Results from 2011-2012 (Academically Strong Students)

A few weeks ago a question was raised about our students who are doing well at school. The question was,  "In this project if we focus on the students at risk, then what are we doing for the students who are strong academically and socially?  Are we letting them down?"

This project was designed with all of our students in mind.  The purpose was to try to make school more engaging and meaningful for all kids, and so we collected data from all of our students hoping to gain feedback about what we were doing well, and what we needed to work on.  In addition to collecting data on all students, we compared data from three smaller groups:  Students who were academically and socially strong, students who were doing average work, and students at-risk of not completing school.   We watched our students at-risk closely, but all students were involved in the classroom based strategies where teachers attempted to make the curriculum more meaningful and connected to students' lives.  Students were given choice, challenged to use their strengths, and were involved in interactive classroom activities.

We surveyed all the students both pre- and post- in order to see how we were doing.  We surveyed them with questions in four areas:  academic confidence (how confident and competent do they feel at school), social engagement (how well they work with others and the teacher), knowledge of their strengths and how to use those strengths in school to help them succeed, and academic engagement (how engaged are they with the learning tasks).

The results in a nutshell:

• the mean score for ALL students went up from pre- to post-
• when comparing the results of the survey for three groups of students, (students who are strong academically and socially, students who are doing average work, and students at-risk of not completing school), the mean score for the students who are strong academically and socially improved the most; followed by the mean score for students at-risk, and then students doing average work.
•  the students who were strong both academically and socially showed an increase in  15/16 questions, one question stayed the same.  Of the 15 questions, there was a .3 or more increase in the mean score for eight questions:  I felt confident and competent, I felt smart, I had a good relationship with my teacher, I had a choice in showing what I know, My strengths and talents were recognized, My strengths and talents helped me perform better in this class, I saw other student’s unique talents and strengths, There was a t least one adult in the school I could talk to.

In summary:

The changes that teachers are making to engage more students, and to have students deal with the content in multiple ways rather than only pen and paper, is having a positive impact on all our students.  The surveys show this, and the interviews with students make it even more apparent as they talk about it being more meaningful, more connected to their lives, easier to remember, more engaging and interactive, and more fun.  In a number of interviews with students who are strong academically and socially, they confided that while these strategies really work for them, they were pretty sure they might even work for kids who are struggling.

What Happened in Year 1 of the Project?

The project this year has taken off and there has been lots to do to get all the groups started.  Lately I have been thinking a great deal about why we are doing this project at all -- who are the students we are focusing on and why, and the benefits to all of our students.  It is true that when we look closely at our practice through the lens of one or two students we learn a lot, and all of our kids can benefit from that learning.

In June and then during the summer, I wrote the final report for Year 1.  Though I sent out the report to the teachers that participated last year, I have been neglectful in summarizing it here, and highlighting some key learnings.  So to start with, I am attaching a summary from the full report written in the summer for Year 1.  What I’d like to do is follow this blog up with more specific information about student growth and teacher reflections.  What happened for the kids?  And what kind of learning happened for us as well.


Here is the summary of the official report on the data collected last year:

         The purpose of the Through a Different Lens project was to see if we could remove some
of the barriers to learning that our vulnerable students face, particularly our Aboriginal students
and students with behavioural difficulties.  Teachers in the project made a commitment to teach
and assess in alternate ways in order to capitalize on students’ interests, talents and strengths. 
Each teacher recorded the strategies that they used and the students’ response to those strategies,
with a focus on one or two students at-risk in their classrooms.  This was not an easy task, as
many of the students that they focused on had difficulties in both academic and social areas –
behavioural issues, emotional issues, attendance problems, drug and alcohol involvement and
poverty.
         Case studies completed in January, April and June 2012 on 36 students showed the power
of this work.  Thirty-four of the 36 students successfully completed their course or grade level.  In
all cases, the teachers observed their students at-risk engaging in the content to a greater degree,
participating in class, and interacting with both the teacher and the other students more often and
more successfully.  In addition, these students who do not normally feel that they are
academically capable began to demonstrate their strengths and talents in the classroom.  Student
interviews with students who are academically successful, and students at-risk, showed how
students positively respond to being taught and assessed in more interesting, hands-on and
creative ways (see ‘student voice’ on our blog http://differentlensblog.blogspot.com/, and how they 
appreciate having choices in their learning.
         Student surveys reinforced what was learned in the case studies and interviews.  Students
felt more academically confident, more socially engaged and amore aware that they had strengths
and talents that could help them and others in the classroom.  The biggest change overall was that
students felt they had more positive relationships with the classroom teacher, and had an adult in
the building they could talk to.
         Strategies that the teachers found most successful included:  teaching and assessing in a
variety of ways and connecting with student strengths and passions; building a positive and
supportive relationship with the student; being flexible and creative when adapting curriculum for
student needs; scaffolding student work so that they understood the steps involved; partnering
students thoughtfully and working with students to monitor their own behaviour.
         Teachers in the project grew professionally as they met regularly and shared ideas with
colleagues, observed students, planned with their students at-risk in mind, and worked diligently
to establish positive relationships with the students.  These teachers made a huge commitment to
their students and to the project, and experienced some powerful successes with some of our most
vulnerable students.

Self Regulated Learning-What is it?

It seems that one of the buzzes around the province these days  is around "self regulated learning".  I have been fascinated listening to the conversations and though I have heard speakers talk about it, and have read some of Shanker's work, I never seem to quite get the whole picture.

This week, I had the opportunity to talk with a professor, Dr. Nancy Perry,  from UBC  - her area of expertise is Self Regulated Learning.  She has a very straight forward approach that I could absolutely understand!  She prepared a handout that is adapted from an article she wrote in theReading Teacher.  This is her summary:  

Self-regulated learners are:
1.  Metacognitive - they are aware of their strengths and weaknesses as a learner, they are aware of the task demands, and they are aware of strategies that they can use to solve problems and cope with difficult tasks.
2.  Motivated for learning - they engage in learning, they focus on deep understanding and personal progress, they are willing to try new challenges, they persist and they view errors as an opportunity to learn.
3.  Strategic - they have a repertoire of strategies, and they know when to use them.

Wow!  This is great.  Much of this is what we are working on in Through a Different Lens ... without knowing it!  We are looking at helping students become more confident learners... how?  through understanding their strengths, through becoming motivated and engaged, and through thinking about how to apply what they know to different academic and social tasks.  There are many blogs on our Different Lens blog that illustrate teachers using strategies to help kids become more aware.

Dr. Nancy Perry goes on to say that self-regulated learning occurs in classrooms where:
1.  Students have a lot of autonomy - choices, control over challenges, opportunities to collaborate and responsibility for evaluating their own work.  
2.  Teachers provide instrumental support - through establishing routines and consistent participation structures, where they teach and model learning and problem solving, where they guide students thinking and performing, and where they guide student choices, provide information, feedback and encouragement, and where they talk about learning and self regulated learning
3.  Teachers engage in non-threatening evaluation practices - where evaluation is on-going and embedded, where it is a process not just a product, where it focuses on personal progress, and where it encourages learners to participation in the evaluation.  

Again... I see so much of what we are trying to do embedded in her words.  Giving students choice and opportunities to work with others, providing support and modeling learning, and using alternate ways to evaluate progress. 

How Lucky Am I?

What great people I get to work with.  We had a meeting at Maggie on Tuesday where the teachers talked about the work they are doing, and the kids they are focusing on.  I so appreciate their commitment and the trust that has built in the group.  What a great group!  I learn something at every meeting.

The consensus of the group is to carry on next year, with the same kind of commitment and focus, but to broaden the group and let it grow if others are interested.

The report written for the Vancouver Foundation really shows how powerful the work is.

FIRST SEMESTER DATA: The Story

At the end of semester 1, all of the secondary teachers in the project got together to work on their case studies.  There were 12 case studies of students who had completed term 1 courses.  There was also pre and post surveys for the 7 completed secondary classes. 

It took a great deal of time to work through the data and try to make sense of it.  The survey data was complicated and I was very fortunate to be able to work with Sharon Jeroski.  Sharon helped me look at the survey data in many different ways and then find the ways that best tell our story.

The case studies were fascinating and I read them over and over looking for themes. The themes soon became very evident.  And so... the writing began.  The report itself is 13 pages long and I hope to figure out how to attach it to the blog.  But for now I will attach the final summary.

When I read this summary again -- I am really struck by the hard work, the creativity and the commitment of the teachers involved in this project.   All of them tried new ideas, focused on students that desperately needed their attention and care, and shared their excitement and insights with all of us.  I can say for sure that the kids benefited from being involved -- and I am quite sure that all of us adults did as well.

In Summary:

            The purpose of the Through A Different Lens project was to see if we could remove some of the barriers to learning that our vulnerable students face, particularly our Aboriginal students and students with behavioural difficulties.  Teachers in the project made a commitment to teach and assess in alternate ways in order to capitalize on students’ interests, talents and strengths.  Each teacher recorded the strategies that they used and the students’ response to those strategies, with a focus on one or two students at-risk in their classrooms.  This was not an easy task, as many of the students that they focused on had difficulties in both academic and social areas – behavioral issues, emotional issues, attendance problems, drug and alcohol dependencies, and unstable home lives.

            Case studies completed in January 2012 on the twelve students from seven semestered academic secondary classrooms showed the power of this work.  Eleven of the 12 students successfully completed the course by January, with only one student continuing to work on completion.  In all cases, the teachers observed their student(s) at-risk engaging in the content to a greater degree, participating in class, and interacting with both the teacher and the other students more often and more successfully.  In addition, these students who do not normally feel that they are academically capable began to demonstrate their strengths and talents in the classroom.  Student interviews with both students who are academically successful, and with our students at-risk, showed how students positively respond to being taught and assessed in more interesting, hands-on and creative ways  (see “student voice” on through a different lens blog, http://differentlensblog.blogspot.ca/p/student-voices.html), and how they appreciate having choices in their learning.

            Student surveys reinforced what was learned in the case studies and interviews.  All students felt more academically confident, more socially engaged (positive relationships with teacher and peers), and more aware that they had strengths and talents that could help them and others in the class learn.

            Strategies that the teachers found most successful with these 12 students included: Connecting with the students strengths and interests; establishing a positive relationship with the student; partnering students with other students depending on the need; teaching using a variety of creative, hands-on, interesting and ‘fun’ ways; and scaffolding the learning.

            Teachers in the project grew professionally as they shared ideas with colleagues, observed students, planned with their student at-risk in mind, and worked diligently to establish positive relationships with the students.  These teachers made a huge commitment to their students and to the project, and experienced some powerful successes with some of our most vulnerable students. 

Play Dough...a little bit of fun...is that all it is?

This is my second blog about Glasser’s 1990 book on The Quality School.  I keep finding quotes that seem so relevant to this project.  In this set of quotes Glasser talks about how students perceive "good teachers":

“Students tell me that a good teacher is deeply interested in the students and in the material being taught.  They also say that such a teacher frequently conducts class discussions and does not lecture very much.  Almost all of them say that a good teacher relates to them on their level; the teacher does not place herself above them, and they are comfortable talking with her” (p.66).

 “Students also tell me that they appreciate teachers who make an effort to be entertaining.  To maintain student interest month after month in potentially boring courses, good teachers try to inject humor, variety, and drama into the lessons.  How to be entertaining cannot be taught:  Each teacher must work it out in his or her own way, but it is another way to gain admission into students’ quality worlds.  … the desirability that a teacher be entertaining is a further indication of how difficult it is to be an effective teacher” (p. 67).

Glasser continues to say that in many schools to be “entertaining” is frowned upon… there is a belief in “no pain/no gain”.  People don’t understand that “boredom is the enemy of quality”.  He says that we must “nurture teachers as they struggle to put fun and interest into their work”.

I must say I think Glasser was talking about what we are doing – we know the relationship piece for sure, we also know about the important of being passionate about the content… and some teachers in this project are really trying to add the novelty, the variety, choice, and some fun; finding what fits for them.  Glasser believes FUN is a real need.  One that we have underutilized in school for many years… to play with ideas and concepts, to work together with others, to have fun – these are relevant and meaningful ways to learn.

Glasser is not alone, Albert Einstein said “Games are the most elevated form of investigation”;Pat Kane, author of The Play Ethic says “Play will be to the 21^st century what work was to the last 300 years of industrial society—our dominant way of knowing, doing and creating value;and Brian Sutton-Smith, professor of Education at the U of Pennsylvania “The opposite of play isn’t work.  It’s depression.” 

Thus… the Play Dough challenge for the month of February.  Along with all the other creative and interesting things you are trying... try some playdough and think outside of the box!  Successful or not -- that is okay.  Just let us know where it really works.  Let’s have a little fun and share our ideas with each others… in this way we will do what Glasser suggests about nurturing each other as we attempt to put some fun and interest into our work.

Our Project: Links to Restorative Practices

Over the past few months Dave Kroschinsky and I have been offering a series on Restorative Practices.  The group has been reading the book “The Quality School:  Managing Students without Coercion”.  One of the main topics of our conversation is on Quality World.  Quality World is basically the photo album of pictures (or perceptions) you have in your mind that represent what you best enjoy in your life (p.59).  Your photo album is full of pictures of your family and friends, things you like to do, places you have fun, fulfilling jobs -- all the people and things you find need-fulfilling.

The interesting thing is how Quality World fits with our project.  Kids that are disengaged from school have basically removed ‘school’ from their Quality World as a need-fulfilling place.  They have removed ‘school’ and most teachers from their picture of what satisfies their needs. 

The big question is What can we do to facilitate these kids putting school back into their Quality World?  because if they don’t – then they will continue to be disengaged  in school or they will physically drop out of school. 

Guess what?  This is exactly what we are looking at in our project.  What are the two biggest ways to facilitate kids putting school back in their quality world, or for that matter, facilitating all our kids keeping school in their quality world?

-       relationships – helping kids feel they belong with us, in our classrooms, and in our school.

-       engaging students through their interests, strengths, and helping them connect their work to their world…. meaningful work. 

So why do strategies like 2 x 10 work?  Why do kids attend our classes more than other classes when we are open to their strengths?  Why are they more interested when there is novelty, fun, interesting assignments?  Because you have been actively facilitating students keeping school in their quality world, you are helping them get their needs met, giving them some power over their work through choices and interest, and providing places where they at least see the potential for meaningful work.

Glasser, W. (1990).  The Quality School:  Managing Students Without Coercion.  New York:  Harper and Row Publishing.