cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo by Natalie Maynor: http://flickr.com/photos/nataliemaynor/2988366432/

cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo by Natalie Maynor: http://flickr.com/photos/nataliemaynor/2988366432/

Assessment For Learning… Flipped Classroom… Project-based Learning… 21st Century Learning

A few years ago, I was in a learning series and we were learning about the power of shifting our assessment focus from summative (grades, events) to formative (feedback, ongoing).  The facilitator, Yrsa Jesnsen, quoted someone when she said “if we have something good… don’t give it a name”.  What she meant by this was that once we give something a name, it can be defined by whomever and also be branded, boxed, marketed and sold as a specifically defined idea rather than something that can grow and evolve.

I have had a number of conversations about assessment with people online… and what I realized is that people define this term based on their experience.  A US teacher will have a very different view on assessment than someone from British Columbia.  Although many will agree that assessment (ie. ongoing coaching and adjusting our teaching based on what we see) can be one of the most powerful things we do, after going through what a teacher from the US has to go through with endless standardized testing and top-down accountability measures, one can understand how the term assessment can take an entirely different meaning.  We have some teachers in our school use formative assessment practices in a way that is so powerful for our students; however, if I try to define it as AFL, the teachers tend to disengage and give me the look of “do not try to define what we are doing with a single term”. (also check out this post by Marissa Knauf on assessment jargon.)

For the past few days, I have had the privilege of attending and keynoting a conference in Lafayette, Indiana. During my keynote, I said that it is not about “21st Century Teaching/Learning” as a century is a long time; while 80 years from now, we will still be in the 21st Century, I hope that teaching and education will look significantly different than it does today.  Unfortunately, what has happened is that we have taken skills like collaboration, creativity, etc and labeled these as “21st Century Learning”.  As a result of this, companies have been able to define, box these skills up and sell it to people as a particular idea that does not evolve.

During the conference, I sat in a great session with Brett Clark on Flipped Teaching and Project Based Learning and Brett’s thoughts led to a discussion in which my friend Brett Gruetzmacher said to me, it is not about the title of what you are doing – it is about what works for you and your students.  As Brett Clark said, poor teaching is poor teaching… no matter how you shuffle the cards, they remain the same.  So even if you flip your teaching, if you were ineffective before, your students will still struggle.  It is important to take an idea and make it work for us and more importantly, make it work for our students.  In the past, I have been very critical of the flipped class model as I chose to define it as “videos for homework, worksheet in class”. Had I held firm with my beliefs, I would have disengaged from the conversation and not learned from Brett and passionate educators like Carolyn Durley who have defined the flipped model in a way that works for their students and have also included changes to how they assess kids and design their lessons and learning environments.  I have actually encouraged Carolyn to stop calling what she is doing as “flipped” as it is so much more than how so many people define the idea.  She has maintained that she is working to share the stories of what an effective “flipped”  class can look like and can lead to.  Carolyn is a great example of a wonderful teacher whose story may be missed if we choose to define all that she is doing in a single term.

Not naming something may be an impossible task (just check out how many names/labels have been used in this post).  So maybe it is not so much about giving something a name but instead using the name to lead to a deeper conversation around student learning.  As teachers, we need to continually model a growth mindset and engage in dialogue around effective practices that work for OUR students.  Although we should avoid boxing and selling an idea, we need to be open to conversations around ideas in education.  Just because something or someone is labeled with a particular name does not mean that there is effective teaching and learning taking place.  It is less about the name, idea, or tool, and is more about the teacher. Ideas will not change education unless educators use, implement, and reflect upon these ideas in a way that is optimal for our students. We need to be careful to not close ourselves off due to a label and not let a name define what we do in so many different learning environments.

As this is an area I have struggled with, I appreciate your thoughts and feedback.