5 minute read
Synopsis of Chapter 5 Modules
from Energize Your Teams
Teams unwrap the essential standards to identify the highest-leverage learning targets. All standards consist of multiple learning targets; unwrapping, unpacking, or deconstructing the standards helps create more clarity and precision in the planning for and assessment of student learning. Researchers and coauthors Connie M. Moss, Susan M. Brookhart, and Beverly A. Long (2011) explain, “Instructional objectives [learning targets] are about instruction, derived from content standards, written in teacher language, and used to guide teachers during a lesson or across a series of lessons” (p. 67). Regardless of whether the state, province, county, or district previously prioritized the standards, teams must unwrap them to understand exactly what the standard is asking teachers to teach and students to learn.
The process concludes with the final step, as teacher teams collaborate to translate the learning targets into I can statements (sometimes called student learning targets) that help make expectations for the lesson clear to students. According to Clayton (2017), these I can statements “describe in student-friendly language the learning to occur in the day’s lesson” (p. 1). She continues explaining that I can statements are “written from the students’ point of view and represent what both the teacher and the student are aiming for during the lesson” (p. 1). Students are better able to track their own progress, assess their own learning, and set specific goals for improvement when they understand exactly what teachers expect them to learn.
The modules in this chapter support the second prerequisite of a PLC which states, Collaborative teams implement a guaranteed and viable curriculum, unit by unit (DuFour & Reeves, 2016). The professional development activities in this chapter explore several important aspects of the GVC, such as why teams should ensure students have access to a GVC, what a GVC is and is not, and how teacher teams can operationalize the GVC in their school.
Module 5.1: Why Should Teams Establish a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum?
A GVC promotes clarity for teachers and equity for all students. According to Marzano, Warrick, Rains, & DuFour (2018):
A guaranteed and viable curriculum means all teachers teach the same content for the same course or grade level. With a guaranteed and viable curriculum, a student in one second-grade class is taught the same content as a student in a different second-grade class, or a student in one ninth-grade English class is taught the same content as a student in a different ninth-grade class. (p. 116)
The effort of creating a GVC promotes teachers’ deeper and more thorough understanding of what is most essential for all students to know and be able to do.
Module 5.2: What Is a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum?
The guaranteed dimension of a GVC requires all educators accept responsibility for ensuring all students enrolled in the same class, course, or grade level are exposed to the same rigorous curriculum. The viable aspect recognizes teaching the curriculum and covering the curriculum are two very different things, and while teachers can cover lots of content, to teach the curriculum requires students learn what teachers teach. If the amount of content teachers are responsible for exceeds what they can reasonably teach within the time allotted, the curriculum
is not viable. For a curriculum to be both guaranteed and viable, teachers must have a common understanding of the curriculum and a commitment to teach it.
The question is not, Will teachers prioritize the standards? but How will teachers prioritize the standards? The sheer number of standards forces teachers to prioritize and, in the absence of an organized approach, teachers will choose standards based on criteria unique to each individual teacher; however, a far better approach is to coordinate the process. Using the R.E.A.L. criteria to prioritize the standards produces a number of benefits principals, coaches, and teacher leaders can leverage to improve teaching and learning in their schools.
Module 5.4: How Do Teams Unwrap Essential Standards and Identify High-Leverage Learning Targets?
Standards are complex, and each contains multiple learning targets. Deconstructing standards to identify the learning targets provides teachers with more clarity around what to teach, how to assess whether students have learned, and when to intervene. This module introduces a process teams can use to unwrap the priority standards and identify the highest-leverage learning targets.
Module 5.5: How Do Teams Use I Can Statements to Maximize Learning?
The level of student engagement increases when teachers create I can statements and use them in classrooms. The use of I can statements to explain specific learning targets in student-friendly language provides students with greater clarity and allows them to understand where they are at this moment, where they need to go in the learning progression, and what they need to do to achieve mastery on each learning target.
These modules are best thought of as (1) an opportunity for teachers to learn together or (2) as a starting point for further exploration and investigation. We intentionally designed the modules to be flexible; they can be delivered to individual teams or the entire faculty. The modules can be delivered in order, within a chapter or the entire book, or they can be delivered as standalone modules to provide teams with just-in-time job-embedded professional development.
Most importantly, teams need differentiated support, so those coaching teams should match the learning (the modules) with what the team needs to work on. Asking teams, “What would you like to work on?” or “What would you like feedback on?” will make teams feel better, but these are the wrong questions. The right questions to ask teams are, “What do the data indicate that you need to work on?” or “What do the data indicate that you need feedback on?” which will make teams do better. Those who coach teams need to decide whether they want their teams to feel better or to do better.
Knowing what the team needs to do to improve should guide the choice of module. We believe that the decision of what teams should work on or get feedback on must reflect what the data indicate is the teams’ greatest area of need (GAN), not their greatest area of comfort (GAC). The authors’ goal is to provide the right information to the right people in the right settings at the right time.
