Category Archives: Common Core Curriculum

Replace High Stakes Testing with Higher Return Design Thinking

Several articles in the past couple of weeks have highlighted the methodology of design thinking for both the business environment and education, particularly higher ed. Fast Company provides a quick reboot for those who may need a refresher in“Design Thinking . . . What is That?” The Chronicle of Higher Ed provides a more in-depth examination of the place of design thinking in higher ed in “Is ‘Design Thinking’ the New Liberal Arts?” The Chronicle piece details the popularity of “d. school” classes amongst the general populous at Stanford and discusses the potential to extend the model to college education in general.

What about K-12?

I’ve written before about the value of the design process in K-12, as executed by groups such as Tools at Schools, for example, and the great partnerships that collaborate to bring businesses into the schools to help engage students in more extended design projects. This week I’m prompted by the current focus on design thinking to review some of the benefits for emerging adults (aka high schoolers) should more design thinking be applied to curricula in exchange for traditional grading and testing methodologies.

The Benefits of Design Thinking To K-12 Learning

If we take a look at each stage of design thinking methodology, we can see how this process builds skills that a curriculum based on high stakes testing cannot.

  1. Empathize: Incorporating empathy into the process of learning can have huge benefits. As we listen in order to uncover partner, client, or subject needs, we are practicing an invaluable skill. I’m reminded of my hero, Paulo Freire and how he utilized the tools of dialogue and problem solving to the learning process. Learning how to respect your partner in the dialogue that begins the design process can not only further engage your learners in the current design activity, but will have powerful, long-lasting effects that no amount of preparing for an exam can.
  2. Define: The process of uncovering needs, documenting and then synthesizing these findings requires critical thinking skills of the highest order. Applying these skills to a real-world problem beats practicing test questions any day.
  3. Ideate: This is where creativity really kicks in and learners get to generate means of addressing the problem. With everyone chipping in, and with a sticky note (or white board, or newsprint) array of potential solutions, a great volume of ideas may result. Essential to this step of the process is the belief that “no idea is too stupid,” a concept that any student in a traditional school setting can tell you is not usually practiced. Sorting through and finding the main themes that arise are also a great way to practice problem-solving skills in an authentic manner. Test taking requires a very discrete set of skills that tend to stifle rather than nourish creative problem solving.
  4. Prototype: Creating a physical prototype of either one aspect of or the entire solution and responding to feedback on it provides opportunities for applying a range of skills that test practice does not. Building something out of paper, markers, wood, metal, etc. results in a project deliverable that may in some cases evolve into the actual end-product solution.
  5. Test: Listening to feedback from others, probing further and applying that to a refinement of a solution will serve our kids well as they move on to the workplace. The advice from the d. School is “Don’t defend your prototype; instead watch how your partner (client/user) uses and misuses it. Again, this provides so much more valuable experience than filling in a bubble sheet or staring at a computerized version of the same exam.

As school districts and families struggle with adherence to or rejection of new test-driven curricula, the idea of engaging our kids in more productive and authentic learning experiences becomes more attractive. As each year of high school juniors and seniors waste months in mostly solitary preparation for one of two (or both) standardized tests to sum up the value of their 12 years of schooling, considering alternative ways to practice and build real-life skills becomes increasingly important.

Today’s Practitioners in K-12 and Beyond

As you have probably surmised, design thinking in K-12 will best be realized when schools effectively partner with experienced practitioners as well as corporate sponsors and mentors to help students through the different phases of the process. I’ve written before about Tools at Schools, the brainchild of cofounders Don Buckley, Rinat Aruh and Johan Liden. They have partnered with Puma, for example, to work with students designing “The Sneaker of the Future” and with faculty at the St. Mark’s School in Boston to rethink “STEM to STEAM” amongst other projects. Design thinking is being applied to classroom curriculum as well as professional development and curriculum design.

Juliette LaMontagne, founder of the Breaker projects, is helping to re-engage youth (14-26-year olds) in the learning process by working through regionally-based, real-life design projects , such as the “The Future of the Book,” “Urban Micro Agriculture,” “Technology for Civic Engagement,” and “The Future of Stuff.” Students who have participated in Breaker projects talk about how devoted people are to the projects, how hierarchies vanished as part of the project process, how student-focused the work was, and the great benefit of working with industry mentors.

In many districts and schools across the country, faculty are engaged in projects to re-design or even re-envision school. Imagine if the $1,000 or so spent per PAARC exam question were re-channeled to building design thinking into our standard curriculum model.

Try It. You’ll Like It!

Clearly incorporating design thinking into a curriculum or even considering revamping a school curriculum around this concept requires planning and resources that many schools may not currently have access to. That’s why the partnerships are so important. When we consider what is really at stake, we must continue to push for further change.

If you’re interested in exploring the design process further on your own, or within your school, the d.school has a virtual crash course in design available for anyone to take you, working with a partner or group, through a full design cycle. Or use theFuture of Stuff Challenge resources to engage in your own manufacturing challenge (or one of your own . . . design).

If We Want to Change Education, We Need to Disrupt It

What do you think our greatest improvements have been in the educational sector in the past couple of years?

  • Has it been the number of students graduating high school?
  • Has it been the technology introduced to support teachers in the classroom?
  • Is it the growth of online learning expanding the footprint of higher education beyond the ivory tower?
  • Could it be the evolving business model under which we operate?

To really address the issue of improvements, I’d propose that we ask ourselves first whether our educational system is adequately preparing today’s student for the workplace of tomorrow. Are we?

Is Anything Really New?

A while back, I attended a Google + Hangout hosted by the American Enterprise Institute called “Can you be for profit and for students? Rethinking private enterprise in public education.” It brought together John Bailey from Digital Learning Now, Frederick M. Hess and Andrew P. Kelly of the AEI, and Michael B. Horn of the Clayton Christensen Institute. My interest, at the time, was in the debate over private dollars in public education. I’d seen resistance to this for so long and was thrilled that progress was being made to frankly get support from the private sector.

At that time, the discussion yielded a few key takeaways:

  1. A lot of the argument against for-profits was in a simplification of the role for-profits could play.

Andrew Kelly raised an interesting point in noting that 70% of Americans were comfortable with private dollars going to food, transportation, and supplies but not whole school management.

If you look at the different roles for-profits can play, this may reveal a misconception over the intent that many for-profits have and the role they can play in improving educational access and quality.

  1. We can learn from how federal policy deals with private sector contributions to other sectors.

A lot was said in this discussion around the role that policy can play in incentivizing the private sector to support positive results in education. As John Bailey point out, in almost every other sector (health care, clean energy, space program), the consideration has not been whether or not to engage with the private sector, but how to bring them in to tackle the challenge. Education, Bailey noted, is very unique in that incentives have not been provided to make such a collaboration work. And therefore, for-profits have largely had to work outside of the system to get things done. Michael Horn added to this argument that with i3 came out “the engine of innovation was cut out of the game.”

  1. There’s enough to be done so that we can all play a part.

As an extension of the first two points, John Bailey highlighted the role of collaboration, stating that “a blended solution” wherein “the suite of tools, services, and resources that the private sector will develop” can be used inside of the institutions. These benefits of innovation funded by the private sector could be used to support the existing institutions rather than breaking into institutional management. Likewise, expertise in instructional design, program design, and business modeling shared from the private sector can lend great support to the improvement of our schools, from K-12 through higher education.

At the time, my own conclusion was that a balanced, collaborative approach would yield the best result, that based on the need to produce revenue, for-profit educational providers would be watching the bottom line and that this could be a good thing when the pursuit of quality is as important. Additionally, I felt that with technology driving innovation, collaborating with those with the greatest access to capital to drive innovation, could be a smart move.

Now I’m not entirely sure.

What is needed to truly innovate in education

That technology is being used to great effect is not the issue here. It is being used to great effect. In these following areas, the use of private dollars to help drive innovation has resulted in improvements in:

  • Blended learning models and programs
  • Gamification
  • Professional development

But remember that millions of dollars are also being spent to support the Common Core and its associated testing, which in turn is really an extension of an existing model of education that remains stale and disengaging for a large number of constituents. Amy Scott reported on Marketplace yesterday that a single multiple-choice question costs $1,000 with costs ranging between $3,000 to $5,000 per question for more open-ended questions.

To truly innovate would be to take a look at this constituency and really understand how they can best thrive both during the school years and into the workplace. So take at least some of that money spent to make our kids better test takers, and instead provide them with more experiences and skills that prepare them for an adult world:

  • Experiential, hands-on learning
  • Expanded mentorship programs
  • Community-based internships

Question the Model

Yesterday the Chronicle of Higher Ed came out with an article on the Thiel Fellowship, titled “The Rich Man’s Dropout Club.” If there’s anyone out there who doesn’t know about Peter Thiel, he is the PayPal co-founder, Facebook board member and investor who decided in 2010 to pay selected teenagers $100,000 each to “stop out” of college and work on their own start-ups. While there are those who question Thiel’s methods, I’m a huge fan because he addresses the heart of the issue, which is the model itself. The article points out that Thiel initially considered building a better university through his foundation, but instead decided “The opposite of putting faith in the system is putting faith in the young people.”

Granted, the model isn’t expandable, but like other emerging like-minded organizations, it is calling into question the accepted standard for success that has been in operation for so long. UnCollege and Enstitute are others that I have mentioned here before, providing alternate pathways to the working world.

So, while we have made progress with dropout rates, there are still 1.2 million kids a year who leave school. The system still appears to be broken. And that is where we have to begin, questioning the model itself.

Contact Us for more on learning design for social impact.

Who Is the Teacher of Tomorrow?

In my last post, I asked people to “Imagine a School without Teachers” in order to examine some of the current challenges to the profession. Some interesting conversation came out of that post, with people actually speculating a school without teachers, or some variation of that theme. It’s safe to say that with the ever evolving technology, there are great opportunities for technology-assisted learning to support both classroom instruction and personalized learning in any environment (traditional school, home school, etc.). But removing teachers from the equation is not the answer. Evolving the role is a large part of the answer, as is ensuring the curriculum addresses the real needs of today’s students.

Early Voices of Discontent in Higher Ed

Since I left the classroom over a decade ago to participate in the development of some of the first online learning programs in higher ed, I’ve been keenly aware as to how the teaching profession is evolving. I saw the great potential for those whose passion is teaching and learning.

Throughout those years, I also saw how many people felt threatened by the changes that were occurring, first with the introduction of new technology and then with the introduction of new business models, particularly within the realm of higher ed. The first step was simply posting course materials online, starting online discussions, and allowing homework submissions online: in essence, using online platforms as an extension of the classroom learning environment.

As universities started to extend their footprint via the world of online learning, many faculty began to feel they would be replaced by either the technology itself or by those more willing than themselves to engage with it in this newer form of teaching. Sure, there were those that embraced and even spearheaded the changes, but that there was discontent is no great secret.

MOOCs shook things up entirely and to a great extent ensured that online learning would never be ignored again. Higher ed is still learning how to incorporate online options into their overall business model, but it will be a while before we see massive closings of brick and mortar institutions of higher learning.

Embracing Technology within PK-12

Today, as I continue to explore the ongoing changes in PK-12, I see an overwhelming amount of effort being exerted by teachers, schools, districts, and private entities to bring technology into the classroom. According to PBS Learning Media, 74% of teachers say technology enables them to reinforce and expand on content, to motivate students to learn, and to respond to a variety of learning styles (73%). Seven in ten teachers surveyed said educational technology allows them to “do much more than ever before” for their students.” And more than two-thirds expressed a desire for more technology in the classroom.

So, what type of support is there? Let’s look at a couple of examples that differ in their offerings.

Edmodo, the online community for teachers and learners (or “the social network for schools” as it is referred to) has over 47 million users. Teachers share lesson plans and support each other through online forums. Students keep track of their learning and become content creators through blogging features. Parents keep track of learning (including homework, quizzes, grades, projects, etc.) through the platform’s notifications, calendar, and tracking tools.

ISTE, the International Society for Technology in Education, has a membership of 100,000 users worldwide who collaborate to implement technology into the classroom. ISTE has online resources and Professional Learning Communities, hosts an annual conference on educational technology, has an advocacy network to share information on federal and state policies, and provides a framework (the ISTE Standards) for implementing technology in the classroom.

Teachers’ Perspectives on their Role

Teachers will continue to play a vital role in the educational process even as, and especially as that process evolves. But we have to ask if we are providing enough support to enable the change in the role.

According to a 2013 Scholastic poll, 82% of teachers felt that constantly changing demands on teachers and students was the most significant challenge to their profession. The second most significant challenge was not having enough time to collaborate with colleagues. Additionally, all teachers reported having two or more populations within their one classroom, with 23% having seven different populations (including special education, gifted, and those working below grade level).

So, from an academic perspective, providing the time, resources and classroom conditions becomes ever more vital as we seek to retain the quality of teaching we seek for our children. From a broader perspective, it is important to note that 99% of teachers surveyed agree that “teaching is about more than academics, it is about reinforcing good citizenship, resilience and social skills, and they believe great teaching demands a mastery of many skills.”

The Ongoing Role of Teacher

What will be the role of the teacher as we incorporate more technology into the classroom, and as more and more information becomes accessible outside of a traditional classroom environment?

  1. Many teachers in the PK-12 environment have already started the process of evolving as they:
  • Bring more technology into their lesson plans, having students research topics further and complete in-class assignments using desktop computers, laptops, tablets and, yes, cellphones.
  • Use blended learning strategies to differentiate and personalize instruction.
  • Flip their classrooms to make classroom time more valuable.
  • Communicate with students and parents outside the classroom via online platforms accessed on a variety of devices.
  1. As access to information expands, the concept of the flipped classroom may also expand, and the role of teachers will evolve further into those who support learning rather than deliver it directly, as:
  • Curators who help students navigate and select from the vast array of available learning material.
  • Facilitators who provide feedback and guidance within specific learning programs.
  • Mentors who offer practical guidance on real-world tasks associated with more project-based learning programs throughout their educational journey.

More change? Yes, it’s inevitable. I can see some eye-rolling right now. As the Scholastic report noted:

In conversation, teachers identify various issues within “constantly changing demands,” including changes in leadership, policies, curriculum, administrative systems and more. Many note that a large part of the challenge is the pressure these changes place on existing time and resources. As one teacher said, “Too many changes at one time waters down everything and doesn’t give teachers the time to effectively implement all of the changes.”

We need to manage change effectively, give teachers time, and broaden the support system. In an earlier piece, I wrote about Meet Johnny’s Teachers, a community of experts, inside and outside of the school who all contributed to a child’s learning. This proposed network depends to a certain extent on a more experiential curriculum. I agree with those teachers who said that a large part of teaching “is not about academics,” and I do believe the classroom teacher does not need to do it all on his or her own.

The role of teacher is changing greatly, but I don’t see it disappearing any time soon.

Visit us at Designs2Learn for more on today’s changing educational market and how to partner for effective change.

Imagine a School without Teachers: Would that Work?

This weekend, the drive along the New York State Thruway was full of wind, ice and snow. It was challenging to keep the windows clear, and the road was so bumpy that I thought maybe I had blown a tire. Or two. I was escorting my high school senior to another college audition, and we had already laughed about how this was the perfect time to see the school, in the worst weather conditions possible. We arrived safely, and the next morning made it to campus and a welcoming reception and series of presentations while the kids all took their music theory tests and headed to their individual auditions. What stood out for me were two conversations I had in which Governor Cuomo’s name surfaced in relationship to careers in education and the increasing degree of jeopardy in which teaching jobs have been placed most recently.

Where will we be without the music?

Because we were at a college of music, the focus of these conversations centered on arts education and the migration of prospective music education applicants to other areas of study because of ongoing cuts to music and art. This is a shame. The curriculum for a degree in music education is rigorous, including both performance and pedagogical requirements. These programs prepare students for a broad range of teaching responsibilities. To see these programs declining is to portend the decline of one of the most significant components of a K-12 education.

How are we approaching evaluation and professional development?

But of course conversations about the Cuomo plan do not end at shortfalls in funding to arts education. Much of the controversy today comes out of the challenge to teaching and teachers in general. “The 2015 Opportunity Agenda” includes proposals to evaluate teachers based on essentially two criteria.

  • 50% of evaluations will be based on student performance on state exams (Proposal #37)
  • 50% of evaluations should be limited to independent classroom evaluations (Proposal #38)

On the surface, it is easy to say that if your class is not performing well on the test, you as a teacher are not performing well at your job. But it is more complex than that. As we know, the advent of Common Core has introduced serious challenges to those schools who have adopted these standards. Test scores have dropped recently as both teachers and students venture into unchartered territory.

As I have previously written, bravo to those pioneers in edtech and teacher development who have provided a range of tools to help prepare teachers and to support students who have been immersed in the CCSS curriculum. But if the issue is with the curriculum itself, will any amount of professional development improve overall outcomes? We are painting our teachers into a corner. Where does that leave our students?

Are we abandoning public schools? And by extension, are we abandoning our teachers?

Charter schools are a political hot button and under as much fire now as ever as people question Governor Cuomo’s request for additional funding for and a raise in the cap on charter schools. That these schools play a vital role in both the populations they serve and in innovating teaching practices should not be questioned. This should not be an either/or argument. All public schools can benefit from best practices in teaching and curriculum design from the nation’s charter schools. But at what cost to the overall budget? Should young people have to “go where the money is” rather than choose an honorable profession because of an allocation of dollars? What we really need here is some creative business modeling to further leverage the private dollars going into education these days.

What is the forecast moving forward?

My high school senior and I were lucky enough to arrive at our weekend destination safely despite the difficulty of the journey. The road upon which our kids are undertaking their educational journey is well-worn and bumpy, and the conditions under which they are traveling are quite stormy. As an educator, as an optimist, as a lifelong learner, I want to envision our kids all arriving safely at their destination. I can’t see them doing that without well-trained and motivated teachers there to help them along the way. Right now, the conditions are a tad hazardous.

How can we ease the way?

A well balanced and well-designed curriculum that both requires and lets teachers do what they do best will provide some enticement for people to continue entering the profession. Most teachers I know want their students to succeed in life. In most cases, that means providing the skills to make better decisions and to sort through masses of data to effectively problem-solve in a wide range of situations and in confounding circumstances.

As long as we have a curriculum based on achieving well on tests rather than understanding how to effectively gather and use information for problems solving, we won’t be best serving our students interests. And if we decide to judge a teacher’s ability to teach based on the results of and prepping for that exam, we won’t be serving anyone’s interest. And we’ll probably be losing some valuable teaching candidates moving forward.

Let’s get back to the drawing board on this one, folks!

Visit us at Designs2Learn for more about partnering with us for impactful learning design.