Ouch! Did I just learn something? Play-Based Learning: A Guide for Grown-Ups

By: Rebecca Wenstrom, Taryn Peacock, Julian Wilson, and Tonia Vines

What joyful childhood memory can you recall most clearly? When asked this question, one grown-up recalled long summer afternoons rigging a rope swing on which he and his neighbors swung into a creek. Another adult recalled long evenings playing capture-the-flag in the neighbors’ front yards up and down her block. Another describes playing dress-up imagination games with her siblings. When asked this question, adults reliably recall moments of freedom and discovery during extended periods of play. These experiences are exhilarating, creative, child-directed, unsupervised, and enormously fun. They are also, research tells us, hugely beneficial for brain development.

Psychologists like Boston College’s Peter Gray note that play, particularly child-directed play, helps children develop confidence and boundaries, learn to set expectations and follow rules, and practice negotiating outcomes with peers.

“When there is no movement, the brain literally goes to sleep.” This is the conclusion of Mary J Kawar, an Occupational Therapy specialist from El Cerrito, CA, who specializes in therapeutic programs for children with motor development challenges. Kawar notes that movement is essential in order to calibrate the human vestibular system, the special set of receptors in our inner ear responsible for balance, movement detection, and “modulating all of the various types of sensory input, including vision and hearing.” In other words, providing children opportunities to move in fact enhances their ability to learn and store new information in their memory.

Research also tells us, however, that child-directed, outdoor play is becoming scarce. Psychologists are concerned that insufficient opportunities for children to move may be contributing to a rise in mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression.

Angela Hanscom, a pediatric occupational therapist, also sees connections between lack of play and executive functioning disorders like ADHD. She explains, “With sensory systems not quite working right, [students] are asked to sit and pay attention. Children naturally start fidgeting, in order … to ‘turn their brain on.’”

When we square the research with the reality in many of our children’s lives, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that some of our children may be struggling through their schooling with their brains turned off. As parents and educators, it is essential that we actively plan for play to be a core component of every child’s day. We must understand how to create time and space for reasonable risk-taking and child-directed play, and be adept at building structured play-based learning opportunities into each child’s school day.

One deterrent to child-directed play is the pervasiveness of screens in children’s lives (Gray 2011), yet television and the internet are not the only culprits. Gray states, "Since about 1955 ... children's free play has been continually declining, at least partly because adults have exerted ever-increasing control over children's activities.” Safety concerns lead adults to direct their children’s play, or even restrict play time (Gray 2011). Additionally, as schools responded to No Child Left Behind and increasing academic demands, “many children are given less free time and fewer physical outlets at schools,” (Ginsburg 2007). Compared to students in 1981, students in 1997 spent 18 percent more time at school and 145 percent more time doing school work (Entin 2011). The emphasis on reading and math have taken away from free play time.

Have modern students lost the joy of climbing trees and risking that highest leap off the swings in exchange for text messaging and Angry Birds? Or does our culture pressure parents and teachers to structure kids’ lives with adult-directed activities? Both things are likely true. As The Atlantic’s Esther Entin writes, “It is not that anyone set out to do away with free play time. But it’s value has not been recognized. As a result, kids’ free play time has not been protected,” (Entin 2011). Whatever the cause, at Two Rivers we believe that adults can take an active role in supporting and structuring opportunities for the healthy play our children need.

In order for students to benefit from both structured and unstructured play, teachers and parents must be aware of their role in providing opportunities for and organizing play.  Play goes beyond the playground, recess, and P.E, and should be an essential component of a child’s everyday learning, both in and outside of the classroom.  Teachers at Two Rivers have found success in facilitating healthy opportunities for play using some of the following strategies and methods:

Create learning environments that invite and encourage play. Setting up imagination and investigation stations will spark a child’s imagination and support them in exploring their own interests. These environments might include:

• Imagination & Dramatic play areas
• Manipulative/Games areas
• Science/Discovery areas
• Art/Craft Areas
• Physical Play Areas

Providing varied and novel materials in these areas can help children learn and grow through play both individually and in groups. Materials should include loose parts inviting open-ended objectives that students design themselves, and empower creativity by providing children opportunities to think, plan, and do.

Ask questions

While it is essential that children have time to explore and design play activities independently, adults can support children’s learning by engaging in the play as curious observers. Ask exploratory questions that help extend the child’s play.  For example, if a child is playing with a truck, ask, “Where is that truck going? Why is it going there?”

Put play in learning

Teachers can be imaginative about how to link play activities to their curriculum.  A unit on cultivating relationships can be linked to a ball game where children shout another child’s name before throwing the ball to them. Bring manipulatives into the classroom to get your children playing with math, building their conceptual understanding while being physically active.

Talk to your kids about play

“Teachers can determine specific goals and outcomes they want students to achieve during play and share these with families and the students themselves” (Marlyn Rice, M.Ed). Build in time to reflect and debrief with your children about play. Ask kids what they learned from playing and how their play activities are helping them grow. Ask students to share examples of how play helps them build positive peer relationships and practice resilience and risk-taking.

By providing these and other experiences for students to play, we empower them to become lifelong learners exploring and engaged in their world.

Nurturing All Students: Structures that Support Differentiation

By: Jennifer McCormick, Mike Jordan, Kai Blackwood, and Elizabeth Leboo

In a 4th grade classroom, the teachers have planned a close reading task on anthropology, in preparation for the fall expedition. Knowing that their students have a variety of reading levels, they have anticipated some challenges that students may have with understanding the original text. They write a synthesis text, including much of the content specific vocabulary the students need, but simplifying the language so that the text is not overwhelmingly technical. Taking learning styles into account, and knowing that their students benefit from using text features to comprehend, they include some carefully evaluated visuals to enhance comprehension. Since the students will be asked to make a claim about what an anthropologist does based on in-depth understanding of the text, they create a chart for kids to notice and record unfamiliar words. The chart steered kids to the text and context, and provided an activity in making meaning based on using these clues. When students still struggled in understanding, teachers used careful, probing questions to redirect kids to the parts of the text where the word meanings were more explicit. Later on, students listened to each other during share and debrief, and were able to get clarity on any unfamiliar words that they were still unsure about.

Are the many steps to this activity really necessary?  Why not just pass out the text and have students read it?

You may remember your own schooling, when every student read from the same textbook. Thinking back to high school, you might recall an entire class dedicated to deciphering Lord of the Flies.  

At Two Rivers, we know that ‘one-size’ does not ‘fit all’ when it comes to teaching and learning. Differentiated instruction is a classroom model through which all students’ academic skills and abilities, learning styles and personal interests are embraced.

The practice of differentiation ensures that each student gets what he or she needs in class. In math, this may mean that some students explore a concept with counters while others explore the same concept by drawing a graph or writing an equation.  In a reading class, this may look like students breaking up into small reading groups to read different pieces of text that are at their instructional reading levels.  Meeting students where they are allows us to push them towards growth.  

To realize differentiation for every student, specific structures are built into our school that guarantee that every student has access to what he or she needs to succeed.  These structures include instructional strategies like flexible groups and centers; scheduling structures like labs, tutoring classes, and differentiated math classes; and staffing structures.  All of these work together in realizing the potential of differentiated classrooms where every student gets what he or she needs.

Instructional Structures that Support Differentiation: Flex Groups and Centers

The primary instructional structure for providing differentiated instruction at Two Rivers is flexible groups.  The purpose of flex groups is to allow  students the opportunity to express their potential by accessing multiple venues for a particular course of study, within groups that can change as students’ needs change.  For example in reading, students work with teachers in groups based on students ability to decode the text or comprehend the text. Several of these different groups may work with or without teacher support.   When it comes to teaching reading and understanding concepts, this multifaceted approach allows students the opportunity to access the material based on the specific skills that each student needs.  

The concept of centers figures strongly into the idea of flex groups, as the two concepts can mutually support the goal of breaking down the class based on lesson goals.  Centers are stations in the classroom where students work independently on targeted, differentiated assignments.  Particularly during our English language arts classes, they are a way that we promote literacy learning targets by allowing the students to move about the room to different areas, for the purposes of completing different parts of the lesson.  In many cases the parts appear unrelated, but essentially they are working toward a greater understanding of reading and language use.  These centers are composed of:  word sort, partner quizzes, word hunts, independent reading, partner reading, writing and listening.  Each center allows students to access a different piece through different goals.  Through the use of flexible groups and centers teachers can target experiences for each student to meet their needs.

Scheduling Structures that Support Differentiation: Writing Intensive, Lab, and Differentiated Math Classes

Differentiated instruction is something we do all the time, both in our classrooms organically, as well as through structures that are built into our day.  Three of the structures built into our Middle School schedule that support differentiation are our writing intensive classes, lab, and differentiated math classes.

All of our students write in their English language arts classes, and are pushed to develop their critical thinking and writing skills throughout all the content classes.  We know, however, that there are students who need extra support with writing, and that while pushing their conceptual knowledge is invaluable, they also need time carved out during the day where they can receive assistance with writing mechanics.   These students are placed in a writing intensive class at the beginning of the year.  In writing intensive, students can practice basic writing skills and receive extra support in writing structure, skills which transfer comprehensive writing pieces in the subject area courses.

Our labs in the middle school also support differentiation by providing students with targeted instruction where they need it most.  At the beginning of the year, we review our students’ assessment data - state test proficiency, performance on periodic assessments throughout the year, performance and growth on MAP (Measures of Academic Progress), performance in their academic classes and teacher recommendations.  Using these data sources, we look to see where students need the most support, or if they are proficient and need an extra push.  Our labs fall into three bands: intervention labs, that are focused on helping to fill gaps in basic skills and knowledge; push labs, for students who are on the cusp of grade level and need some extra time and practice with the grade level work; and advanced labs, which provide extension for students who have mastered grade level work in a specific content area and are ready for the next challenge.  

Our intervention labs focus on providing practice with basic skills and knowledge in either the English language arts or math classroom; students are placed depending on their academic need.  Intervention labs are incredibly important and necessary, because this is the time built into the day where students can work in a small group (average intervention lab class is 7 students) with a teacher to receive targeted instruction and practice with foundational skills that are not being covered in their math or English language arts class.  Filling in these skill gaps makes students better able to access the current content.

Our push labs help students practice with grade-level English language arts skills.  Here, students look at their performance data on interim assessments and set goals for what skills they need to work on to master grade level content.  Students then work with complex texts that challenge them to hone their skills as readers and writers, and receive extra support from their grade-level English language arts teacher in doing this work.  

Our advanced labs provide students with the opportunity to extend and challenge their thinking in a specific content area.  We have advanced labs in science, math, Spanish and social studies.  Students in our advanced science labs develop their own science identities, and then form groups around a science experiment they want to take on.   Students in our advanced math lab are challenged with complex math problems in preparation for the American Mathematical Competition 8 (AMC 8).  Students work on exam problems from the previous years, draft solutions, and engage in critique of their peers’ work.  In our advanced Spanish lab, students who are proficient in Spanish push their skills by having conversations, writing a Two Rivers Spanish newsletter called, “Que Pasa, TR?” and preparing to take the National Spanish Exam at the end of the year.  In our advanced social studies lab, students gain a deeper understanding of historical contextualization by exploring contemporary issues and historical thinking.

Lab provides an opportunity for all students to receive targeted instructions exactly where they need it, in the content where they need it most.  It’s a living example of differentiation every day.

In addition to writing intensive and lab, we offer explicit differentiation in math classes in the middle school.  All of our math instruction allows for all students to develop proficiency in mathematical concepts, application and communication. Taking learning styles and differences into account, math teachers guide students through multiple ways to approach real-life mathematical problems, and support them in various ways to demonstrate understanding. Realizing that all math students do not enter middle school with the same set of basic skills, Math classes are not only divided by grade level, but extensive assessment data is used to place students according to their level. For example, some middle school students  who have demonstrated preparedness to work on more advanced mathematics are able to take a credit-bearing Algebra class. Students who have not reached proficiency with grade level math are supported in the appropriate grade level work in addition to attending a Math Lab that supports their ongoing development of basic numeracy skills.

Staffing Structures that Support Differentiation: Special Educator Support

In addition to instructional structures and scheduling classes that support differentiation, Two Rivers’ commitment to making high quality education accessible to all learners is reflected in our faculty composition. A special educator is a member of every grade level team in Grades 2-5, participating in the planning, instruction and assessment of all students. Preschool through Grade 1 are supported by an early childhood special educator, and, at the Middle School level, special educators co-teach in both math and English language arts classes, as well as teach individual intervention classes in reading, writing and math.  Students with identified learning differences are supported to meet their individual learning goals in whole class activities, small groups and through individual instruction in the classroom setting. Including a qualified special educator on teams ensures that accommodations and strategies for students with special educational needs are consistently planned for and incorporated into every aspect of learning.

At Two Rivers, we are able to meet our students where they are in their learning journey because of the structures that support differentiation.  Through flexible groups, centers, intensive writing, labs, differentiated math classes, and supportive staffing structure, we are better able to guide and challenge all students as they become expert thinkers and complex communicators.

It’s All in the Problem: Putting Students in Charge of Their Own Learning PART 2

By: Jazmin Heartfield, Meaghan Petersack, and Elaine Hou

What does problem-based learning look like at Two Rivers?

Problems are opportunities, but how does a school create and capitalize on those opportunities? What does the problem-based learning approach look look like in in a typical school day?  Walking into a classroom at Two Rivers, what instructional strategies and moves might a visitor see that are preparing our students to be flexible problem-solvers?  

Over the past two years, our staff has focused its energy around planning math instruction that empowers students as mathematicians and prepares them for the higher demands of the common core standards.  Across all grades, we have implemented an instructional strategy called “problem-based tasks.”  These tasks turn the traditional lesson plan (I do, we do, you do) on its head.  After a short introduction, students are given problems with all of the qualities we listed above (ill-structured, open-ended). Teachers act as coaches, guiding but not dictating student thinking as they try to solve a problem.  Following a period of grappling with the problem, students gather together for a well-planned share and debrief session in which peers and teachers unpack different strategies for solving the problem-reflecting on both new content learned and transferable problem-solving habits of mind they can apply to solve any ill-structured problem.  

Does students-centered problem solving mean we just leave them on their own?

At Two Rivers, we mimic real-world problems by allowing students to grapple with these problems as the heart of their learning experiences in and out of the classroom. When students enter the 21st century workforce, it is unlikely that their bosses or mentors will give them a problem and then lay out the exact steps for solving it.  Instead, they will be given a problem and asked to solve it.  

This is not to say that all learning at Two Rivers is constructivist.  There are times when students do need exact steps and skills that require explicit instruction.  We seek to balance direct instruction and constructivist learning so that students are able to acquire discrete skills and deeper, foundational understandings that can be flexibly applied to problems.  Maintaining this balance requires embedding the problem-based approach into all subjects that students study.  For example, in the second grade curriculum, students learn all about the importance of laws and the process by which legislators create laws.   Teachers at this grade level design problems that students can solve using their knowledge and understanding of laws.  Taking on the expert role of legislators, students are tackling a problem with unsafe play at recess.  They will mimic the process of real legislators in order to create the school “law” that solves the playground problem. Once again, we are finding ways for students to solve authentic problems which will prepare them to do so in all parts of their educational career and future in the 21st century workforce.

Every Social Conflict Becomes a Learning Opportunity

At Two Rivers we extend the problem-based learning approach to our social emotional curriculum as well.   As any teacher can attest, a typical school day includes problems that arise organically in terms of student interactions and behavior.  Students get into arguments with one another, break rules, and face disappointments and obstacles.   Given that life as an adult in the 21st century will bring similar struggles, our social emotional curriculum seeks to empower students to control their own emotions and behavior and solve their own interpersonal conflicts.  We do this through a strategy called “Problem-Solving Conferences.” These are one on one conversations between students and adults that involve collaborating to name a problem and making a plan for solving it.   By including the student in this process, rather than just gathering the adults in that students’ life and making a plan to fix the problem, we are developing a skill set that will be crucial later in life.  

The “Real World” Starts Now

So what will truly set a student up for lifelong success after they leave the walls of their school experiences?  It is the ability to understand and solve complex problems.  That work cannot wait until they enter into the “real world.” As John Dewey expressed, “Education is not simply preparation for life. It is life itself.”  Lifelong learning starts now as we as educators skillfully give students multiple opportunities to solve authentic problems, communicate their solutions, and see the opportunity in every challenge. To do anything less would be closing instead of opening doors for our students.

THIS IS THE SECOND IN A TWO-PART PIECE ON PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING. PART 1 ABOUT WHAT IS PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING AND WHY WE NEED IT WAS POSTED ON MARCH 27, 2015.

It’s All in the Problem: Putting Students in Charge of Their Own Learning PART 1

By: Jazmin Heartfield, Meaghan Petersack, and Elaine Hou

“What makes you the best candidate for this job?”

Fast-forward years from their career at Two Rivers, all of our students will have this question posed to them at some point in a job interview.  Years of schooling have led up to this moment. In this same moment, our students are competing against candidates who also bring with them years of schooling from other educational institutions.

So what sets the Two Rivers student apart?

Before the era of Google, the answer to the question about what made one the best candidate for the best jobs was very different than it would be today, because the world itself was very different.  The best jobs in the 20th century were out there for people who had very specific skill sets that allowed them to solve the same type of problem again and again. Memorization of facts and learning one formula to accomplish the same goal reigned as THE skill that success on the job demanded.

With the information age of the 21st century and the transforming power of technology on our world, the one skill that reigned in the 20th century is now pretty much obsolete.  Solving one type of problem with the same formula over and over again? Computers can do that. Robots will be able to do most of the work soon. In this era, we need a whole new set of thinkers and problem-solvers that can go beyond solving one type of problem in one way.

So what sets the Two Rivers student apart when it comes to problem-solving?

At Two Rivers, what sets our students apart is the problem-based learning that they are immersed in throughout their school career.  From a student’s first years in preschool to their last year in 8th grade, a Two Rivers student embraces problems.  This is not a warm and fuzzy embrace.  A Two Rivers student encounters and learns to solve purposeful and real problems throughout their curricular journey, allowing them to do the type of thinking and collaborating that a computer or robot cannot do.

When Google asks our students: “What makes you the best candidate for this job?”, the Two Rivers student will be able to talk about how their problem-based learning experience makes them a qualified “Googler”. Two Rivers students will be able to speak to how they can “flex different muscles in different situations in order to mobilize a team; use a variety of strengths and passions, not just isolated skill sets; tackle complex problems creatively and not get hung up on nailing the ‘right’ answer; and possess a comfort with ambiguity, bias to action, and a collaborative nature” to solve complex problems, problems that don’t even exist yet in a rapidly changing world (words straight from Google’s hiring criteria).  In their futures, Two Rivers students will be able to solve the toughest problems because that is what they do everyday in and out of the classroom.

What types of problems are the “right” types of problems to let students solve?

It is important to recognize the kinds of problems that students in a problem-based learning approach are asked to tackle on a daily basis. These problems do not fit neatly into boxes with pre-packaged solutions. Rather, they are messy, ill structured problems that require  unpacking and evaluating, thinking skills that will serve students well in the 21st century. The right kinds of problems are not easily solvable with simple solutions.  Instead, they require students to be creative with their thinking and application of ideas and skills. These problems are also authentic and have real-world implications. Sometimes the problem may be academic in nature, asking students to act as experts and apply what they have learned in a specific content area. Other times, it may involve social-emotional issues that spring up unexpectedly and need to be resolved in order for the classroom or school to function in a more optimal way. A good educator uses these spontaneous problems as crucial learning opportunities for lifelong learning.

It’s a Collective Endeavor

Problem-based learning allows students to be active, participants in their learning and education. It is a student-centered approach in which students are invested in the problem they are exploring as well as how it is resolved. However, while it is student centered, it does not mean that educators become passive and uninvolved in the planning and learning process. Teachers act as guides, coaching students through real world experiences and problems and helping to foster a deeper understanding through the act of both understanding and solving the problem. They often organize curriculum and units of study around a central problem that can be solved through the application of content specific skills. The problem is designed to become the main driver of learning, providing an important “so-what” to the skills that students must learn and apply.

In this learning approach, students are often asked to collaborate with their peers to investigate and make meaning of the problem they are trying to solve. Opponents to this way of learning may say that allowing students to collaborate with peers takes away some of the individual ownership of a task and enables students to depend on peers rather than do their own work. However, this kind of collaboration allows students to see and discuss different viewpoints and strategies, which will contribute to their own individual growth as well as the growth of their peers. Collaboration, when facilitated by educators to be learning opportunities, leads to the realization that we are not only responsible for our own growth and learning, but also that of our entire community.  In their role as collaborative problem-solvers, students come to understand that in order for everyone to be successful, we all must contribute. When students are asked to collaborate, they are required to practice and develop social skills that are crucial for working with others, effectively becoming part of creating larger solutions to problems that currently don’t even exist.  This is the type of thinking that Google is looking for, the type of thinking that opens doors for students in the 21st century.

PART 2 ON WHAT DOES PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING LOOK LIKE AT TWO RIVERS? WILL BE POSTED ON APRIL 3, 2015.

Creating a Culture of Grappling: Building Perseverance and Emotional Stamina in All Students

By: Caroline Mwendwa-Baker, Penny Perrott, and Anya Rosenberg

It’s Wednesday morning on a crisp day in early November and students in the Fourth Grade are getting ready for their weekly problem-based task in morning math.   The students begin in a whole group lesson to go over the complex math problem together.  Ms. Jessica, the class’ lead teacher, begins by reading the problem out-loud as students follow along and underline words and phrases that stand out to them. Once a basic level of understanding of the problem is reached, students spend five minutes of independent think time to fill out a Know/Wonder/Ideas (KWI) graphic organizer to share what they know about the problem, what they wonder about the problem, and any ideas they have for how to solve it.  Students then come together as a class and share their ideas to reach a deeper collective understanding.  When students share their ideas, Ms. Jessica, the class’ lead teacher, gives value to every students’ observations and summarizes their ideas to fit in the know/wonder/idea structure, physically filling out a large scale KWI on a chart paper at the front of the class.  This whole group lesson establishes clear and explicit structures and expectations for how to approach the problem, such as the expectation that every student create a clear model of their thinking.  By making the expectations and guidelines clear, students are set-up to grapple at a level that challenges their current understanding but won’t leave them frustrated.  The whole class KWI is created within the first 10 minutes of the lesson, and it remains at the front of the class for students to reference as they delve into their independent work. Minimal guidance about how to solve the problem is given, but many ideas are proposed and discussed.  Once in partnerships, the students begin to work through the problem together.  Using powerful language to express their thinking, students own their opinions and defend their approaches, but are malleable with their thinking so that they can grapple and engage in the challenging work together.

What is grappling?

Grappling is the process of persevering, thinking critically, analyzing data, and constructing an in-depth understanding when faced with a problem that does not have a clear path to a solution.   

Within the intentional community of learners at Two Rivers, we establish a culture of grappling within all aspects of our school culture.  Grappling appears in many forms in our community: whether it be Fourth Grade students working hard and challenging themselves with a complex mathematical problem-based task, Fifth Graders working through a complex text through partner reading, or a group of teachers and administrators coming up with strategies and best practices to institute new testing procedures.  In each of these cases, grappling looks like learners coming together, asking each other questions, sharing ideas, admitting confusions, and coming to new levels of shared understanding.  Grappling is admitting and being comfortable with the fact that the answer may not be instantly apparent; it is working hard and persevering through challenges to form answers and ideas.  

What Does Grappling Do for Students?  

Grappling provides students opportunities to get comfortable making mistakes, taking risks, and feeling the great reward of challenging themselves to reach areas of unknown growth and academic adventure.   It is an indispensable component of a well-rounded educational experience, as it builds critical thinking skills and emotional stamina.  When students grapple with complex tasks on a daily basis, it becomes an attitude that students use to approach any and all tasks in and out of school. They tend to take every opportunity as a learning opportunity, and are willing to fail. It creates a higher order of thinking by investing students in the problems that they are trying to solve, often motivating students to learn more due to their involvement in the problem.

This is best illustrated in the work on cognitive mindsets.  Mindsets affect how students approach and persevere through a task.   Dr. Carol Dweck, one of the world’s leading researchers in the field of motivation identifies two mindsets that students have about their intelligence-- a growth mindset and a fixed mindset (Dweck 2008, 6).  Students who have a fixed mindset believe that their intelligence is one that is already set; they see academic and emotional challenges, making mistakes and failure as threatening to their intelligence and thus avoid experiencing them.  This greatly affects their performance and success in the long run.  On the other hand, students who have a growth mindset believe that their intelligence is one that can continue to grow and develop through hard work, perseverance and mental stamina.  They embrace challenges, are not afraid to make mistakes as part of the learning process, and are lifelong learners.  These students know that they can grow their intelligence through grappling with challenging problems and taking academic risks. In order to create a culture where a growth mindset is the norm, students and teachers must grapple with complex tasks on a daily basis.  

Dr. Carol Dweck outlines the ways in which a growth mindset benefits students; particularly poignant is Dwecks’ data about how students with growth mindsets seek out opportunities to grow as learners and academic risk-takers. Students with a growth mindset exhibit a drive to learn from their mistakes and absorb knowledge from fellow learners, while those with fixed mindsets seek out tasks that confirm--and do not challenge--their pre-existing intelligence (Dweck 2008).

Building a Culture of Grappling

At Two Rivers, we spend the first weeks of the school year working on creating a shared language of grappling. We explicitly name it for students as “grappling;” and discuss why grappling is an important part of our learning community. We set high expectations for all of the tasks that students partake in and make it explicit that our expectations are high because we want students to challenge themselves, make mistakes, and take risks--and because we know that they are capable of the challenge.  We praise students for putting in their best effort and making mistakes, and we intentionally and explicitly establish making mistakes as an integral part of the learning process.  

As displayed in Ms. Jessica’s Fourth Grade class as they struggled with their problem-based Task, as teachers and community members, we work to engrain grappling and language of the Growth Mindset into our classrooms and our school community.  As teachers observe and assist with student work, we praise our students for “working hard” and putting in their best effort in addition to assessing the quality of final products. We recognize that academic risk taking will yield mistakes, but this does not detract from our expectations for high-quality products; we hold our students to rigorous standards for completing their work, and provide opportunities for critique and feedback when these expectations are not met. We veer away from language that stresses “smartness” as an inherent trait and instead employ language that encourages students to keep digging, asking questions, and putting their best effort into their work.  In Ms. Jessica’s Fourth Grade class, this takes the form of teacher observations that begin with “I notice that you….” And “I see that you are working hard at understanding… Did you consider this..?” By providing students with observations about their work, we encourage them to be self-reflective of their own practices and examine how their work can be improved through deeper questioning, intentional risk taking, and attempting new and different ways of thinking.

As teachers, counselors, administrators, and instructional leaders, we work to adapt a growth mindset that encourages grappling within our community of educators as well as a culture that permeates the walls of our school. Our hope is that by nurturing a growth mindset in our school, our students will develop a habit of mind that will give them emotional and academic strength to face challenges in school and out.  When students and teachers grapple together, our classrooms feel supportive, safe, and connected.  As observed with Ms. Jessica’s Fourth Graders, every student feels comfortable asking questions and being inquisitive about the thinking processes of other students.  There is tremendous buy-in by students, and because the support and safety has been so well established, students are comfortable making mistakes and asking questions of one-another that push them outside of their comfort zone and into the zone of proximal development where they feel challenged and can learn.

Experiences in which students grapple can be messy.  As teachers working to find the best ways to support students in grappling, we don’t have all of the answers, but we believe wholeheartedly in giving students opportunities to build their critical thinking skills and emotional stamina.  As we work to build a culture of grappling, our work will surely yield mistakes, but we do not fear these challenges. Rather, we welcome the opportunity to grow our mindsets and practices together as learners, students, leaders, and teachers.

Further Reading:

Dweck, Carol. 2008. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Ballantine Books.

“Getting Students Ready to Grapple” Expeditionary Learning.

http://elschools.org/sites/default/files/Getting%20Students%20Ready%20to%20Grapple.pdf

Spiegel, Alix. "Struggle For Smarts? How Eastern And Western Cultures Tackle Learning." NPR, 12 Nov. 2012.

What’s in a Grade?: The Importance of Shifting the Way We Think About and Use Grades in Our Schools

By: Jeff Heyck-Williams

What’s in a grade?  Why do we grade? What do grades communicate?

These questions may seem to have obvious answers, but they warrant consideration as we realize that grading is a major way that schools communicate both how individual students are doing and how our schools are doing at educating our children.

The most basic way that we answer the question of why we grade is to communicate the progress and achievement of students within a class.  But this begs the question of what, exactly, these grades are communicating about progress and achievement. 

Unfortunately, traditional grades too often have been a bit vague at communicating the achievement of students.  At Two Rivers we have intentionally designed a grading system that communicates the complexity and depth of student learning.  We recognize that our system is different and therefore creates dissonance with traditional notions of grading. 

There are three basic ways that traditional grading systems fail that we address through our grading system at Two Rivers:

1.    Traditional grades compare students to each other or to assignments.  Two Rivers’ grades compare students to standards.

2.    Traditional grades are general and one-dimensional.  Two Rivers’ grades are specific and Two Rivers’ reports acknowledge the multiple dimensions of learning.

3.    Traditional grading compartmentalizes learning.  Two Rivers’ grading recognizes that learning occurs along a continuum.    

TRADITIONAL GRADES COMPARE STUDENTS TO EACH OTHER OR TO ASSIGNMENTS.

At their worst, traditional grades are assigned by comparing students to one another.  This system of assigning grades comes out of a misapplication of the famous bell curve.  If grades are assigned in this way, only the top 10% or so can receive an A because grades are assigned on the curve.  With a system of comparative grading the majority of students receive C’s and inevitably some students fail the class.  This system of assigning grades is flawed from the start because it assumes that schools are in the business of ranking students versus teaching them.  A teaching perspective would necessitate the possibility that all students can achieve and thus receive the highest marks possible in the class. 

Slightly better – though not by much -- are grading systems that evaluate students on assignments.  In this system of assigning grades, tests count for a certain percentage, homework counts for a different percentage, projects for a different percentage and so on.  The problem with this system is that schools aren’t just teaching kids to take tests or create projects.  Rather, it is the content of the tests and skills applied in the projects that we are trying to teach. An effective system of grading should assess the knowledge and skills that we actually want kids to develop, not the assignment.

TWO RIVERS GRADES COMPARE STUDENT PERFORMANCE TO STANDARDS

At Two Rivers, we have responded to this by developing a standards-based grading system.  This means that students are not graded either in comparison to each other or on how well they did on a given assignment, but rather on the degree to which they have mastered a given standard.  A single assignment may require students to call upon content knowledge and skills from several different standards. Thus, any given assignment  -- whether a test, quiz, or project -- can potentially have more than one grade associated with it.  Multiple grades would reflect the level of proficiency in each of those standards.  In this way, students can look at their grades and know specifically what content and skills they have mastered or still need to work on, information that a single grade for an assignment cannot capture.

TRADITIONAL GRADES ARE TOO GENERAL AND ONE-DIMENSIONAL

If your experience around grading has been similar to mine, grading at its best has always been an amalgamation of scores created by taking into account mastery of content, development of skills, and the amount of effort and focus.  Those scores are then boiled down to a single letter grade for the class.  Even with a syllabus that outlines weighting of assignments, it is often difficult to understand how each of the component assignments led to the final grade. 

More importantly a single letter grade can’t tell you much about what a student actually knows and can do even.  After all, what does an “A” in physics mean?  An “A” does not tell you if a student understands quantum theory or if they can balance an equation.   It also doesn’t tell you how much effort they had to put into their work to earn the “A.” 

Furthermore, while some traditional reports clump multiple dimensions, such as effort, skills, and content, into a single letter grade for a class, others effectively boil all learning in that class down to a single dimension -- usually content knowledge.  This single grade from a given class thus conveys only information on how well the student mastered a given set of information.

However, as I’ve have written before, we know that students need more than a set of content knowledge to be successful in the 21^st century economy.  They also need what we term expert thinking and complex communication skills.  A single grade -- even a grade that takes into account multiple dimensions of learning -- masks these dimensions by lumping process skills, collaboration skills, and content knowledge into the same bucket.

TWO RIVERS GRADES ARE SPECIFIC AND TWO RIVERS’ REPORTS ACKNOWLEDGE THE MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS OF LEARNING

In contrast to traditional grading systems, Two Rivers intentionally provide grades on specific standards rather than giving omnibus grades for a given class.  By focusing on specific standards, a student and her family can know exactly what skills and knowledge she has mastered and what skills and knowledge continue to need work.  On our progress reports, we report on strands that comprise a group of standards, once again giving students a more specific understanding of the discrete areas on which they need to improve.

Our grading system is also designed to provide information across multiple dimensions.  The grades on given standards only reflect how a student is performing in comparison to that standard and not their level of engagement, participation, and collaboration in class. 

Two Rivers addresses these type of intrapersonal skills through our Scholarly Habits: I work hard, I am responsible and independent, I am a team player, I care for my community.   Currently we provide narrative reports on how students are achieving these Scholarly Habits, separating them from assessment of whether or not a student understands a concept taught in class.  In this way we acknowledge that there are multiple dimensions of learning that can be teased out and reported on separately, and that each component builds on the other to form a well-rounded learner.

Consequently we don’t include homework as a component in determining grades for two major reasons.  First, independent work completed outside of class is not a reliable measure of whether or not a student has mastered content.  Second, homework completion is often a sign that a student has integrated a combination of organization skills and motivation that have less to do with understanding of a standard and more to do with what we would describe as intrapersonal skills. 

Ultimately, reporting in this way provides us with the opportunity to acknowledge the specific strengths and areas for growth of each individual student.  Thus the student who needs to work on developing understanding but has excellent study skills can be acknowledged for the effort that he puts into his work while focusing on the area for his growth.  Similarly, the student who has a strong conceptual understanding but struggles to work with peers can be acknowledged for her understanding and focus on building her collaboration skills.

TRADITIONAL GRADING COMPARTMENTALIZES LEARNING

The last way in which traditional grading systems fail is they operate under the assumption that learning has a clear beginning, middle, and an end -- at which point grades are reported.  While there inevitably is a beginning and an end to the school year and there must be a point in which grades are reported, learning itself does not occur this way.  This assumption about a beginning, middle, and an end compartmentalizes learning into discrete elements of learning.  However, compartmentalizing learning in this way breaks up knowledge and skills into pieces that are often unnatural.

One result of compartmentalizing learning is that a student can’t achieve higher than an A or 100%.  This suggests that after a student has earned the A they have nowhere to grow in the class.  What this guarantees for a great many of our students is that they come to class having already mastered the content and effectively learn nothing more, though they achieve the A.  It is a reality in our schools today as always that there is a wide range of student ability in every class and some students will master the given content faster than others.  If our grading system doesn’t provide a place to report on students who meet the challenge to move beyond the outlined standards for a grade level or class then there is little incentive for the teacher to provide experiences that provides that challenge or for the students to strive to meet it.

TWO RIVERS GRADING RECOGNIZES THAT LEARNING IS ON A CONTINUUM

Our scale acknowledges that learning is on a continuum and that knowledge doesn’t end with the mastery of a discrete standard.  Thus, a 3 in a given standard shows that students  have met or are on target to meet the standard by the end of the year; indicating that they are on grade level and performing the skills and acquiring the concepts we would expect of a student at that grade level. A 4 means they have exceeded the standard by no more than one grade level, while a 5 indicates that they are performing in relation to a given standard more than one grade level above their current grade. 

Grading in this way communicates that learning – and the grades associated with learning -- is a continuous process and that students can not only master a concept but can also continue to deepen their understanding and application of the concept.

While we realize that our grading system challenges the assumptions of traditional grading systems, we do so with the intent to fix what is broken about those systems. While our system may not be perfect, it better captures the essence of a community of learners that recognizes the necessity for authentic feedback to learners so that they can become leaders of their own learning.   By empowering our students with the  knowledge of what they need to improve upon, we uncover for them the process of learning and provide a foundation to make learning a life-long endeavor.