B.A. Social Studies
In Missouri, we are seeing the first new state assessments being developed in the social studies in over ten years. I have been fortunate to be a part of the process in the two most recent stages by developing items and working in the content and bias review of those items. The process is difficult work and I can honestly say that I left each day ready to hit the pillow. With all of that said, I have been asked by multiple people to share some takeaways from the process and how it has helped me to prepare my students for the new assessments being piloted this year. Here are my tips: This process began when the state of Missouri evaluated and changed from the Course/Grade Level Expectations (CLE’s) of old to the new Missouri Learning Standards (MLS). This is where quality instruction begins. I encourage you to dive in, and I mean really dive in, to the new standards. In government specifically, I think that you will notice a major shift to include much more history regarding the development of the Constitution compared to the previous standards. This is a major challenge for us in the government classroom as the 9-12 standards do not address the history of the Constitution and Early Republic. There is a major void here that government teachers and schools will need to address. How will we fill in these gaps in the curriculum? I have started teaching more of that history directly into my class, and as a result of my students lacking exposure over the course of three years (8th-11th grade) to that history, I have to assume that that they do not have any background regarding that information. A ton of reteaching is involved, but is necessary if we want to work to be successful on that all important government EOC. With all of this being said, there is plenty of room for discussion pertaining to the processes and principles of government in both world and United States history courses, but this will need to be a serious discussion among departments and curriculum coordinators in districts statewide. In the end, we are asking social studies teachers and departments to prepare students for the government EOC as a result of it being the lone state assessment in the subject in K-12. As it does with any part of our students’ educations, it takes a team effort to ensure that students are prepared for success. Sitting through the process of both writing and reviewing items over the course of two different sessions, the most significant tool used to determine content was the item specifications provided by DESE (click here to find them). In the item writing portion, they were the starting point for development and then in the content and bias review items were compared with them. Specifically, the content limits/assessment boundaries were the most used resource in the room. You need to download them and have them easily accessible for each standard in order to best understand what you need to be providing for your students in regard to content. The specs also inform educators what types of items and stimulus (sometimes specifically) that students will need to be exposed to prior to the assessment. Gone are the days of the fifty item multiple choice test. The multiple choice option is only one of many that item writers have at their disposal. The options for assessment types seem to be endless and students can expect to label images using drag and drop, use drop down fill in the blank items, complete open-ended items, and hot text among others. We will need to prepare our students for this new wave of technology-enhanced questions in order to ensure that they have the highest opportunity to be successful. In order to address this concern, I have started using the Schoology (who I am in no way endorsing) assessment technology-enhanced items. There are other tools available with these capabilities (see this post from “The Techie Teacher”), but I would encourage you to be sure that you are finding and using one to best prepare your students. We need to be preparing our students with the same style of assessment items in order to best overcome what is a potential barrier for success. We do not want our students, our teachers, buildings, and districts to be labeled as less than proficient if the issue is assessment taking ability over the content and curriculum skills. Gone are the days of cramming facts into our students heads--knowing that the First Amendment contains the five freedoms is far from demonstrating an understanding of how they are protected and applied. A significant takeaway for me was that it will be necessary to expect students to move beyond the memorization of facts and concepts. Expect items to vary regarding Depth of Knowledge (DOK) level. In the past, the multiple choice items have reached to achieve level two, but you will see that some items, due to the technology capabilities will climb higher on the new assessment. There is a focus on historical thinking skills and how they can be assessed. Students will be asked to apply their DOK level one knowledge in order to address the items at a high level. None of this is to say that we can move to the higher orders without having the base knowledge, but there is going to have to be a focus in our classes on preparing past the basics.
As a social studies educator and advocate, I am aware that the general consensus is that the United States lacks proper civics education. I agree. In terms of social studies education, including civics education, we are "missing the boat." This has been well documented. In schools, the social studies have been thrown to the side in many instances due to the pressure to perform on math, science, and reading tests.
I am also an advocate of preparing our students for “college and career readiness.” Another focus that the government has pushed over the last decade and one that innovative educators are addressing. Students should leave with higher level thinking skills that will prepare them for their future endeavors and good educators are working to provide them with the tools to do so. With this being said, I would like to discuss the Civics Education Initiative, and its recent adoption in Missouri (among other states). Under the current law (Missouri HB 1646--Signed by the governor on June 22, 2016): “Any student entering the ninth grade after July 1, 2017, who is attending any public, charter, or private school, except private trade schools, as a condition of high school graduation shall pass an examination on the provisions and principles of American civics. The examination shall consist of one hundred questions similar to the one hundred questions used by the USCIS that are administered to applicants for U.S. citizenship. The examination required under this section may be included in any other examination that is administered on the provisions and principles of the Constitution of the United States and of the state of Missouri, and in American history and American institutions, as required in subsection 3 of section 170.011.” I have no problem with the intent of this law and I am a proponent of that intent. The issue that I have is the obvious contradiction that the government has put into place. If the end-goal for our students in K-12 education is “college and career readiness,” I would like an explanation about how a test with “100 Facts Every High School Student Should Know” is preparing them to meet that goal. There is an obvious disconnect proving that our elected officials are consistently playing politics without common sense in mind in many cases regarding education reform and improvement. I understand how a “nea” to this would not be politically savvy and probably was not an option on the table in almost all cases. If you say no to this, you are saying no to stronger civics education. Or are you? I argue that a “yea” narrows social studies and civic education down to a set of “100 Facts” that any student can memorize in a week. As a result of this, what will happen in classrooms as a result? Nothing. Most educators will continue to teach social studies at a higher level than this and in the exact same way that they have been. Social studies once again gets reduced to simply “one hundred questions similar to the one hundred questions used by the USCIS that are administered to applicants for U.S. citizenship.” This initiative in its current form does not strengthen civic education, but instead diminishes it. The role of social studies once again gets sent to the backburner. Instead of providing students with the opportunity to think at a higher level, determine how they are going to participate in the government, along with determining what they believe, they will be taught 100 basic facts. Students are going to miss out on the best and most important part of social studies courses, learning how to decipher what they think and know and becoming key contributors to society and United States democracy. If we want students to become knowledgeable, responsible, conscientious, and civically engaged, is the best way to have them simply memorize these basic facts for a state mandated test? If our goal is to teach students how to think for themselves, we need to get more creative about ensuring that they learn civic values by teaching them to become part of the process. Being civically educated does not mean only knowing a series of simple facts, but by learning how to become an active part of United States democracy. This takes so much more than another required test. In Missouri, our students have been expected to “pass” tests on the United States and Missouri constitutions for decades. I can guarantee that the tests that I, and most other civics educators have developed take into account much more, at a higher level, than the simple set of factual knowledge that the Civics Education Initiative requires. Once again, education has been reduced to a standardized set of questions with an answer that can be memorized and forgotten. If we want real change and reform, we should be looking for innovative ways of teaching and assessing our goals with lasting impact, not another mandated test full of standardized questions to be regurgitated and forgotten. Disclaimer: The views expressed here are strictly those of the author and do not represent those of any organization in which he is affiliated. Text of Missouri HB 1646 Establishing the Civics Education Initiative: http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills161/billpdf/truly/HB1646T.PDF The Civics Education Initiative: http://civicseducationinitiative.org/ http://civicseducationinitiative.org/take-the-test/ Civics (American History and Government) Questions for the Naturalization Test: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Office%20of%20Citizenship/Citizenship%20Resource%20Center%20Site/Publications/100q.pdf Nothing against interactive whiteboards here, but when was the last time that you used yours and its interactive capabilities? Also, nothing against my district or the hundreds of others that placed a focus on putting one in every classroom. Having this meant/means that you have the technology in place to help students to learn, right? The problem isn’t the technology resources. The problem is that our education system does not promote progressive ideology that allows us to find better ways to use it. It does not promote allowing teachers and students to find the best ways to use those resources, but simply says here’s a cool new tool, now use it in the same way that you used magnets on the refrigerator or on the magnetic chalkboard from the 1950’s. If we are honest with ourselves, most of us aren’t using all of this new technology in the most impactful ways are we? Now, think about the billions of dollars spent on putting this technology in the classroom… I know that this isn’t a question that can be tangibly measured here, but I would like to ask it. “How much ‘bang for the buck’ have we gotten out of all of this new technology?” I recently had the opportunity to hear keynotes from two education leaders (at the Greater Ozarks Cooperating School Districts Innovation Summit in Springfield, Missouri--#GOInnovate @GOCSDMO), George Couros (@GCouros) and Will Richardson (@WillRich45). The general message that I gathered and I hope that all else in that room took with them is that our current education system is not structured in a way that allows our learners to gain the skills necessary to be successful in the real-world. One topic among others that drew my attention was that across the board, schools are laden with the latest and greatest technology but are missing educators trained with and willing to learn how to use it to its full capability. I am fortunate enough to work in a district that has a 1:1 laptop to student ratio from grades 5-12. I’m also very proud of the fact that our district has been at the front of adopting this. It is what is best for our students. They need to have these tools in their hands in order to learn how to use them because that is the direction that the global society is moving. Our students will need to have the ability and skills to use computers, tablets, smartphones, and social media in order to get a job, turn it into a career, and be successful at it. Making connections is huge, and social media needs to become a part of our education culture. Remember the age old mantra, “it’s not what you know, it’s who you know.” Go back and take a look at the previous paragraph. What is the purpose for providing our students with this technology? Now here is the real question: Are we fulfilling our purpose and goals in regard to providing our learners with “21st Century Skills” (I hate that we are still using this term a decade and a half--16% of the way through it) that they need to be successful? I would argue that as a whole, we are not. Why? Let’s take a look at this from the perspective of each significant group of stakeholders within education. The Students:As the place that all things in education should begin, let’s discuss our students’ perspectives (from what I see in the classroom every day). Why haven’t students bought into using this technology? The real answer, they have. Now, using it productively and having the ability to do so is different from “using it.” Across the board, our students lack models for how to use technology and social media in a positive and productive manner. Shouldn’t one of our missions as educators be to allow them to learn this skill? I’m not talking about creating a course on “Digital Citizenship.” What I’m talking about is instead, using these tools in every course and allowing our students to become digital citizens. I really worked last year to connect my students to others, having them write “research blog posts,” and trying to find people to review them using my Personal Learning Network (PLN), I also brought in Greg Myre (@GregMyre1) via (failed video call) phone with my students as a resource for a PBL unit on current tensions in the Middle East. That was a start. One thing that I took from Couros and Richardson was that I can and should be taking this way further. I’ve started thinking about how I’m going to encourage regular use of social media, blogging, vlogging, writing, etc. in my classes for next year. This makes learning more relevant, more personal, and provides students with a voice. What better way to get students involved in using technology and learning how to take control of their own learning? If we are using technology, but still using methods from the 1950’s, how is that relevant to our students and to their future? The Educators (Teachers and Administration):So, I’m going to throw this out there. I recently did not get an instructional leadership position in my district that I would have loved to have and felt that I would have been a great fit for. I really do enjoy being a leader from within the classroom though, so why did I want this job? Because I wanted share the perspective with others how making a shift in mindset and learning and how incorporating technology with sound pedagogy can make our classrooms so much more successful and enjoyable for everybody involved. Now, was I the right personality for the job (this is where it gets tricky when you’re really evaluating whether you are actually the right fit)? I probably would have ruffled some feathers, which may be a reason that I didn't get it. I expect for all educators to take pride in being lifelong learners--that includes being open, willing, and adaptable in order to do what is best for our learners. Looking around at our district, and mine is probably the same as yours, we have many that do not have the mindset to meet the expectations that I have for them, both as teacher and parent, in becoming adaptable educators that are open and willing to change along with the pace of the rest of the world. In essence, I’m calling out all of my colleagues at every level of education, to focus on and embrace lifelong learning. From my experience, education is one of the few sectors where it is "OK" to be a part of the status quo and it is sometimes even frowned upon to make changes even when it is evidently necessary. Does the old way work? Maybe. Does the new way work? Maybe. What’s the difference in the outcome here? “Maybe.” There is no difference. So, why not try it? There is no right or wrong way to learn or teach, but we need to be working on our craft continuously. So now another “real question.” Why don't teachers embrace lifelong learning, and why won’t they make changes? FEAR. This is where I’m really going to go on my soapbox, so beware if you are going to continue reading. The atmosphere in education currently does not foster growth, innovation, change, adaptability, or choice. There is significant risk involved if you are going to try any of the items on that list. Why? Because teachers are the ones that get blamed. Blamed for accountability scores from high stakes tests. Blamed for a failing school system. Blamed for the United States standing in the global community on those high stakes tests. Teachers lose and get jobs based on their ability to get their students to perform on whatever measurable test that policy makers throw at them. I have been asked these questions during presentations on the implementation of Project Based Learning in my classroom. Each of them really drive my point home here, I think, and really show the ineptitude that our current system fosters:
I typically don’t receive questions other than that. Those who are really curious and are open to making changes are there to see how it looks, how it’s been implemented, to get ideas, and usually thank me on their way out the door. I understand these questions and why they’re being asked. Our jobs are at stake if something doesn’t work. I’m all for accountability, and it’s a topic for another day, but how we assess students, teachers, schools, and districts needs to be THE topic of discussion for our policy makers, which I will elaborate on later. The Parents:When I think about getting my students connected, I immediately wonder what the backlash could be. There is risk involved and a possible (though small if done correctly) negative outcome. The world isn’t all rainbows and sunshine and there is risk in getting our students connected. When I have discussed the 1:1 Initiative with parents in our district, there are a few (though not the majority) who look at the machine that the students have been provided as a negative thing because it has now exposed things to their child that they might not have been exposed to without it. Is it worth the risk? Even speaking with my college friends about what I do, and how school has changed, they are in awe typically. They realize that education is not the same as it was when we were there (I graduated high school in 2002). They realize that school is and should not be done the same way that it was then. That was before Facebook, text messaging, etc. When I explain it to them that way, it seems to click. Also, we are open to how much technology has changed our lives because we have lived it in our generation. We were raised without cell phones and with the original Apple Desktop Computers in our school wide computer lab playing Oregon Trail and have seen it transform to having more technological capability in our pockets than the vehicle that transported us to the moon. As a whole, I think that parents understand the purpose for implementing technology and progressive methods in the classroom, but may not fully embrace it. One of the issues is that there is risk involved in the lives of our children. My son is entering preschool next year. Do I want him to be in a classroom where the teachers are taking chances and messing with things? Of course I do! If I walk into a classroom where he is expected to sit in one place and complete worksheets all day, I will be ticked! I hope that parents become more in tune with this over time as well. There are many parents though that believe that if teachers are doing that, they are using their kid as a “Guinea Pig,” and don’t want their child to be a part of a failed experiment. I understand that sentiment for sure. I feel the same way. My perspective though is that if an experiment fails and my kid sees it, he should learn from it. As long as we are all learning in the process, there is no risk. There may be reteachable moments along the way, but across the board, what is the risk of having our children in classrooms that aren’t making the changes to keep up with the pace of the rest of the “real world?” It's up to the parents first, to understand the reasons that education is changing, then to demand that our children/learners, educators, and policy makers also do the same. The Policy Makers:Yes, I’m going to broach the topic of politics here. Risky move, I know. That being said, they are often neglected when it comes to a list of stakeholders. That being said, they are the stakeholders with the most power to allow our education system to make significant progress. I propose that together, we have open dialogue with our policy makers to share our qualms with the way that the system is set up, especially in the way that it is assessed. In the same way that educators should be adapting to the times, so should our entire system. No complete change can take place until those at the top realize that the answer is not more high-stakes testing to measure school performance or by labeling schools as failing, then taking away funding. Shouldn’t education work be more like the private sector? Who gets the dollars from consumers? It’s a simple economic concept. In order to continue to sell a product, businesses have to adapt. They have to improve their product, offer more choice, and innovate new ways of doing the same thing in order to earn consumer dollars and stay relevant. Why not promote that way of thinking in our education system? Promote innovation, adaptability, learning and support for educators and assess schools and educators based on the skills that are needed most in society for our students to be successful in the long term. I don’t necessarily have a plan or direction, but I’ll think about it, regarding how this assessment model would look, but doesn’t it make sense if we are going to adapt education to the times in the long-term? Finally, I’m calling for our politicians to be lifelong learners as well. I know that education isn’t the only topic that they have to deal with, but I would think and hope that it’s a top five issue for them to think about and address with their constituents. Wouldn’t it be nice if they dealt with classroom educators, immersed themselves in professional development conferences with them and actually interacted with those that are in the classroom on a daily basis? Ask the questions about what teachers really need in order to help our students succeed, and involve ALL stakeholders in the process, not just a select few on state school boards and in state education departments, who are politicians themselves (whether they believe it or not) that have not been in the classroom for decades or ever in most cases. Only then will real changes take place in our education system. The Challenge:I want to leave you with this to consider: Whether you are one or a combination of these stakeholders, how are you going to make sure that you are making the best use of the resources provided to us? It’s going to take a real change in mindset from all involved in order to make real progress in education. How do we open this dialogue in a realistic way and do what is best for our students and communities in the long-term?
|
AuthorBrian Anton currently serves the Purdy R-II (Missouri) School District as the 7-12 Principal after working in the PK-12 Assistant Principal and Athletic Director roles for two years. In the 12 years prior to moving into administration, he served as an award-winning high school social studies teacher. Archives
September 2018
Categories
All
|