testing, testing, testing, 1, 2, 3

Realistic Math Education

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Sun, 20 Sep 2015 20:13:00 -0400

I had the pleasure of attending the 5th International Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) 2015 Conference in Boulder, Colorado at the University of Colorado. Prior to attending the conference I did not know too much about RME. I knew that people that I admired in the field of mathematics education (Lucy West, Toni Cameron, Cathy Fosnot) were greatly influenced by the principles of RME and the Freudenthal Institute (FI). Below is brief history, as posted on the Freudenthal Institute - USA:

In 2003 the Freudenthal Institute - USA (FI-US) was established as a result of the collaboration that had existed for years already between the Wisconsin Center for Education Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the USA and the Freudenthal Institute. In Fall 2005, FI-US relocated to the University of Colorado at Boulder, USA.

The Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (FI) aims to improve education in the fields of arithmetic, mathematics, and the sciences, with a focus on primary, secondary and vocational education. FIsme works towards achieving these objectives through research, teaching, curriculum development and services.

What does any of this have to do with developing test-savvy math students, you may inquire? Well the institute is grounded in the belief that learners need to consistently and deliberately experience the application of mathematics in order to learn how to mathematize their world...real and imagined. RME is also grounded in the idea that learning needs to include informal, pre-formal and formal applications. To emphasis this point the researchers at FI use an iceberg as a metaphor. The top of the iceberg is what some people would call, "the math" or the abstractions or mathematic notation. But researchers at FI insist that we need to pay special attention to what in underneath the top of the iceberg. Beneath the iceberg is where conceptual understanding is developed and it is the majority of the iceberg of understanding.

So where does this leave testing and preparing for high-stakes standardized testing? In my opinion...the same place it was before. The concepts of RME are not new and have been influencing classroom instruction for decades. The challenge was and remains to be...knowing that learners need significant time with the informal and pre-formal ideas and structures of mathematics. Time and experiences that help to build towards the formalization of mathematical idea, without letting go of what is beneath the iceberg.

Is it a matter of trust? Trusting that if we spend more time beneath the iceberg, with appropriate tools, models and tasks, that we will not drown. Is it a matter of mindset? Believing that some people can get the math and others cannot, so it does no make sense to focus so much time beneath the iceberg?

I am not sure. I just know that what we have been doing has not produced the results that we are looking for in terms of students being able to see mathematics in their world and use mathematics to describe their world.

What can we do?

Critically and strategically examine our curriculum programs to note how much of our time is spent beneath the "iceberg" on given topics.
In teacher teams, vertically and horizontally across grade-levels, develop and examine our "icebergs" to note areas that need additional support and understanding from a teacher content stand-point.
Expand upon on our notions of assessment to include more experiences that demand the application of mathematical ideas in a realistic and sometimes messy ways.

Your thoughts on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

The 40 Year Effect!

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:34:00 -0400

Over the last year I have have the pleasure of working with Dr. Gregory of Dr. Gregory & Associates at an elementary school where we both do some consultancy work. He is constantly talking about the "40 Year Effect" that our instruction has on our students. Dr. Gregory advocates that teachers should plan instruction experiences that stay with learners for 40 year, not 40 days or 40 months. Listen to the podcast below to find out more about the "40 Year Effect" and how you can achieve it.

I mention the 40 year effect, because I have been working with some adults who are looking to get into the renewable energies field, but did not meet the requirements in a certificate program. In order to gain the skills needed to meet the requirements they had to take part in a 5-week Math Boot Camp and I was their instructor. Initially, I was told that the concepts that I would be required to teach would be high school level mathematics, but in reality the mathematics concepts I actually had to teach would normally be introduced and taught between grades 3 to 7. Topics such as area, perimeter and volume, operations with fractions, using measurement tools, decimals and percents, and ratios and proportions. Much of my experience mirrored what I see at the K - 12 level.

As a teacher:

I did not feel that I had to time to adequately prepare. The opportunity to work with these students came along rather suddenly and I had 2 days to plan out the 5-weeks.
I did not have access to any assessment data until after I met my students. When I the opportunity came up for me to see the assessment data we began to realize that the assessment and the online tool for assembling the assessment data were inadequate.
I was given a "curriculum" and asked to teach it. The "curriculum" consisted of 100 PowerPoint slides broken down by topics to teach each week. Upon review of the first 10 slides, I found 3 mathematical error or imprecise use of mathematical language.
The "curriculum" did not math the assessment tools. I realize rather quickly that in order for students to "progress" in the Math Boot Camp they had to make gains in the online assessment tool. However, the online assessment tool did not match the flow of the "curriculum". For example, If a student tested in at Level 5, then they would begin the Math Boot Camp focused on ratios and proportions, but the "curriculum" did not address that topic until week 4.
I was not told that my students would have a final exam until 4 before the last class. The director decided that the students needed to take a final exam that was separate from the online assessments that they had been taking. I saw the final exam 2 days before the last class.

My students:

Reflected a very wide range of mathematical understandings. This group had people from all walks of life...a nurse, a lawyer, a carpenter, a recent high school graduate, a computer programmer, a handyman, a solider in the U.S. Army, etc. Most of my students were math phobic. Most of my students did not like to communicate their understanding...they just wanted to get to the answer. Most of my students were very procedural in their reasoning. Most of my students could "see" and make sense of numbers when the ideas were related to money, but had great difficulty when the numbers were in a different context.
Thought that I taught differently than anything they had ever experienced because I asked them to question, use more than one way to find a solution, work in groups, use mathematical sketches to visualize problems and used concrete materials to "show" and act out mathematical concepts. Most of my students lacked a deep conceptual understanding of the mathematics that they were being asked to use.

The "40 Year Effect" via student comments:

"Christine, I never knew what Pi meant. I never understood the relationship between the diameter and the circumference. I never understood that the circumference was the perimeter of a circle. Thanks to the (hands-on) activity that we did...now I will never forget."

"Christine, I can see the benefit of understanding now and not just knowing a procedure. I was trying to explain how to do something to another students, but realized that I did not understand enough or another way to explain things and they could not get it my way. I only knew how to get the answer my way, but I did not really understand what I was doing."

"Thanks for teaching us so many ways to solve one problem. I understand now and I have options. I now solve one way and check with another way and I know that I am correct. My teachers in school only taught me one way and if I did not get it, then I was stuck."

"When my son was in the 3rd grade he tested off the charts and was placed into a talented and gifted program. But where I come from, 'talented and gifted' programs are just codes for 'CEO training' programs. My son is brilliant and a little quirky, but in this 'talented and gifted' program they killed his creativity. He had to find solutions to way that they showed him or he was wrong. He now hates math is is very phobic about it. He doubts his abilities and his intelligence."

"Christine you taught me how to measure. I never knew. I thought that I could not ever get it. I never knew that it was so simple. It seemed so complicated before. I can measure now and I can teach my son."

"Christine, I had such a fear of math. I chose to become a social working, because I could avoid math. Now here I am trying to do better in life, change careers and it is the math that is hold me back, but at least now I know that I can do it."

"I did not like to explaining part of the class. I can get the answer, but Christine insisted that we explain things."

"You told us to sketch it out. I would not have gotten this one wrong if I drew it out. OMG, I can believe I left out the calculations for the area of the second window. I just did 1 window and the area of the wall."

"I knew that I was going to fail the final, but I was courageous and came anyway. I tried. I just need more time to get this stuff. Thanks for helping me get this far. The online tutoring sites (NutShell Math via Cosmeo, Khan Academy) that we were using...are they going to be available even after the class is over?"

What is your math "40 Year Effect" going to be?

Today was the "Big Day"

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:20:00 -0500

"Our students tested today. They were as most kids are on standardized days...they were focused. Of course they said the test was easy." - CMK, May, 2011

I started writing this post almost a year ago, but was never inspired to finish it. I am not really inspired right now either. What I am is another adjective...frustrated. Most of my schools are focused on...guess what...testing. They say, "We have six-weeks, how do I best prep my students?"

Everyone is looking for a magic pill to give students, so that they know and understand all of the content that we are spoon feeding them. It won't work. I have hope that with the coming of the Common Core State Standards educators are prompted to take another look at how we prepare students for standardized testing.

More test-prep is not the answer. Test-savviness is an alternative. We have to build thinking and reasoning into the test-prep process and it needs to be grounded in research-based instructional practices that raise the cognitive demand levels of students. I recently did a workshop on the test-savvy strategies and the following is what a participant said and I thought with a sigh of relief, "Ahhh, she got it."

"I have to admit that I was expecting something totally different when I heard the words "test savvy." My first impression was that we'd focus on test sophistication skills and strategies such as bubbling, process of elimination, navigating the test, etc. So you can imagine how impressed and eager I was when I learned that you would equip us with tools and strategies to develop kids' conceptual understanding and deepen their overall thinking.

All of the principles and strategies we learned are so valuable in delivering meaningful and engaging instruction. I really enjoyed the hands-on nature of the PD. There are many parallels between this professional development session and my SIOP training. This is profound because when used together, these strategies will enhance my effectiveness in teaching ELLs. The PD offered a great deal of strategies so I will choose a few of the strategies I think my students would benefit from most to implement throughout the rest of the year. We've already launched "Word Problem Rework" in the class and it has been so eye opening to see what my students are capable of and where their misconceptions lie. Thanks so much Christine!" - NYC Teacher

A final thought from Dan Meyer @ TED:

Reading Levels of Word Problems

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:47:00 -0400

I have been exploring word problems and how to use reading comprehension strategies in math class. I have been looking at ways to address comprehension and the importance to explicit instruction in the understanding, usage and application of mathematical vocabulary. I will discuss those areas in upcoming posts. In this post, I would like to discuss reading levels of word problems.

Look at the problem below:

"On Monday your snail made a slime trail 2 inches long. On Tuesday the slime trail was 4 inches long. If this same progress continues, how long will the slime trail be on Friday?"

This task came from the K - 2 section from Exemplars. When I informally surveyed a few teachers most felt that this problem would fit into the 3 - 5 grade level span. When you analyze the task for grade level readability you get the following results:


Generated using: http://www.online-utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp

Looking at the "Gunning Fog" index we can say that the average child, who started school in Kindergarten, would have to be in 7th grade to easily understand the text on the first reading. The grade level ranges, according to the second set indexes, are from the middle of the 3rd grade to the first few months of the 9th grade.

So what about the students who are not on grade level or ELL students? These students are what Phil Daro, one of the write of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, would call the, "canaries in the mineshaft." They provide a spotlight on issues the "average" student is able to coverup, because he/she knows how to "do school" and get the right answers.

Word problems can be overwhelming and require us to take the time to provide instructional support at the reading comprehension level to enable students to fully understand problem and mathematics in context.

One strategy that can be used is to understand the math story by Retelling, before looking at the question that is being asked. Tell students to explain the story without the use of numbers. For example, the problem cited above might be retold in the following manner:

"Some snails were sliding along leaving a trail of slime. Yuck! They went a little way on Monday, then went a little farther on Tuesday."

Another strategy that can be used is Visualization. In reading visualization involves taking a text line by line (sentence by sentence) or paragraph by paragraph and seeing and describing the picture that can be painted from the words. This strategy is a precursor to making mathematical sketches. When we visualize we see, hear, smell and feel the story as it unfolds. We talk about what has to be present in the environment, and consequently we eliminate erroneous ideas about the context of the problem. This is an activity that is best when done collaboratively.

Citing the word problem above, we might see a snail. This might lead into a conversation about what a snail looks likes and what slime looks like. And for many students, this is a necessary step if they have never had the opportunity to observe a snail in action. The visualization may lead to deciding if this snail was a pet in a container or free in the wild. In this case, students might conclude that it is a pet snail, due to the fact that we had to see the same snail on Monday and Tuesday.

A word of caution...reciting or listing the events in a problem does not constitute comprehension. A child can read a book and tell you the sequence of events, but it does not mean that they comprehend the story. Understanding what is read is a complex task, but a doable task when students are provided the time, structure, opportunities to collaborate, appropriate scaffolds and tools to be successful.

Below are some additional resources to help you think more this issue and how to help students understand word problems:

"Literacy in the Secondary Classroom" Presented by Lucy West, Susan Radley Brown, Howard Segan and Anne Burgunder
Phil Daro's video interview on "Against Answer-getting"
"Using Reading Strategies in Math" from Reading Recovery
From Reading to Math: How Best Practices in Literacy Can Make You a Better Math Teacher, Grades K-5
Comprehending Math: Adapting Reading Strategies to Teach Mathematics, K-6

Embracing Meaning: Algorithms with Understanding

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:49:00 -0500

I recently had the pleasure of hearing a talk by Marilyn Burns about our societies singular devotion to the use of specific algorithms, called "traditional algorithms," when teaching students how to compute numbers. The computation of numbers fall into the domains of mathematics called Number Sense and Operations. I have often thought about the irony of those labels and how we generally do not impart a good sense of numbers or meaning when teaching students how to "operation" on numbers. Instead we teach the "rules," steps or procedures for algorithms to "relieve" learners of the burden of having to develop a useful, flexible understanding of numbers, their magnitude, meaning, and relationships to other quantities.

Some educators might disagree or take offense to my aforementioned point, saying things such as:

"We were taught this way, and we are fine."
"This is simple for my struggling learners to follow. They can get the answer. I will save these other methods for my advanced learners."
"They get it. See they can all use the algorithm and get the right answer."

I cannot tell you how many times I have heard these lines or similar one with the same sentiments, but I sense a change in many educators. I am finding that more and more teachers are willing to ask about the meaning behind various algorithms that they teach. They realize that, as a society, "we are not fine." In the report, "Diploma to Nowhere," they note, "One of the most important goals...is to prepare students for college. In the knowledge based economy of the 21st century, students need a post-secondary degree...most...students who enroll lack basic math..." They go on to document, "...achievement in elementary schools is low, with barely 40 percent of 4th graders scoring at or above proficient in mathematics on the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Only 41 percent of 8th graders in 2005 enrolled in gateway classes such as Algebra."

The challenge and pressure that many educators face and feel stem from standardized exams and performance expectations. Aside from the fact that many teachers do not know how to approach teaching algorithms with meaning, they are also concerned with the time it will take their students to understand the concepts involved. Additionally, in many schools, it is often not the work of grade level teams to look at how algorithms are taught and/or seeking alternative strategies that might help students understand the mathematics embedded within the algorithm. Furthermore, few school districts are like Chets Creek Elementary and Schultz Center Academy of Mathematics, and do not make building teacher content-knowledge around this topic a priority.

To help us better understand this issue...our need for a systematic and efficient approach to solve a problem, we are going to have a conversation with Ms. MaryAnn Wickett, co-author of, "This Is Only a Test: Teaching for Mathematical Understanding in an Age of Standardized Testing", and we are going to focus on the question of, "What are the benefits of teaching algorithms with conceptual understanding?"

Interview with Ms. MaryAnn Wickett:

Interview with a parent who has a child in Ms. Wickett's 3rd grade class:

Additional books by Ms. MaryAnn Wickett:

One last word - a statement from the Introduction to the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: "There is a world of difference between a student who can summon a mnemonic device to expand a product such as (a + b)(x + y) and a student who can explain where the mnemonic comes from. The student who can explain the rule understands the mathematics, and may have a better chance to succeed at a less familiar task such as expanding (a + b + c)(x + y). Mathematical understanding and procedural skill are equally important, and both are assessable using mathematical tasks of sufficient richness."

Less is Sometimes More

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 01:14:00 -0500

I had a meeting today...actually I had two really big meetings today; one with a newly appointed principal, and another with a group of teachers. Both groups having the same focus...how do we get our students to do better on the state exams? I had some thoughts, but what they all really wanted was a "quick fix" to a very deep and systemic problem. It is kind of like using Band-Aids for a festering, and pus-filled wound; not effective and in the long term...deadly.

You know one of the biggest problems our students have...besides our antiquated educational structure...it is expressing, showing, and explaining their thinking. As educators, we generally rebel against expressing our thinking. Expressing our thinking requires work, sometimes mental, emotional, and/or physical. Showing our thinking takes effort. Explaining our thinking may leave us open to criticism. Expressing our thinking is sometimes a slow and incomplete process that requires us to revisit ideas. When do we do that (expressing, showing, and explaining their thinking) for ourselves? How can we do that (expressing, showing, and explaining their thinking) for our students?

Consistently using conceptually rich, academically rigorous problems can be a pathway to expressing thinking, but it begins with teachers being willing to embrace and express his/her own thinking publicly and in writing.

Step 1: Choose or create a problem.

Step 2: Do the problem with your colleagues and use multiple representations to show your thinking.

Step 3: Identify the "big ideas," math standards, and concepts/skills addressed.

Step 4: Outline the various strategies that can be used to show and resolve the problem.

Step 5: Identify the possible student misconceptions.

Step 6: Express what you would like to see in your student's solutions.

Step 7: What questions might you ask students to help them deepen their thinking and understanding?

By following these aforementioned steps, teachers will have a clear understanding of what students are thinking as expressed in their work. Teachers will also have a better road map of student understanding and of how to move them to the next level.

Now what is meant by conceptually rich, academically rigorous problems? Compare the two tasks below and think about which question allows you find a solution by taking multiple paths? Which question pushes your thinking via the mathematical connections that you make? What are the mathematical concepts involved? How might the concepts involved, change by grade? Can you show multiple representations for either task?

Task #1: Write a number sentence using at least four different numbers for which 0.86 is the answer. (Source: OPEN-ENDED ASSESSMENT IN MATH by Heinemann)

Task #2: Solve the problem: 0.23 + 4.5 - 1.4 + .25

Follow-up:

Select Task 1 or 2
Complete Steps 1 to 7
Group discussion: Ms. Jones, an educator, states, "While task #1 is richer, my students would not see that kind of question on the test. Besides, my kids would just get confused with all the different solution options. On the test there is only one correct answer."
How would you respond to Ms. Jones?

The Power of Collaborative Learning Communities

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:20:00 -0400

When was the last time you met with your fellow teachers to discuss your instructional strategies for test preparation? When was the last time that you looked at and examined student work in relationship to how they might perform in a testing setting? I am currently participating in a training with Sandi Everlove, the founder of TeachFirst, and today we are focused on the value and necessity of professional learning communities. One of the big ideas that is coming out is the focus on student learning as a way to examine our own instruction. And in order to do that we need to do a few things...in a 1995 article, "Building Professional Learning Communities" by Sharon Kruse, five critical elements were identified: 1) reflective dialogue; 2) de-privatization of teaching; 3) collective on student learning; 4) collaboration; and 5) shared norms and values. The podcast below focuses on two of those elements: reflective dialogue and the de-privatization of teaching and how that might apply to developing test-savvy students.

Additional resources:

All Things PLC
The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement
Productive Group Work: How to Engage Students, Build Teamwork, and Promote Understanding by Nancy Frey, Douglas Fisher & Sandi Everlove

Gather a few colleagues, take a look at the following example of student work and take a moment to comment. The task is open-ended and would not be found on standardized exam currently, but look at what the student did. What does this response indicate about how this student might respond to an extended/constructed response question on a standardized exam? In your conversation, focus on the following questions:

What does this student know?
What grade-level standards are being addressed? What are not?
What might be somethings that you would do in your classroom to help this student become more test-savvy? Think about the Mathematical Practices as indicated in the Common Core Math Standards.

"Bowls of Apples" task from Exemplars Math

Test-Savvy Principal #3: Collaboration

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Thu, 6 May 2010 11:03:00 -0400

In James Suroweicki's book, The Wisdom of Crowds, he talks about how groups of people who are focused on a task can often come up with or develop better answers or closer approximations, than if they were working independently. He discusses that how many times the task of finding solutions to problems that pertain to a specific area of specialization are left to the experts of that field. For example, economists discuss how to reduce our national debt and get us out of this recession, but homemakers are not invited to these conversations. But Suroweicki argues that we need a wide variety of individually who have a vested interest in a particular topic to contribute to the conversation in order to develop better, more meaningful answers. Listen to his 2004 interview with NPR News Radio.

How does this apply to creating test-savvy test takers? Simply put, while taking a standardized exams is an independent endeavor, the preparation needs to be a collaborative process. Students need to have opportunities to listen to the ideas of others, but remain firm enough to state their point and understanding. It is through the process of collaboration that we generate new and better ideas, solutions and products. In order to effectively collaborate we need to 1) provide students time and training needed to document their initial thoughts and solutions to a problem; 2) provide a venue where all students can compile, share, and evaluate the data gathered; and 3) encourage students to voice their opinions and support them with facts. Think about how you are fostering true collaboration, not just getting the students to think like you.

Our Culture of Testing...Can Creativity Flourish?

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:57:00 -0400

Every year I watch the same cycle...either educators who worry about testing from day one or the ones who worry about testing six weeks prior to the date of THE TEST. Either way the results are the same...educators worry about standardized testing. I was reading a funny, well thought out story about standardized testing, Testing Miss Malarkey. The story is presented from the point-of-view of the students, the actual test-takers. They mention how the adults and even their parents started to act strange and school as they had know it...changed because of THE TEST. In art class, they made posters about how to fill-in the circles on the test in a "good, clean, neat and nice" fashion. In gym class, they began to practice yoga to prepare their "minds and bodies." Parents started giving their kids power bars to build the brain. On the day of the actual test, sick, nauseated teachers overran the nurse’s office. And strangely enough, after the test things returned to normal...leaving the students to conclude, "THE TEST really wasn't that important after all."

The fact is we do a disservice to our students and ourselves by negating THE TEST on the surface, while allowing our actions to show that we are deeply, DEEPLY vested in testing. Maybe it is because we do not have a better system. Maybe we are scared to enact a better system. Whatever the reason, if we accept standardized testing, either by conscious choice or by default, then we need to acknowledge it, accept it, BUT allow for creativity and critical thinking despite it!

The video below focuses on creativity in education. The test-savvy philosophy advocates creativity and allowing students to be partners in the creation of content for the classroom.

Check out his book: The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything by Ken Robinson

Writing in Math

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 08:24:00 -0400

Getting students to write effectively and coherently is a challenge. A challenge many educators feel ill equipped to tackle for a few reasons. First, educators themselves may be uncomfortable with writing, especially in the area of mathematics. Much of our experiences with math has been very procedurally based using numeric representations that were not tied to any real-world connections. Second, writing, like reading, involves many subtle steps and seemingly undefined nuances. The old adage of, "we learn to write by writing," does not seem to translate to student growth in the classroom. Third, many students have adopted the sentiment that math class is not for writing or that writing in math is hard and boring.

I once heard an author say, "I don't know what I am thinking, until I write it down." In order to best educate our students for the needs of the 21st century, we have to...it is essential that they know how to articulate their thinking via the communication tool of writing. So how do we do this? How do we develop better writers in math class? This weeks podcast focuses on "7 Steps Educators Can Take to Improve Student Writing in Math" and check out the YouTube Search Story on Writing in Math.

Check out these additional resources:

Six Steps to Better Vocabulary Instruction by Marzano (online in Educational Leadership)
Closing the Vocabulary Gap by Jane L. David (online in Educational Leadership)
Using Writing in Math to Deepen Student Learning by MCREL
Systematic Vocabulary Instruction by MCREL
Inside Words by Janet Allen
Writing in Math Class by Marilyn Burns
From Reading to Math by Maggie Siena
Writing to Learn Mathematics: Strategies That Work, K-12 by Joan Countryman (recommended by Dr. Janine Stewart)
Writing Math Research Papers: A Guide for Students and Instructors by Robert Gerver (recommended by Dr. Janine Stewart)

Test-Savvy Principal #2: Accountable Talk

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:21:00 -0400

The 2nd Test-Savvy Principle is Accountable Talk. Accountable Talk is one of the nine researched-based Principles of Learning as categorized by the Institute for Learning (IFL) at the University of Pittsburgh. IFL states that, "The Principles of Learning are condensed theoretical statements summarizing decades of learning research. They are designed to help educators analyze the quality of instruction and opportunities for learning that they offer to students." Accountable Talk is about talking to others about our work and being able to clarifying our thinking about a given topic. The one who is talking is the one who is learning or clarifying their thinking. In many classrooms, teachers do much of the talking, thus much of learning. In the Voicethread posted below, we will look at Accountable talk in action. The test-savvy strategy being used the is Word Problem Rework. The student is in the 3rd grade. Consider: 1) What does the student know about the concept? 2) Where is the student on the continuum of learning from concrete to representational to abstract? 3) What misconceptions is she student grappling with? 4) If you were her instructor, what might your next steps be? Please note, this is the students first "rework" and her first Voicethread. Please feel free to leave a comment (feedback) for the student, as she will learn from what others have to say.

Motivating Students

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:26:00 -0500

Just watched a video lecture by Daniel Pink as he spoke at the TED conference in July, 2009. Please watch the video and ponder the following question: How can we apply the ideas of intrinsic motivation to student learning?

Test-Savvy Principle #1: Student Ownership

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:16:00 -0500

This is crunch time for many schools. They are entering the "test triage" zone. Every year around this time I see educators pull out the traditional test prep book, give simulations exams and frantically try to figure out strategies to help students do well on standardized exams. Every year it is the same cycle...give lip service to the exams the first half of the school year and ignoring data. Then as exams get closer we test the daylights out of students, pinpointing their areas of weakness and enact various extra/enrichment programs and provide additional resources to "help" students succeed on the upcoming exams. We lament about all we have done, but the students still don't get it or they are not paying attention. ENOUGH! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! We need to teach differently! Students need to take ownership of their learning. This podcast is about using test-savvy strategies to provide opportunities and structures that allow and foster student ownership of learning. Test-Savvy Principle #1: Student Ownership

What is Test-Savviness?

christine@ckingeducation.com (Christine Mulgrave-King - C. King Education, Inc.) — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:02:00 -0500

In our world of high-stakes testing many teachers cannot escape the lure of teaching to the test. But the term "teaching" conveys that in order to teach, learning must have taken place on the part of those being taught. But year-after-year teacher get a new crop of students whom they say did not retain any information from the previous school year. It that is the case, were the students taught? Did learning occur? Did the teaching that took place meet the needs of the learner? Often times this conversation takes a back seat to preparation of standardized exams.

I have developed a set of classroom strategies for developing test-savvy math students. I believe that we can use research-based instructional strategies that promotes higher order thinking skills using, plus test prep. The result is "test-savviness". Test-savviness in math is about knowing and understanding three things:

1. math content and understanding how the content might be assessed;
2. the test, its mechanics and procedures; and
3. ones own personal strengths and challenges.

Each week, I will preview one of the test-savvy math principles (student ownership, accountable talk, collaboration, error analysis and tapping into prior knowledge) and discuss how a strategy can be applied to mathematics instruction. When used consistently, the result are students who are not only better prepared for high-stakes exams in math, but also students who are better prepared for life.