Ubd/DI (Chapter 8) and MI (Chapters 8, 11, 12): Student Success

    Chapter eight of UbD/DI focused on grading and reporting achievements. Interestingly, the books suggest that the majority of assessment should not be graded. Although I love this idea, and I do agree that pre-assessments and formative assessments should never be graded. I would imagine if this were to be effective than the teacher would have to keep it completely under-wraps. I mean, in my high school experience if the students knew that something was not going to be graded then you did not do it; the student thought, “Why do something if it will not hurt me to not do it?” I guess, I am not sure how to implement non-graded assignment; I could threaten with making them graded if they did not do them, but I am pretty opposed to threats and, as aforementioned, grading pre-assessments or formative assessments. Additionally, I want to note for myself that as a teacher it is critical to explain what the grading system means and how student work is evaluated, thus making it clear what they have accomplished with each score given.

     Chapter eight of MI talked about using students’ multiple intelligences as tools to capture their attention. For perspective consider the following: a student is starting to doze off halfway through your lesson. Using your knowledge of her interests and displayed abilities you assume she has a strong musical intelligence; try playing a relevant song, or incorporating music in some way to regain her attention.

     Chapter eleven of MI really opened my mind about something: how we assess people with disabilities. For example, when we take into consideration somebody who has a disability we do not ask what they excel at, rather with what they struggle. I have had very little experience with this topic, but even I can see what a travesty this truly is; we should be working towards helping everybody learn and improve their skills regardless of disabilities or not. 

     Chapter twelve focused on student cognition and how it plays a role in the class and MI theory. While teaching, determining what students are thinking and what they are mastering is essential. By categorizing each students’ knowledge and applying it to the class it will not only make the student more likely to succeed, but it will make evaluation much more accurate. 

     Overall, these chapters talked about how student achievement is not fairly reflected in exams as an infinite amount of factors could influence student performance. Additionally, even the best students have days where they are not functioning at their peak performance. As teachers, it is not our duty to reprimand students for having emotions, but helping students work around any number of factors and providing them opportunities for success is. My dream classroom is a place where students feel at home, where they feel they have the support needed to succeed, and where their interests will be fostered and allowed to blossom; this chapter aided my understanding of how this is achieved. 

FIAE (Chapters 11, 12, 13, 14): Grades and Grading

     Chapters eleven through fourteen of Fair Isn’t Always Equal, by Rick Wormeli, focused on grading and how it should be reported to the students, parents, school, and any other relevant person. One of the main ideas that I took from the text is that the larger and more various the sample of work, the more useful and fair the results will be. 

     Should a student receive a “0” or a “60”? This argument, in chapter eleven, is a hot-button issue among educators. An observation the author made has always been on my mind: the range for grades A, B, C, and D (on a 100 point scale) is, on average, a total of 40 points, while the range for an F is 60 points, how is that fair? Putting a zero in the grade book is ethically wrong for it creates a nearly insurmountable challenge for the student. Additionally, mentioned also in chapter twelve, a 1 to 4 scale was discussed which I think is much fairer to the students, as even the lowest score is not overwhelmingly devastating to their total grade. Also, it makes it easier to establish definite criteria for each grade regardless of subject. 

     Discussed in both chapters eleven and thirteen, I found that weighing grades is a smart way to let the students’ work speak for itself; for example, an essay is probably worth more than a questionnaire, so by scoring it as such it will provide a more accurate representation of skills learned and developed. 

     Lastly, chapter fourteen examined report cards and their helpfulness. Many schools are trying to design a more useful report card that provides more information. The text talked about the dual approach, which grades students on personal growth as well as against the standards, part of me truly likes this idea for it will give a better representation of the students' achievements. However, I can also see what the book was saying about it providing information that might make the school look bad; for example, if an advanced student receives a high mark, but their personal progress was minimal due to their prior knowledge, it could make the school year appear to be an overall waste of time. 

     As a teacher, understanding why and how you are grading is crucial. Personally, I would like to adopt the 1 to 4 scale as I do agree that it is fairer. But beyond that, an awareness of what you expect your students to learn from each lesson and assignment will create a more positive learning environment. With that, if you know what you expect your students to learn then it should be relatively easy to apply weights to assignments that are more significant. Although I have yet to grade any work, I have edited papers, so drawing on that experience I have mentioned above what I think makes for the most effective grading techniques: one that will provide ample opportunity to all students. 

MI (Chapters 7, 9, 13, and 14): Flexibility and Change

     The seventh chapter of Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, by Thomas Armstrong, focused on inviting multiple intelligence theory into the classroom environment, or “classroom ecology”. By fostering a classroom that meets the needs of all the intelligences, student success should, in theory, be a given. Now, this is not solely about curriculum, rather the organization of the classroom itself. For example, a naturalistic student would prefer to have light coming into the classroom from outdoors; or, a spatial students may crave a aesthetically pleasing room with many posters.  

     Chapter nine explored further the idea that schools should shift from the traditional linguistic and logical methods to embracing MI Theory, doing so will reach a larger audience. Often times, when budget cuts occur in a school district the arts and sports are cut to save money, completely eliminating the opportunities for many students to develop essential skills. Additionally, In the ideal “MI School” their would be three additional employees: assessment specialist (in charge of recording each students’ progress and development in each intelligence), student-curriculum broker (pairs students with their ideal classes and materials based on intelligences), and school-community broker (places and connects students with out-of-school resources and opportunities that will benefit their personal strengths and interests).

     Moving on to chapter thirteen, the author explores three additional places where MI Theory could be applied: computer technology, cultural diversity, and career counseling. Personally, I think that incorporating technology into the classroom is critical because we live in a time where everything is driven by it. Also, students living today have all had computers and technology ingrained in their lives, it would be foolish to neglect to opportunity to use their pre-existing knowledge as a tool to hasten learning. 

     Chapter fourteen introduced a new intelligence, though it does not meet all of the criteria so it is not included yet, “existential intelligence”. This new intelligence refers to the more philosophical perspective of viewing the meaning of life and a higher power. Although there could be much controversy teaching and implementing this intelligence, I think it could be a great tool to use for further investigation of materials. Especially, in high school students are truly starting to develop their own views and this could allow for real-life application, which is a proven to be successful. 

     Overall, these chapters all had an underlying theme of change and flexibility within the classroom. A teacher whom intends to apply MI Theory effectively must be willing to admit mistakes and change their plans. Through understanding, flexibility, and self-evaluation, teachers should be able to successfully implement MI Theory into their classrooms; doing so will permit all students the opportunity to succeed and to develop each intelligence throughout the course of the class. 

FIAE (Chapters 7, 8, 9, and 10): Grades

     Chapters seven through ten of Fair Isn’t Always Equal, by Rick Wormeli, focused on the importance and significance of grading. Firstly, what do grades mean? The point of them is to assess the students' level of mastery, but what does a “C” mean, versus a “C+”? Yes, a “C” is technically average, so then a “C+” would be slightly above average, but that it is not good enough to be a “B-”, right? Well, now that we have figured that out, what is “average”? Unfortunately, this could go on forever. Grades are extremely subjective, there is no common grading system, which results in grades becoming a way for students to reflect upon their own intelligence, when grades should be viewed as level of understanding achieved so far.

     What should be graded? Teachers need to know what they are grading and why. For example, is it really necessary to grade an introductory exercise? If so, why? Personally, I think that anything that is not an assessment or an equivalent (projects, etc.) should not be strictly graded, for its purpose was not assessing, but practicing. Grading is not meant to demoralize the students- though it often becomes this- but to check their level of mastery. If needed, the teacher should alter classroom methods to improve upon the results. All students work and achieve at a different pace and nobody should be punished for their methods; however, if the teachers establishes a clear deadline for a lesson, it is up to the student, with the guide of the teacher, to manage time accordingly so that come the due date they are where they should be in terms of the lesson.

     Do students really deserve redos? Every teacher has their belief on whether students should be allowed to do their work over: some teachers think that do-overs are illogical as it enforces student laziness if they know they can fix it later; however, my personal belief is that redos can be a great tool to improve upon mastery. If a student is willing to put the work into improving their score and can explain why their new submission is improved, than I think it can be useful. Most students, if they know that they will be expected to accomplish additonal work, will not take the redo, thus it stops those students that may think, “I'll just submit this now and then I'll use the “redo” time as an extension, so that I don't have to do it now.”

     Grading is subjective, but that does not mean it is pointless. When used correctly, grading can help the teacher and students understand what is or is not working. As the teacher, using grades as a way to reflect upon the struggles of the class and of the students and using that awareness to clarify is essential. Every teacher has a different policy for their classroom and grades and that is not necessarily a bad thing, it just means that every teacher needs to make sure that their own practice is clear to the students and themselves; as long as their policy is consistent and fair it should yield positive results. that every teacher needs to make sure that their own practice is clear to the students and themselves; as long as their policy is consistent and fair it should yield positive results. 

MI (Chapters 5 and 6) and Ubd and DI (Chapter 6 and 7): The Learner and Essential Questions

     Chapters five and six of Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, by Thomas Armstrong, focused on differentiating lessons and activities to allow every student an opportunity to succeed. Riddled throughout these chapters were many examples on how to achieve this variation. Meanwhile, in chapters six and seven of Integrating Differentiated Instruction + Understanding by Design, by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Jay McTighe, the text explored the idea of the “essential question” and developing classroom readiness and mastery. All chapters discussed strongly stress the learner as something to be aware of in order to be an effective educator. 

     Due to increased standards for both students and teachers and the pressures to do well on standardized testing, teaching has become rather mundane with heavily linguistic and logical themes. In an MI based classroom it is crucial to include the different intelligences in the curriculum to provide equal learning opportunities to every student, “teachers need to expand their repertoire of techniques, tools, and strategies...” (MI, pg. 54). Furthermore, lectures and worksheets do not make connections with life events easily attainable. Teachers that take MI theory into consideration allow themselves to check their own teaching abilities for ease of understanding in regards to every learning style, “Mi theory essentially encompasses what good teachers have always done in their teaching: reaching beyond the text and the blackboard to awaken students' minds” (pg. 56). Knowing that there are eight intelligences it can be difficult to incorporate them all into your lesson, however, if “the teacher continually shifts her method of presentation from linguistic to spatial to musical and so on, often combining intelligences in creative ways” (pg. 56) it will allow ample opportunity for everybody to learn. MI theory is an extremely useful tool that every teacher should be knowledgable about to create an equal opportunity environment.

     However, before the teacher can even begin to think about how they want the students to learn, they must know what they want them to learn. To develop a clear idea of this one must ask what is the essential question? What is the main thought or idea that I want the students to ponder? Chapter seven of Understanding by Design helps explore ways to develop such an open-ended question. 

     Additionally, creating application to every students’ life is beneficial to both the classroom interest and to an intriguing essential question. Thematic education allows the teacher to break the wall down between their lesson and the lives of the students, “themes cut through traditional curricular boundaries, weave together subjects and skills that are found naturally in life, and provide students with opportunities to use their multiple intelligences practical ways” (MI, pg. 67). 

     Overall, these chapters really helped establish connections between the learner, the educator, and the curriculum. Regardless of learning styles, level of achievement, or personalities, it is critical that the students understand what the essential question is asking; thus, a well-focused and concise objective is vital. Teachers that are able to create this ideal essential question should be able to implement MI theory rather easily, because it should be accessible to all eight intelligences and applicable to projects and goals for all.

MI: Assessments (Chapter 10)

     The tenth chapter of Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, by Thomas Armstrong, focused on the usage of multiple intelligence theory in regard to assessments. This chapter was full of so much information that I love as somebody who is averse to standardized testing. In a multiple intelligence theory practicing classroom various forms of instruction and activities are the core of the class, what about assessments? It makes very little sense to emphasize creativity and individuality if the assessments are going to be cut-and-dry standardized exams; additionally, it could even confuse or discourage the students as these exams generally take either a linguistic or logical approach. So then how should teachers assess their students? Authentic assessments are much more accessible to all learners, they emphasize real-world application. Instead of the unnatural individually-given and timed pen-and-paper test allow students to take the initiative to present what they have learned in the medium of their choice, if it meets the standards than why not? By allowing this kind of approach it will also help alleviate students’ testing anxiety. 

     I feel like a broken record. If you have read my other posts on assessments I am positive that it is evident that I detest standardized testing for its narrow outreach. I truly believe that allowing individual approaches in the classroom is key to efficient learning; also, by allowing students to make connections to themselves and their interests it will create a more passionate environment in which learning is welcome.

UbD and DI: Considering Evidence of Learning in Diverse Classrooms (Chapter 5)

      The fifth chapter of Integrating Differentiated Instruction + Understanding by Design, by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Jay McTighe, focused on assessments; also, the various forms of knowledge that one must understand to properly assess. Many different knowledges exist and should be known by teachers, some of these include: declarative knowledge (any pre-existing understanding), procedural knowledge (how the knowledge is/should be applied), and disposition (feelings or connections to the content). All of the aforementioned knowledges can impact the classrooms interest and success. In addition, much like Rick Wormelli, the author of Fair Isn’t Always Equal, this text emphasizes that assessments are only useful if the teacher uses them to better the classes understanding. A good teacher will work with the students, based on their assessments, to develop differentiated instruction that will improve the class. 

     As a teacher, I know that I will apply the above information willfully and happily. I agree completely that assessments are only helpful when used by the instructor to better the class. Too often I have had teachers that assume that class-wide failure is result of terrible students, but in general I think that class-wide failure is a better reflection of lackluster instruction. Using assessments as a tool to assess growth is smart and I will definitely implement it (as for [heavily] graded assessments I am still in the air). For example, by using pre-assessments the teacher can develop a greater understanding of the level of pre-existing knowledge that will impact the pace of a lesson. Additionally, by implementing formative assessments a greater idea of what lessons were successful, and which were not, can be attained.