Common Formative Assessment Book Study Chapter 3
Chapter 3 - Power Standards -- The Essential Outcomes
What do the authors mean when they say that teachers can interpret standards in different ways? Has this ever happened in your experience or with your PLC?
The authors discuss why teachers might interpret standards in different ways. It is because the standards are difficult to measure. This has happened when discussing assessments in our PLC. We will need to move to declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge. (pages 39 and 40)
ReplyDeleteI like the strategy used in this chapter of finding "power standards" as a team. Starting with the standards is always how we organize our PLC's. During our PLC, if we disagree on the interruption of a standard we do exactly what is suggested in the paragraph "Aligning the Power Standards". To help us understand what the state wants us to teach, we look at how it's been tested. The training we have had at Kilgore has help provide a lot of examples of this. Using released questions has made it easy to interpret what skills the students are expected to learn.
ReplyDeleteThe authors use the term "grain size" (p30) to describe how specifically or generally a standard is written. The bigger the grain size, the more general, and the more open to interpretation a standard is. They state that "by building consensus about power standards, teacher develop a common understanding of exactly what [the] standards mean" (p32)
ReplyDeleteIn our math PLC this past year, we weren't sure about a standard involving measures of central tendency. The students were to learn which measure to use for a given set of data. We didn't know if this meant to choose the measure that makes the data look best or that best represents the center of the data. We did what Chapter 3 says to do and looked at released STAAR questions to clarify.
Teachers emphasize standards differently. We need to have a common vocabulary, objectives and understanding of what power standards need to be taught. This has been a difficult task for SS, because we have over 100 standards.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1: The authors pointed out there was to much to teach, teachers' had predispositions, how do we proceed to measure/what are the expectations and weighing standards.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2: here's two from my pre PLC days. The learner had better 1) be prepared to work the problem backwards and 2) gather the data from a table, graph or an equation....both of these embedded from objective 6 since staar inception.
Even with similar definitions, individuals interpret the same vocabulary/concept differently. Divergence between meanings can grow even further apart when assigning value to a particular standard. It is a constant, on-going, process. The SS PLC has spend time consulting with our district coordinator, looking at released tests, and collaborating with each other.
ReplyDeleteWith TEA releasing the Spring 2013 test, we should have a better feel for their interpretation.
DeleteStandards are measured differently because many times common goals or objectives are measured do not exist. Instead of looking at students individually, standards are sometimes measured based on averages which do not determine how much growth there is in a student. Therefore, students do not move forward successfully. "Aligning the Power Standards" is what helps teachers on focusing and prioritizing on what is most important for students to know, learn, and apply.
ReplyDeleteI feel that taking the time to determine and align the power standards as you prepare to plan for each six weeks would be well worth a PLC's.
DeleteI think that interpreting standards in different ways means that you think the emphasis of the standard is in a different place. I also think that we as teachers get so used to teaching certain things and sometimes forget where the true importance lies and don’t read parts of the standard. It is easy to use resources that do not necessarily align with our TEKS. If we don’t know exactly what we are supposed to teach I think some resources may unintentionally lead us in the wrong direction. An example of this in our plc is with our standard 7.7A that requires us to locate and name points on a coordinate plane. I remember pulling out my hair trying to get the students to graph decimals on the plane. After further investigation on the standard it states that we need to used ordered pairs of integers, which does not include decimals. The chapter talks about how long it really teaches to teach all of our standards that we have and I believe it is essential that we don’t waste time teaching the things that aren’t necessary for this year.
ReplyDeleteAMEN!!!! You hit the nail on the head! We need to make everyday in the classroom count by focusing on what the students need to know which should be based only on the standards for that grade level.
DeleteHow come you get to have a two profile pictures, Shaft?
Delete"What do the authors mean when they say that teachers can interpret standards in different ways? Has this ever happened in your experience or with your PLC?"
ReplyDeleteTeachers interpret the standards as they want them to read as opposed to what they truly say. We will them to be stated to our liking, so we can teach the concepts we like or know best.
In my experience, this happens consistently around the district. I most often encounter this when collaborating with peers at district in-service. Within my PLC, I did not see this with other members, but I know I am predisposed to thinking I know the standards when in fact I may just know what I WISH they said.
Can't wait to see the state interpretation today! The STAAR test was released today!
DeleteBecause of what we "bring to the table" we all have different strengths, so we tend to gravitate toward those strengths, thus determining what is most "important". I can see how this would happen, but I feel like the reading TEKS are pretty straight-forward, so a TEK was a TEK was a TEK...I can't really remember us having interpreting them differently...Everything is pretty much laid out for us in Eduphoria.
ReplyDeleteThe less specific/more general the standard is, the easier it is for teachers to interpret in different ways.
ReplyDeleteThis can happen with the Reading standards, much more easily than, for example a math standard.This has actually happened in the past. It has not happened as often in the recent past, as the standards and TEKS have become more specific even in Reading.
We have a quandary indeed.
DeleteIn, “The Giver,” we don’t know if our antagonist makes it to safety.
I say he makes it.
Remember the plane he observed when he was playing toss with the apple on the first page?
I see your point Melanie.
PS don’t let Strickland persuade you differently…she doesn’t think he makes it.
I think that, based on our individual knowledge and experience, teachers may interpret differently HOW a standard should best be taught. The consensus process is a great method to clarify our understanding of theses standards and making sure they align. In PLCs, we easily agree on the standard being taught, but have found later that we emphasized the teaching of that standard differently, and thus taught it in a different way. This became apparent upon completion of Data Analysis Protocols. It would be beneficial to be more aware of our interpretation before the standards are taught.
ReplyDeleteI think most TEKS are pretty straight forward, but some aren't specific enough, which naturally causes convoluted understanding.
ReplyDeleteThe beginning of last year, Shaft and I called several other 8th grade ELA teachers to gain their take on one of the TEKS. It ended up that everyone was questioning the same thing, so we went to the head of ELA for clarification.
The responses to the questions for this chapter prove the need for effective and efficient PLCs- two characteristics I believe have rapidly developed over the past year. One of the areas where I see HMS' PLC's effectiveness is in the "readiness for the next level of learning" component of the power standard. The results of Vertical Teaming as a part of a PLC's discussion has contributed to the awareness of that need for readiness to a great extent, and I believe that in coming years, there will be less cause for concern regarding what didn't get taught in previous grades.
ReplyDeleteInterpreting the standards was sometimes a topic of debate for our PLC. Finally, we utilized our Kilgo training and looked at the verbs and example questions for clarification.
ReplyDeleteI believe it means that teachers can interpret what the TEKS mean and different teachers focus on different standards and their importance. Our PLC did a great job of collaborating and deciding what the power standards are and what was most important that our students know. Kilgo training was also very beneficial, because it allowed us to unpack the standards using the verbs.
ReplyDeleteIt means there not always one exact definition where like it said can different grain sizes. In math, as they go through higher levels, the grain size on some of the standards get more vague covering multiple areas in that one standard. Even though we can look at previous released questions, that is only one sample size from what a TEK can cover. We can only try figure out as many ways as possible that the standard wants by paying attention to the verbage that is used in that standard.
ReplyDeleteTeachers interpreting and understanding the standards differently, which would meant that they would have different interpretations on how to teach a standard and weigh the standards differently (giving a standard more emphasis).
ReplyDeleteI think we (Science Team) did a great in collaborating as an entire science team and at grade levels.
3. Teachers tend to be overwhelmed with the amount of standards they are asked to teach. When individual teachers are isolated from collaborating with others, they tend to decide which standard or parts of a standard is more important than the others on their own which causes curriculum chaos with in a school. In the beginning our PlC suffered a bit of this chaos but when we sat down and discussed the verbs in the SEs, we were able to target and create power standards to focus on. This occurred within and across the grade levels as 6th and 7th grade teach power standards that 8th grade builds on.
ReplyDeleteWow!! This is interesting and I would like to discuss this post in one of your upcoming PLCs.
DeleteIt’s a problem that is getting better. Many years ago, teachers across the district would have wildly different interpretations of standards. A series of good science consultants, and now the PLC’s, has helped.
ReplyDeleteI see a lot of comments about how valuable KILGO stems have been in developing their assessments and lessons last year. It is time to dust off those KILGO binders and use them in our upcoming PLCs.
ReplyDeleteCollaborating in our PLC and with other teachers in the district helped determine the power standards that needed to be taught.
ReplyDelete