Some New Resources to Share!

This semester, I am teaching a new course that I have never taught before. While this can at times be daunting, it is also a great opportunity to find new resources and collaborate with other teachers. One of the resources I found useful and will be using with my grade 9’s is from the Outta Ray’s Head website www.rayser.ca . I had not previously come across this website, but it offers a wide range of resources compiled by a retired OCT teacher. The lesson plans are organized into different categories including writing, poetry, library, and literature. I like this site because all of the resources are available free of charge and without a subscription, and also because it is largely based on Ontario curriculum.

One of the resources I found on his site is a group writing task used to introduce opinion writing. The link to the activity is here: http://www.rayser.ca/paradev.txt In groups, students work together to develop an opinion based on a question provided by the teacher, for example, “Should students who have part time jobs be allowed to get their driving permit early?”. Students then need to come up with an opinion as a group, and support it using three different points. They write this together on chart paper and present it to their peers.

I like this activity because of the group dynamic, which allows students to work together to brainstorm ideas, and the opportunity to work on their collaboration, oral communication, and paragraph structure. It is also a way to get students writing that is less intimidating than first attempting individually.

Another resource I found is available on the website www.readwritethink.com I like this website because it offers lots of language lesson plans are resources that you can search by filtering the grade, topic, or type of resource. I found a really creative lesson plan on the site here: http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lesson-plans/heart-using-haiku-identify-31113.html?tab=4#tabs that involves students creating a haiku that expresses the thesis of their formal essay as a way of revising and clearly expressing their argument. I thought this was a very creative and unique way for students to hone in on what their essay is about, and is an opportunity for them to improve the conciseness of their writing, something that a lot of my students struggle with. This lesson could be modified to be a short activity as part of editing, or an extended lesson that delves deeper into haikus. I also appreciate this activity because I find it difficult to include an entire unit devoted to poetry, but this is a relevant way to incorporate it into another unit.

I am definitely going to try it with my grade 10s who are beginning their essays this week!

A Fun Activity to Try: 4 Corners Activity & Group Skits

One activity that I have adapted and developed over the past few years is a four corners activity to introduce the themes of Romeo and Juliet. I have posted it to my blog, but here is a brief overview below:

1.      Review 4 Corners: Each corner of the room will be labelled “Agree” “Disagree” “Strongly Agree” or “Strongly Disagree”. The teacher will read a statement aloud, such as “it is possible to fall in love at first sight” and students must choose a corner to stand in based on their personal opinion. No one is aloud to “sit on the fence” or not have an opinion.

2.      Discussion: Standing in their corners, the teacher will lead a discussion in which students must justify their reasoning for their opinion. Students are encouraged to provide personal and real world examples.

3.      Skits: After going through all of the statements, the teacher will choose one statement (one that generated a lot of discussion/class was divided on) and students will work in their groups to create a short 3-5 minute skit that emphasizes their opinion. After having time to prepare and practice, they will present their skits to the class.

Statements for Romeo and Juliet:  

Children should always obey their parents.

A young woman’s top priority should be to find a suitable husband.

It is possible to fall in love at first sight.

Being loyal to your family is more important than following your own desires.

Love is the most important thing in life.

When you know what you want, it is okay to do anything it takes to get it.

You should keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

I like this activity for a number of reasons. Firstly, it gets students up and out of their seats. I also find that students love to share their personal experiences, ideas, and opinions, and the statements are open and general enough that students of al levels can respond confidently. Because there is no right or wrong answer, the activity is not intimidating to lower level students who may not usually want to participate or answer questions in class. It is also a great way to get to know your students on a more personal level, as they often share interesting stories or memories. The skits are an element I have added more recently as an extension to this activity. Because we do some scene performances in the unit, it is an easy way to get the students up in front of the class with their peers to practice their oral communication skills without the pressure of been assessed. I also like this activity because it can be easily adapted to other units of study or courses. All you have to do is change the statements to fit the themes that will be discussed in that unit. 

I would definitely recommend trying this activity and adapting it to fit the needs of your class in any unit this semester...it is a lot of fun!

Considering Finland's Success as Ontario's Future

Colleen Ireland’s article “5 Days in Finland” highlights the differences she noticed between Ontario’s and Finland’s education systems during a trip with the York Region School Board in 2011. Her goal was to find differences that explain and inform Finland’s success on the PISA, the Programme for International Student Assessment. Some significant comparisons are outlined below:

·         Finland’s teachers and principals are in the same voluntary union, while principals also have their own separate union. Many principals continue their role as educators and teach one period a day.

·         The union is part of the interview process.

·         Administrators have trust in teacher competence: Teachers train for 5-7 years, must pass an entrance exam and group interview. Teachers have three compulsory professional development days, the rest are up to the discretion of the teacher.

·         Standardized testing only occurs once every five years, and may not involve the entire student body. The purpose is to “inform curriculum practice” rather than accountability.

·         Schools are locally run and offer common schedules allowing students to easily transfer if necessary.

·         Parents have access to their child’s attendance records in real-time, online.

·         Cross-curricular planning is the standard.

Of these differences, the point that stood out the most to me is that there is “a strong belief in teachers and their competence, and the understanding that the bond between student, teacher and family is essential to educational success”. It is this philosophy, this trust in teachers that seems to be the foundation for all other policies and practices in Finland. Money and time are not wasted on accountability measures like TPAs or EQAO. I believe we should use Finland’s success to justify the removal of these bureaucratic policies and also to reduce the importance of student’s marks. Instead, the emphasis should be on the development of skills and knowledge. I believe that cross-curricular planning is also an effective strategy that can achieve this, as it involves a more holistic approach to teaching the whole child. The focus in Finland, which we should adopt here, is on fostering a positive relationship between all stakeholders which I believe is allows everyone to focus on the common goal – student achievement and learning.

Comparing Approaches to Teaching Literacy: Ontario vs. Saskatchewan

Introduction

The purpose of this post is to provide a look at English Language Learning by comparing two Canadian provinces: Ontario and Saskatchewan. My goal in this analysis is to gain a greater understanding of how Ontario’s vision of an accountable education system compares to another within the country. I have gathered information from government websites, documentation such as policies and guidebooks for students and teachers, recent studies, as well as the knowledge of my cousin who is a teacher in Saskatchewan.

Like Ontario, Saskatchewan has three fully funded systems: public, separate, and French. I was surprised to learn that along with these two provinces, Alberta is the only other in Canada where the separate system is protected by constitutional status. Saskatchewan has 28 total school boards in the province (including one separate Protestant and one French language board) compared to Ontario’s 76 boards. Both provinces have adopted a K-12 system, however SK has middle school for grades 7-9 and high school for grades 10-12. For this reason, high school students in SK require 24 credits to graduate, while in Ontario the number is 30. School attendance is mandatory until the age of 16 in Saskatchewan, two years less than Ontario. This is likely due to the strong agricultural sector that supports the economy there.

Research Findings

1.Time on Task

In Ontario, high school students must earn a minimum of four English credits from grade 9 to 12 to graduate. Typically, students will take one English credit per year, which involves 75 minutes per day of instructional time in a semester, for a total of approximately 100 hours of instruction per course. By the time they graduate, Ontario students will have had 400 hours of English language instruction.

As previously mentioned, high school in SK is from grade 10-12. Five of the 24 credits they earn must be English credits. One credit is the equivalent of 100 hours of instruction, for a total of 500 hours by the time they graduate. In grade 10, students take two English courses. In grade 11 they take one, and in Grade 12 they take two. Students also have the option of taking one or more elective English courses.

2. Streaming English

A. Ontario

In 1999, Ontario adopted a new province wide system of streaming students based on career pathways. In Grades 9 and 10, students must choose between academic, applied, and locally developed level courses. Academic courses are prerequisites for University level courses, while applied courses are prerequisites for college level courses at the senior levels. Locally developed courses are prerequisites for Workplace courses at the senior levels. The differences between the streams are outlined below by CareerCrusing.com:

Academic Courses:

focus on the essential concepts of the discipline plus additional related concepts.  Academic courses develop students’ knowledge and skills by emphasizing theoretical, abstract applications of the essential concepts while incorporating practical applications, as appropriate. 

Applied Courses:

focus on the essential concepts of the discipline. Applied courses develop students’ knowledge and skills by emphasizing practical, concrete applications of the essential concepts while incorporating theoretical applications, as appropriate.

Locally Developed Courses:

focus on the most essential concepts of a discipline. These courses are offered in Mathematics, Science, English and Canadian History. These courses will provide support for students making the transition to high school by enhancing their skills to allow them to be successful at secondary school. Students in Ontario schools can earn up to six credits toward a secondary school diploma through locally developed compulsory credit courses (LDCC). 

Open Level Courses:

Open level courses have one set of expectations for each subject and are appropriate for all students. Open level courses are offered for all non-core subjects and do not have a prescribed post-secondary destination.

B. Saskatchewan

In SK, there are three levels of the “Regular Education Program”: locally modified advanced, provincially developed (core), and locally modified basic. They also offer Alternative Education Programs for students with below average cognitive abilities whose needs cannot be met by the regular program. I have outlined the differences below:

Locally Modified Advanced:

100% of the provincial curriculum objectives are met, plus up to a maximum of 50% of advanced objectives determined by the individual school board.

Provincially Developed “Core”:

100% of the provincial curriculum objectives are met.

Locally Modified Basic:

50% of provincial curriculum objectives are met, 50% of locally developed objectives met, as determined by individual school boards.

 My cousin who teaches in Lloydminster, SK mentioned that the vast majority of students are enrolled in the advanced courses, and that some schools do not even offer the core level courses because of low enrolment. However, I was unable to find hard data that supported this suggestion.

Comparing Streaming Outputs

What I did come across in my research was an interesting study by Statistics Canada (2000) which compared streaming outcomes in SK, ON, AB, and BC. These are the four provinces in the country with the most defined systems of streaming. Using the national Youth in Transition survey, they compared the number of grade 10 students with PSE (post secondary education) options verses students who did not. The results were quite eye-opening. Here are some highlights:

·         In ON, 64% of students had open PSE options compared to 87% in SK. In both provinces, girls had a slightly higher number than boys. SK had the highest results of all four provinces.

·         All provinces showed the trend that the higher the family income, the more likely a student was to have PSE options open.

·         Students with immigrant parents, visible minorities, and English as a Second Language students were all more likely to have open PSE options than native/English speaking students. These findings challenge previous studies that suggest the opposite. SK did not have a large enough sample of students in these categories to be included in this statistic.

The link to the study can be found here: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-004-x/2007002/9994-eng.htm

3. English Standards

As a way of comparison, I decided to take a look at the differences between the Gr. 10 Academic English course in Ontario (ENG2D) and the Grade 10 advanced course (ELA A10) in Saskatchewan.

A.   Ontario

All compulsory English courses in Ontario are divided into four strands of learning: Oral Communication, Reading, Writing and Media Studies. Under each strand, there are overall expectations and corresponding specific expectations for each course. For each expectation, several examples are provided on how students can demonstrate their meeting of this expectation. For example, under the writing strand, the second overall expectation is Using Knowledge of Form and Style. A specific expectation students must meet is to “write for different purposes and audiences using a variety of literary, graphic, and informational forms”. Examples of meeting this expectation include “a speech to persuade their peers to take action on an issue; a myth or updated fairy tale for young children”. In ENG2D, there are 70 specific expectations like this one that fall under the four stands. The curriculum document for this course is available online here: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/english910currb.pdf

B.   Saskatchewan

As previously stated, gr. 10 students in SK must take two English credits: ELA A10 and ELA B10. Each credit has 2 units of study, and its own specific expectations that complement/build on one another.  

Unlike Ontario, overall expectations are not organized into 4 strands. Instead, they are focused on three overarching “goals and outcomes” including: Comprehend and Respond, Compose and Create, and Assess and Reflect. Like Ontario, these goals are accompanied by overall expectations and specific expectations. However, there are considerably less specific expectations identified. For example, ELA A10 has 10 specific expectations that must be met. The expectations also are written in a more applicable, concrete way that those of Ontario. For example, here are two of the four expectations for Compose and Create:

CC A10.2 Explain and present to a familiar audience the key ideas and events (actual or based on a text studied) through an appropriate combination of charts, diagrams, sound, models, drama, and print.

CC A10.4 Compose and create a variety of written literary (including a historical persona essay and a review) and informational (including an observation [eye-witness] report and researched or technical report) texts attending to various elements of discourse (e.g., purpose, speaker, audience, form).

The province clearly outlines the “Forms of Representing” or assessment opportunities expected for the course, including a “historical persona essay” and “multimedia presentation”. The province also provides a “minimum guide for resource selection” that teachers must adhere to. For ELA A10, this includes 10 poems, 5 short stories, 5 essays, 2 novels, and 2 plays. Resources must also include informational texts including articles, podcasts, brochures, documentaries and websites. This same guide is expected for ELA B10.

The curriculum for all English courses in SK is available here: https://www.curriculum.gov.sk.ca/webapps/moe-curriculum-BBLEARN/teaching?view=teaching&lang=en&subj=english_language_arts&level=10

4.Testing

A.   Ontario

In Ontario, high school students write final examinations at the end of each course. These exams range in worth from 15% to 20% of the students’ final grade. Final exams in Ontario are created, administered, and graded by the classroom teacher. At my school, efforts have been made to improve the consistency of these exams by using standard formats and questions, however they may vary greatly from school to school and board to board.

Ontario students must also write the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT) in grade 10. According to EQAO.com, the test is designed to measure “whether or not students are meeting the minimum standard for literacy across all subjects up to the end of Grade 9”. The test occurs on the same day for all students in the province, usually in late March, and takes 2.5 hours. It is developed and administered by the Ontario government (EQAO) and students must pass this exam to earn their high school diploma. EQAO states that they work with teachers in the planning, development and assessment of the OSSLT, however it is unclear as to how many teachers are actively involved and how they are chosen to contribute.

B.   Saskatchewan

A standardized literacy test like the OSSLT does not exist in Saskatchewan. However, provincial “Departmental” Exams in Grade 12 are mandatory for all students enrolled in English, math and science courses not taught by an accredited teacher. According to the Government of SK, a teacher is eligible to become accredited if they have an Honours Degree in the subject matter, have two years experience, and attend the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation seminar.  If a teacher is accredited, they can create and administer the exam themselves, otherwise students must write the Departmental examination.

I was able to find the Teacher Guide to the exam which had a lot of information in it, which you can find here: https://web.archive.org/web/20110112073411/http://www.education.gov.sk.ca:80/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?DocID=930,918,284,107,81,1,Documents&MediaID=15164&Filename=teacherguide2010.pdf

This exam is worth 40% of the final mark, with the remaining 60% made up of the school mark. Each examination is 2.5 hours in length, however since 2006, all students are granted an addition half hour if required. All English examinations are marker scored (rather than machine scored, like in chemistry and math). The format of a sample Gr. 12 exam includes five sections: multiple choice, short answer, paragraph response, short essay and a long essay. The Teacher Guide clearly states that it is the teacher’s responsibility to select and teach texts that have been approved by the ministry as suitable for the course, and that students will be penalized on the exam if they do not use these texts in their written responses.

Conclusion

Overall, there are several similarities between Ontario’s and Saskatchewan’s approach to teaching English in high school. Both provinces have adopted a system of streaming students based on academic ability. However, it seems that SK’s system better prepares students for post secondary possibilities. I think that this may be because while in Ontario, students need to make a clear choice between university or college through the selection of the academic or applied stream, in SK both the advanced and core stream offer university as a post-secondary option. It also seems that more students are encouraged to take courses that lead to post secondary options in SK compared to Ontario based on the data from StatsCan. Though I have only taught in the Ontario system, I personally feel that we should adopt a system that does not stream students until grade 10 or 11. This would allow students the time they need to consider their future aspirations after they have made the challenging transition into high school.

Both provinces have a mandated curriculum for English courses. However, the framework for this curriculum and the expectations for teacher implementation is distinct. I can appreciate elements of both. I like how Ontario’s curriculum is divided into the four strands, because they are practical and provide a clear distinction. But I prefer SK’s more concise list of specific expectations for each course. Having 50 to 70 specific expectations is far too many, and I find that many of them are repetitive. The wording and applicability of SK’s curriculum expectations are also more accessible to both teachers and students alike.

While both provinces use standardized tests, the method and implementation differs. In Ontario, the OSSLT is a compulsory part of a student’s diploma. SK does not have a literacy test, but does mandate standardized Departmental Exams for grade 12 core courses. I think that these exams really drive the instruction and assessment format of these courses, and limit the creativity and professional judgement of the teachers who teach them. It seems that the courses are structured to prepare students for the exam. I also think that the exam is weighted far too heavily, and therefore may not fairly or accurately represent all students’ knowledge or abilities.  

Another important distinction is that students in SK have considerably more instructional time studying English than students in Ontario. I personally think it is great that students in grades 10 and 12 in SK take English both semesters. This really allows for the opportunity for students to continue to develop their reading and writing abilities without extended breaks. It also emphasizes the importance of English as it relates to all career options, which I think all English teachers can appreciate.

After completing this research task, I think that continuing to compare Ontario’s implementation of accountability to other provinces and jurisdictions can provide a lot of valuable food for thought, and challenge some of the assumptions we all make about how to best meet the needs of our students.

A Canadian Perspective...

While the Ravitch summary I posted earlier this week focused on the history of accountability in the United States, it is perhaps more useful to compare it to a Canadian perspective. The Alberta Teacher’s Association offers such perspective in their paper published in 2005, which you can access here: https://lms.brocku.ca/access/content/group/f8b88833-f4b5-4afd-aa05-1f9fd8bccbb2/index.html

The idea of province wide assessment in Alberta was first introduced in 1980 with the establishment of the Provincial Student Evaluation Program. This was roughly ten years after the establishment of the NAEP in the U.S. By the mid-1980’s, both organizations were focused on using standardized assessments as a measurement of accountability in their education systems. These changes demanded increased funding, and as Ravitch suggests, accounted for about 40% of the U.S. states budgets. By 1984, standardized tests were applied to all school boards in Alberta, including a Gr. 12 exam required for students to earn their diploma.  

Alberta’s education system in the early 90’s was characterized by a change in the use of standardized tests to identify schools in need, and the placement of special needs students in regular classrooms. However, 1994 was the year of most drastic changes. A new trend of “doing more with less” due to funding cutbacks, major restructuring, the introduction of site-based management, was all echoing the efforts in the U.S. to run schools like businesses. At this time the focus remains almost solely on outputs, or test scores, rather than input.

This one-sided emphasis on output is finally challenged in 2003 and implemented in 2004, when the established Learning Commission suggests reporting includes factors such as class size, use of funding, and satisfaction surveys. The same year, the School Act is amended to enforce that teachers be responsible for grading provincial achievement tests and exams. Likewise, in the United States, teachers began to feel the increased pressure to perform and be held accountable for student achievement. It is not surprising that we see the push back by educators during these decades and in the years to follow.

Another noteworthy part of the Alberta Paper focuses on what the Teacher’s Association calls a “shared understanding and commitment to values” that educational partners must share in their efforts to improve accountability in education. They include:

1.       Fairness: everyone plays by the same rules

2.       Openness: processes for reporting and documentation, and the analysis of these results are openly discussed and displayed

3.       Respect for Diversity/Equal Educational Opportunity: recognizing each student’s unique needs and allowing school boards to determine how to best meet these needs

4.       Stewardship: sufficient and responsible use of resources

In consideration of these values, you can interpret the challenges the teachers in Alberta have faced in the era of accountability. For example, in the first value, fairness, it is clear that teachers do not feel they have been treated fairly, nor has there been consistency in the expectations they must meet. They must also feel that the process and purpose of reporting and documenting student outputs has not been clearly defined, or openly expressed, which poses further questions. And as Ravitch suggests, many teachers feel that they are asked to accomplish too much given the lack of resources they are provided by those in control, which brings down morale. All of these factors help us to better understand the history of accountability in education, in an effort to make improvements for the future, and it seems that these values are a good place to begin.

This week, I was teaching a lesson to my grade 10 academic English classes about how to write a proper news article. While the lesson is tied to the final assessment for our short story unit, its greater purpose is to prepare students for the OSSLT, the standardized literacy test in Ontario. This got me thinking more about testing in our education system….when did it start? How has it changed over the years? And how effective is it in determining accountability of all stakeholders?

One resource that provides a comprehensive overview and answers some of these questions is Diane Ravitch’s “A Brief History of Accountability” which summarizes the changes of testing in America. You can read the text by clicking on the link here, http://www.hoover.org/research/brief-history-testing-and-accountability

OR….. read the shorter summary I have written for your reading pleasure! Let’s get started by going back to early education in the 19^th century….

19^th Century Accountability

The practice of testing students’ knowledge and skills was common practice at this time, and determined whether or not the child would move ahead to the next level. Less than 1 in 10 students went to high school, and fewer still enrolled in college. Early on, colleges required applicants to pass their own entrance exam, however this testing was later standardized by the newly formed College Entrance Examination Board. Educators were also subject to a test and interview in order to determine their suitability and knowledge of subject matter. But this was their only assessment after obtaining a position…must have been nice! As you can see, testing in this era focused on students’ own accountability for their own learning without emphasizing the role of other stakeholders involved in the process.

Progressive Education, Thorndike and Accountability

The growing popularity of the field of educational psychology in the early twentieth century meant many changes to testing. The Progressive movement, led by Edward Thorndike, emphasized the need for less structured, traditional teaching and more opportunities for experimental learning. Thorndike’s approach was grounded in the popular Progressive idea that “education was a function of the state and that its administration should be a professional matter in which public oversight was strictly limited” which was something teachers happily supported (Ravitch, 2002). While the public was not to be involved, students were also no longer held accountable for their learning. Another key difference was the idea of “social promotion”, or passing students regardless of their abilities.  This change was influenced by both the effort to keep kids in school during the Depression, and the concern that failure would lead to psychological and social harm of the child.

Influence of NAEP

The creation of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) was largely in response to a report published in 1966 by sociologist James Coleman called Equality of Educational Opportunity. While his study considered how the distribution of resources effect student achievement, it more importantly changed the focus from inputs to outputs, or more specifically, test scores. The purpose of the NAEP was to collect data on student achievement at a national scale. They also implemented standardized tests in grade 10 and 12 in math and science. This new focus on test results meant increased pressure on politicians to focus on how to improve achievement. This in turn, meant increased funding for education which often consumed state budgets. School boards were run like businesses, and politicians were expecting a return for their investment.

Policy Makers VS. Teachers

Today, we see what Ravitch describes as a “stalemate” between teachers who focus on resource inputs, and public officials who control funding and seek accountability. There are many examples of tension and conflicting perspectives between these groups, each emphasizing the same point: that educators want to reduce accountability measures, while politicians (and the public) want them increased. While policymakers want more charter schools and private contracting, educators see it as a threat to public education. While policymakers push for merit pay, teachers feel it will hurt their professionalism. Essentially, both parties have the same goal: improved student performance. But only the future can determine how they get there.

I hope that this summary provided some useful background into the "accountability movement" and will make you think further about the politics behind this growing trend. 

Hi Everyone! I wanted to share with you a challenge that our English department is currently trying to overcome. It is one that I think many departments – especially English – struggle with from time to time, so I would love to hear your input. I have outlined the problem, the context and my solution below…so please read and tell me your thoughts!

The Case Details

Recently, our English Department has been made aware by guidance that many senior students, particularly students in grade 12, have been requesting time table changes in an effort to avoid taking ENG4U with a teacher who is known for assigning low marks. On the other hand, many students have been requesting another English teacher who has a reputation for assigning higher grades. This issue must be addressed fully and involve all teachers in the department, as questions about consistency have become more frequent and have begun to divide the team. This issue must also be addressed with sensitivity to those directly involved, with careful consideration of their feelings, perspective, and rights as union members. 

The Context

There are a few policies and documents at the board and provincial level that can guide my response to this problem. Because this is an assessment issue, the first document to consider is the Ontario Education Ministry’s Growing Success. According to Growing Success, “Teachers will benefit from leadership by the principal to ensure that there is a common understanding among all staff about the process for determining the final grade. The principal will work with teachers to ensure common and equitable grading practices that follow ministry policy and board guidelines” (p. 39). This suggests that it is the principal’s role to encourage and enforce consistency in assessment within the school. This can be done with the support of department heads.

The Halton Catholic District School Board also provides Guidelines for Secondary Assessment, Evaluation and Reporting (2007) which provides a very detailed explanation of assessment expectations for all secondary teachers in the board. It outlines issues such as using professional judgements, assigning an appropriate level using the “18 point scale” and justifiable grades. The document states that teachers must ask themselves questions like, Have I considered evidence that is most consistent over the reporting period with consideration of more recent evidence, when applicable? Is there sufficient balance among the categories of the achievement chart? And have I collected sufficient evidence upon which to base my decisions? to determine if a grade is justifiable.

Another document made available on our board website is the Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat (2007), which published a resource on moderated marking. It states that moderation provides “opportunities for professional dialogue about assessment practices bring coherence to those practices, nourish a climate of inquiry that supports student learning, and challenge teachers to focus future instruction on specific learning outcomes.” Each of these documents provide relevant context in determining an appropriate solution to this problem.

Leadership

For anyone interested in leadership, Don Clark has a great website that offers lots of great information on the subject. Here is the link to his site: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leader.html I also would recommend the Leader to Leader Journal, which has a great article by Marabella, available here: http://www.leadertoleaderjournal.com/sample-articles/serving-our-employees-and-volunteers.aspx I considered  both of these references when thinking about how to address this issue.

Department Heads have a unique role as leaders in the school setting. While they are on one hand classroom teachers, they are at the same time leaders of their colleagues under the direction of the vice principals and principal. I see this role as very much aligned with the philosophy of servant leadership, which is focused less on institutionalized power and more with commitment and empathy towards others. It is the department head’s role to provide insight, resources and support to their teachers as empowerment. Two of the ten principles of servant leadership include building community and conceptualization, or the ability to bring a goal to fruition by providing a bigger picture. Department Heads do this regularly, by acting as the link between the classroom and the administration. According to Northouse (2007), every leader must use several social judgement skills to guide their decision making, including social perceptiveness, which is insight into how others will react to change, and social performance, which is being aware of the perspectives of others and effectively adjusting your approach to acknowledge their perspectives.

In this specific scenario, it is important for the department head to acknowledge their role both mentoring and spirit-building these two teachers as part of the solution to assessment inconsistencies. Providing additional support and resources to these teachers will build confidence and motivation. If the department head approaches the problem as a positive learning opportunity, the teachers involved will be more likely to “buy in” to the solution and will fell less discouraged.

The Plan

Based on this assessment policy and leadership research, I can make an informed decision on how to best handle this difficult situation. The first thing I would do as a department head is discuss this issue with my principal. As the leader of the school, it is important for him to be informed and for me to have his support in addressing the issue, especially if he needs to step in later. He may also be able to offer a unique perspective or advice on how to proceed.

Next, I would also submit a proposal to Curriculum Services for a Collaborative Inquiry Project (CIDI) focused on moderated marking. If approved, this project will provide multiple days of release time throughout the semester for a group of teachers in our department. While I cannot force any teacher to participate in this extracurricular project, I would personally invite anyone teaching senior academic English, and therefore, will include both the teacher who assigns very high marks and the teacher who assigns very low marks. This way, no one is singled out as “the problem”. In the moderated marking collaborative inquiry, teachers would have the opportunity to review curriculum expectations and rubric success criteria for the comparative essays for ENG3U and ENG4U. They would also use student exemplars to discuss and compare their approach to marking this assessment piece.

Another valuable exercise I would lead in my next department meeting or PD day to address the issue is reflective practice. Each teacher would be provided statistical data showing their class averages compared to the overall course averages. This data would not be shared with any other individuals. In the exercise, teachers would be asked to consider their averages to the class averages and reflect upon the results. I would provide guiding questions for consideration, such as: How do your averages compare to the overall course average? Are you surprised? Why or why not? What are some potential reasons for this result? In what ways could you influence or change this result? Explain. Teachers would then have the opportunity to share their reflections if they wish. This exercise is an effort to allow for thoughtful and practical reflection on teachers’ assessment practices. Again, it does not center any one out, but is designed to encourage teachers whose averages are much higher or lower than most to critically examine their approach to assessment of learning.

If these two measures are unsuccessful, or if the teachers do not participate in the CIDI project, I would consider changing these teacher’s timetables so they are teaching more junior courses rather than senior courses. If these teachers are unhappy with this change, I would explain to them that there were several other teachers who also requested teaching the grade 11 or 12 courses, and because they participated in the Collaborative Inquiry Project, their dedication is being rewarded. If the problem persists, I would ask that the principal become involved for further discussion around proper assessment practices.

So – that’s it for me! Let me know what you think of this solution – and if you have any further ideas that could be applied to this situation.

Pick Me!

Here’s My Application…

As a new teacher, I often take on the role of following others, including my principal and vice principals, my department head and my NTIP mentor. These individuals have offered invaluable guidance and support throughout the first few years of my career.

Recently though, I took on a leadership role of my own by volunteering as course coordinator for the grade 9 geography courses at my school. When I joined the department, we had a team of four geography teachers. One is an experienced teacher who transferred from another school and the rest of us had never taught geography before, so I was happy to jump at the opportunity to demonstrate my leadership abilities. As course coordinator, my job was to take the lead on organizing textbook distribution, consolidating resources, and aligning assessment.

Our school population has doubled since two years previously (we are a new school in one of the fastest growing towns in Canada) so having enough resources has been a challenge. At this point, we are still waiting for new textbooks that have been ordered to accommodate our growing numbers. So, prior to the start of school, I made sure that any classrooms that didn’t have their own textbooks had easy access to a set in close proximity for convenient sharing. This task demonstrated one of my strengths – organization!

Next, I created a google drive file where all geography teachers can share resources. This is especially useful for the new teachers who need more support, but also for experienced teachers who may want to refresh a lesson or two. I organized the files into unit folders, and added all my lessons to get the ball rolling. Recently, a new LTO joined our team, and so I sat down with her to answer any questions she had about teaching the course and offered her my resources (and of course directed her to the google drive!) Creating this drive demonstrates my passion for collaboration and teamwork. I thoroughly enjoy working with other teachers to share ideas and resources to improve my practice. As a leader, I think collaboration is super important in order to stay current and to be in touch with colleagues.

Another task I took on was leading a meeting with all grade 9 geography teachers to align assessment. Because we were all coming from different schools, we all shared the goal of achieving consistency within our assessments. We agreed on using the same major assignment for each unit, and also established a consistent test format for unit tests (same types of questions and total marks). This task demonstrated my ability to mediate, as at times the discussions about which assessments were more effective than others became a bit intense. I made an effort to ensure each colleague felt heard and reminded the group of our ultimate goal which kept us on track.

Overall, being a course coordinator has been a great opportunity for me to stretch my leadership muscles and try something new.

Journal #2: O Captain, My Captain!

One of the most powerful leaders I have admired, followed, and aspired to be is a previous boss of mine named Jane whom I worked for over a period of about six years as a teen. Jane owns her own catering business and has a staff of twelve who work for her part-time.

Strengths

1.      Effective Communicator

I think that one of the most important strengths every leader must have is effective communication skills. A leader may have many outstanding qualities, but if they are not able to communicate their message or vision to others, they are immobilized. To me, effective communication skills include an ability to articulate ideas clearly and concisely to others. It also involves using appropriate volume, tone, and diction as well as non-verbal cues like eye contact and posture. Jane is one of the most effective speakers I have encountered. Her ability to tell a story, express her opinions, and give instructions is captivating. She is assertive and concise, so that her message is clear. Jane speaks with eloquence and has a way of convincing people of her ideas. She does not shy away from difficult conversations with others, but also enjoys banter and casual conversations getting to know her staff.

2.      Fair

Another quality Jane demonstrates that makes her a great leader is her sense of fairness. Leaders are often tasked with problem solving and conflict resolution. As the leader, your followers look to you to help them resolve issues with others. It is important that leaders demonstrate fairness and bias towards others to develop a sense of unity, equity and inclusion among the group. Jane has demonstrated fairness many times as a boss. When approached with issues regarding scheduling conflicts or differing opinions, she always tries to listen to both sides and works with people to ensure a solution is agreed upon by all parties. Day to day, she does not give preferential treatment or unfair advantage to certain individuals. Jane treats us all fairly and therefore we feel like equally valued members of the team.

3.      Motivating

I think that great leaders have the ability to motivate others. In order to do this, leaders must get to know their followers and figure out what drives them to do better and be better, just as teachers do in the classroom every day. Jane motivates me in many ways, by reminding me of my personal and career goals, and by offering support when I need it. Despite her busy schedule, she will go out of her way to give the team a morale boost (often in the form of homemade cookies or candy!) or a pep talk. She demonstrates her trust and belief in us, encouraging us to take risks by supporting us in our failures.

4.      A Master of their Craft

While I was going to identify the last strength as “respected” or “admired”, I had to pause and think about why great leaders are respected and admired by others. Often, great leaders have many traits that others admire, but when I think about Jane as a leader, I think about my respect for her as an amazing business woman and chef. Jane single-handedly built her catering business from the ground up. The main reason for her success (besides her leadership abilities) is her phenomenal cooking abilities. I think that great leaders need to earn their positions by demonstrating excellence in their field, and that is something Jane exemplifies through her work.

The Achilles Heel

No one is perfect, and I know Jane would admit that her “Achilles heel” is her disorganization and dislike of “paperwork”. Most leaders have a jam-packed schedule and many responsibilities to fulfill each day, and so organization is an important skill required to ensure everything is done efficiently. However, Jane is more of a “creative type” and so keeping a detailed planner or comprehensive to-do list is not her style. Nor is completing the administrative duties her position must fulfill. Luckily, her ability to recognize her weaknesses and seek help in these areas has made these challenges an opportunity for others to demonstrate their leadership. Overall, Jane is someone I admire, respect, and willingly follow as she continues to inspire me to be the best version of myself.