box was converted into a racecar, the day after that it was King Tut’s tomb. That box sparked hours of creative fun. Was that what the designers of that box intended? No way. It was designed to hold personal items for easy shipping. My parents had even taken a permanent marker to the side of it and labeled it Dave’s Toys. I had taken my imagination and turned it into so much more.

      So, what does this have to do with teaching and learning? I believe this is a metaphor for what is and is not working in our schools today. In education today, we are constantly looking for the silver bullet to student engagement, student learning, student inquiry, student assessment, etc… We read articles, explore Twitter, and attend conferences to hear the trick necessary to increase our bottom line (student achievement). Unfortunately, what we often do as a result of all this learning is place ourselves in a box, slap a label on it, and lose our creativity. We think one initiative, one tool, and one pre-packaged/pre-labeled program is going to be the answer. We try to find a script to follow; we forget we have kids to reach and get frustrated when we don’t get the intended results.

A prime example is the work being done with assessment today. For the past ten years, the terms formative and summative assessment have been used by countless “experts” to describe how we need to evaluate student learning. Often teachers learn about these two formats and try to craft two different types of assessments to fit their varied needs. We are told that teachers must create a formative assessment in order to evaluate teacher effectiveness. We are told teachers must create summative assessments in order to evaluate student learning. We place these assessments into two separate boxes, label them, and use them only for their pre-planned purposes. Don’t get me wrong. Using formative and summative assessments are crucial components of high-quality teaching. At my own school we have spent the last four years talking about little else, but what we lose sight of is the fact that the best assessments serve both purposes, not one exclusively. Placing a label on an assessment prior to using the assessment is unnecessarily restricting. Teachers should be able to give an assessment and use it formatively and summatively. The label on the assessment should not be applied until after it has been used. Placing it on prematurely places us in a labeled box. If we label it summative and we do not get the intended results indicating student learning, does this mean a teacher should not adjust his or her instruction? If we label it formative but every kid shows mastery, are we not supposed to claim this as evidence of proficiency? A great assessment allows us to use it formatively to evaluate our own instruction AND summatively by assessing student understanding. It is how the task is used, not how it is designed, that yields results.

 Assessment is critical. Teachers must be diligent to determine the validity and reliability of an assessment, but that does not mean they must limit themselves to the label. When working on classroom instruction, teachers must not fool themselves into thinking there is only one way for a child to learn. There are countless ways for students to learn, just as there are countless ways for students to show what they have learned. We need to avoid putting our students into boxes that are already labeled. We need to avoid telling students there is only one way to do anything. We need to know how the story of our classroom will unfold, but we may not necessarily know the themes that will emerge.

Great authors understand this. Titles of books are not written before the story is complete. They wait until they have developed an entire plot, then look for a way to synthesize the message. Singers do not determine which songs will be singles or the titles of their albums until the entire record has been crafted. As teachers, we need to learn to take our labels off and just go.

 I think about my oldest son who likes to play with Lego. He has countless sets. He has bricks of every shape and color. When his sets are purchased, they always come in a box with directions. He used to follow the directions, assemble the pieces just right, and then…nothing. Once he had followed the manufacturer’s directions, he saw his job as done. He was not asked to be creative, inventive, or investigative. We now buy his Lego, toss the directions in the garbage, throw the pieces into a bin with the rest of them, and say, “Have fun” and it is up to him to learn, create, and “think outside of the box.”

The kids we are teaching today will be asked to demonstrate that they understand the world in a way that is much different than we ever had to. Sure, they will need to be able to follow directions, but more than that, they will be asked to write directions. They will be asked to identify problems and create solutions. They will all be asked to serve as an engineer in some capacity. They will be asked to design solutions, experiment, troubleshoot, and fail repeatedly.

 As teachers, don’t put yourself, or your students, in a labeled box. Of course, you need to stay organized, but the only time a box needs a label on it is when items are being moved from one place to another. Once it has arrived, scrub the labels off and let the creativity begin. Don’t force your students to learn the way you learn. Let them learn how to learn. Don’t force them to be assessed using one template. Let them demonstrate understanding by being creative. Help them identify the problems but let them generate the solutions. Don’t stick to the script when an adlib is necessary. Don’t tell your students to climb out of the box because it was designed for something else. If your students climb in, help them create something that has value. I am so lucky that on that day, thirty-some years ago, my parents let my toys sit on the bedroom floor and captured a picture of me playing in an empty box. A box that allowed my creative energies to be utilized. A box that was designed for one purpose but was repurposed into something that has lasted a lifetime. That box is a great memory. Had it only been used to pack up some old GI Joes, it would have been recycled and forgotten about. Because the label was removed, it instead has become a lasting memory. A memory that has changed the way I parent, the way I teach, and the way I lead. How can you give your students access to an empty, unlabeled box in your school or classroom?

Chapter 11

Keeping learning on par

I love to play golf even though I am not very good. I know I am not very good because someone a very long time ago created a scoring system that reminds me that my scores are well above average, and in golf being above average is not a good thing. The goal is to get my ball into the hole in as few strokes as possible. Doing so at an average level would make me “on par” with others. I am well over par. Despite this, I can spend four hours on a course having a great time playing 18 holes just like everybody else. I end up getting my ball into the cup on each and every hole, just like everybody else, but I know I am still not very good. I am reminded not only at the end of my round when I add up my total number of shots, but after each hole when I determine whether I am over or under par (which rarely happens), and often after an individual shot when I am able to determine whether the ball went straight towards my intended target or well-off course (which often happens).

One of the great things about golf is that excellence is defined the same way for everyone, and everyone has the same obstacles and same opportunities. Each course I play was designed well before I ever picked up my first club. The water hazards, the sand traps, and even the wide fairways were constructed years before I walked up to pay my greens fees. It is each golfer against the course. The course was not designed to beat me, but my goal is to beat the course.

 When courses are designed there tends to be an average score that the designer has in mind (par) typically somewhere between 70-72 total shots for 18 holes. On any given hole a player can be expected to shoot a par score of 3, 4, or 5 shots depending on the challenge and length. A lot of nice golf courses supply their players with scorecards that show maps of each hole and even suggested shots for maneuvering from the first shot at the tee box to the hole on the green to help them reach the score of “par”. Often the course itself offers support by providing information along the way by indicating when a golfer is within 150 yards of the green or “almost there.”

Golfers are provided a scorecard before beginning their round in which they self-monitor and chart their progress. When players keep score, they typically write a few things on their cards. They write the number of shots it took to sink their ball into the hole and they may write a few anecdotal comments regarding whether they were over or under par, how many putts they hit, etc…but not much more. They do not document every swing, whether they hit a three wood or a driver, whether they used a nine iron or wedge, whether the wind was blowing, or the sun was shining. They identify their success in relation to the expected standard of par and move on. Each time they play, they aim to improve their score by getting closer to par or perhaps if they are advanced even surpassing the norm. For most recreational golfers, we do not play with a course official watching our every swing and verifying the accuracy of our scorecard at the end of the round. It is up to us whether we want to be honest with ourselves. If my ball is buried under an inch of grass, nobody is going to remove me from the course and label me a failure if I bend down and remove my ball from the hazard and make my shot easier. I will be cheating myself though and the accuracy of my score and the validity by which it is compared to others has now been tainted.

Grading and scoring in an American public school system should not be much different. Each state has identified its standards and expectations for each child. These are not secrets. It is the job of a classroom teacher to provide the map and strategy for successfully maneuvering from standard to standard. There should be no surprises. There should be no secrets. It is not a race to simply cover the curriculum just as it is not a race to just get 18 holes behind us. It should be the goal to make every lesson count, just as every shot counts. All it takes is one moment with a lapse in focus to send us wandering through the wilderness.

Documenting student success should also not be done arbitrarily. The standards are defined. Students should be told succinctly whether they have met or surpassed the existing standard. Are they up to “par”? If not, let them know how to take a different shot in the future and welcome them back to the course at another time to play the hole again and demonstrate an improved performance. If they do, the new score counts…. even die-hard golfers take “mulligans” every once in a while.

Students must be given the feedback needed to know how to improve. If their ball ends up in a hazard, make them hit it from there. It’s OK if they struggle or don’t hit it the first time. The goal is for them to learn from their mistakes in order to get better. If we constantly put some students on a miniature golf course where the greatest hazard is a windmill and others are forced to play on a course resembling a Scottish meadow, we are not providing the feedback necessary to either student when documenting their progress. It’s Ok to let some students hit their first shot from a tee box a little closer to the hole and to make others students hit from further back, but this needs to be reported, and this can be adjusted from hole to hole. The job of a good classroom teacher is to identify where each child’s strengths are and how to put them in a position to capitalize on them for future growth and success.

The bottom line is student success, both obtaining it and documenting it should not be a mystery. Whether your experience with golf is hitting an orange ball across synthetic grass at a carnival or hitting a driver down the fairway at The Masters, we can all learn a lot about how to demonstrate mastery of standards from the great game of golf.

Chapter 12

From engagement to marriage (commitment matters)

Buzzwords and acronyms abound in education. PBIS, RTI, Differentiation, Standards, Assessment, PLC’s, and the list goes on and on. One of the latest buzzwords getting a lot of airtime is Engagement. Teachers are asked to assess student engagement regularly. Administrators profess a desire to evaluate student engagement. Yet, does anybody actually know what student engagement looks like? What is it, really?

I have heard some people describe student engagement as student activity. Others have described it as students displaying happiness for learning. If you were to ask ten different teachers to describe what student engagement looks like the odds are you would get ten different responses. The same is probably true if you were to ask building administrators, the very people charged with evaluating teachers on whether or not student engagement is evident in teachers’ classrooms.  What is needed is a consistent definition, a consistent measurement so that consistent feedback can be given and teachers everywhere, working to increase student engagement, an agreed upon Best Practice, can actually know what they are working towards.

Try to think about it through this fairly simple analogy. If you are married, what did it mean when you “got engaged”? If you are currently single or dating a significant other, what will it mean to you to “get engaged”? Is getting engaged the same thing as getting married? Is it the same thing as dating? What does it mean?

I have been married for 16 years. I was engaged for approximately a year and a half prior to that. I dated the woman who is now my wife for about a year and a half before that. There are three distinct eras that I can identify in my relationship with her. When we were dating, I did not wake up every morning and ask myself whether or not I was happy in my relationship and whether I wanted to continue with it. I simply went through the motions. She and I would spend time together, we got to know each other, and we began to understand each other on a deeper level. Eventually, we reached a point where we both knew it was decision time. Were we at the place where we were willing to make a commitment that was no longer contingent on our feelings? Were we willing to say that we promised to make things work, to continue to learn and grow together, even if some mornings we woke up and we were not happy or even liked each other? When we decided this was the type of commitment we were ready for, we decided to get engaged. The engagement lasted just long enough for us to get all of our proverbial ducks in a row. We made sure we both had jobs lined up, that we would have a house to live in, and that the wedding ceremony was all set up. The wedding was a symbolic gesture where we were able to publicly share all we had previously committed to. Fourteen years later, now that we are married, we can take all we learned previously, and all that we continue to learn, and apply it in new and more meaningful ways.

Dating is about getting to know someone more and more. Engagement is all about making a commitment. A wedding is all about putting that commitment on display. In a classroom, the initial superficial learning that occurs on a topic is the equivalent of dating. It is a chance to simply explore an unknown topic in limited ways. This introductory learning is a necessary step that must occur before a greater commitment can occur. It is not fair to assume that an engagement should occur before dating has occurred. In a classroom students may not be engaged unless they have had an introduction to learning. At some point though students must make a commitment. They must become engaged. This means that they show evidence to learn no matter what else gets in the way. Students should be showing a willingness to apply the knowledge they learned while dating and show a commitment to growth. They should do this in spite of how they feel. They should do this in spite of the activity. They show this by getting all of their ducks in a row before the big day, the point of no return. To throw more academic jargon into this, there will be a lot of formative assessment taking place if students are truly engaged. During an engagement, a couple has the chance to learn how to overcome obstacles, how to endure, and how to plan for future success. Once they get married, they have to enter a legally binding contract that says they know how to make it work. In the classroom, this may be the moment when a summative assessment is given. This may be a public performance, a paper and pencil test, or any other assessment trick used by a teacher to publicly share what has been learned as a result of their engagement.

So what is the best way to assess whether or not students are engaged? It goes way beyond looking for smiles or movement. It goes beyond looking at the activities or assignments. True engagement is a commitment to learning. If students are engaged they are reluctant to leave the classroom. They are not absent. Students are talking about the subject matter in the hallways and at home. The best way to determine whether or not students are engaged is to test their commitment to learn.

Read earlier chapters by visiting https://schmittou.net