instr leadership group presentation: Recent Episodes
kate otto
Relevance:
Joseph Schwab’s role in multiple disciplines as a teacher, curriculum reviser, or otherwise are a testament to his comprehensive knowledge and ability to interconnect specialies, disciplines, theories and research of all types together.
He challenged and questioned existing educational frameworks and structure.
Borrowing ideas from the likes of Aristotle and Dewey, he himself has been labeled an educational philosopher.
The Practical and his 4 Commonplaces remain relevant today because Schwab’s model is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and considers four critical elements to challenge and test curricular objectives.
The practical:
Schwab is best remembered for the last and most comprehensive of his critiques of education, focused on curriculum making.
From 1969 to 1986 Schwab produced six articles (the last two unpublished) on the various dimensions of the The Practical.
The Practical argues that five bodies of disciplines and experience be represented interdependently to conduct fair curriculum revision.
Schwab called four of these the "commonplaces" of educational thinking, which require representatives of the affected learners, teachers, subject matters, and (sociocultural) milieux.
The fifth is that of the curriculum specialist, who must work with the other representatives to ensure that the commonplaces are properly coordinated, because changes in any one will have consequences for the others.
Schwab Background:
University of Chicago professor of education and natural sciences,
Joseph Schwab was born in Columbus, Mississippi,
He finished high school in three years, and in 1924, at the age of fifteen,
Went to the University of Chicago for school and stayed there for 50 years through his retirement at age 64.
He earned graduate degress in literature, zooabology and genetics.
He also taught in every degree program at the university of Chicago.
The first part of his career involved conceptuatlizing and implementing reform at all levels of schooling.
Some highlights include that he worked on integrating the humanities and natural sciences, and won the award for excellence in teaching twice, the first to do so.
Later in his career, He prescribed curricular changes and teaching devices that were based on liberal arts, which could actively engage students in their education.
Introductory activity:
-
Click the link on this slide to be directed to a Poll Everywhere page.
-
You’ll have the option to share your name or skip to answer the poll anonymously
-
Once you’re at the poll, in one or two words share
what factor most influences curriculum making from your perspective
Recommendations:
We have 3 recommendations for those implementing Schwabs model in their schools
curriculum design or revision efforts.
First, we recommending using Schwab’s 4 CommonPlaces
as a transformational learning tool
For example, you could use
reflective, probing questions to challenge your school's current curriculum.
Second, we recommend Employing Schwab’s model as a lens for curricular revision
All 4 of Schwab’s commonplaces are vital to curriculum design or revision.
However, keep in mind that the likelihood of perfectly balancing all four is unlikely.
Third, we recommend Supplementing Schwab’s 4 Commonplaces with equitable practices
Schwab's Model can fail to address existing barriers to learning.
School leadership should consider their mission and vision,
and look beyond the 4 Commonplaces for other
relevant elements to effectively serve their community.
Great! You played the audio for this slide.
For each subsequent slide do the same
by clicking the play button on the upper righthand corner of the slide.
- Describe
Joseph Schwab's 4 Commonplaces.
- Understand
how to implement a version of Schwab's Model at your school.
- Share
at least 3 ways Schawb's Commonplaces could benefit you personally as an educator and curriculum leader.
- Recognize
at least one challenge this model could present your school, if chosen.
In this presentation we will
Start by sharing four learning objectives we hope you as participants will takeaway from
this module, and have an introductory activity.
Then we share some background information about Joseph Schwab to give
context about him and his 4 Commonplaces curriculum design model.
Next, well go in-depth into the model itself
Followed by our group’s summary of the model’s strengths and weaknesses.
Finally, we will provide you with some information to think about for your own potential implementation of Schwab’s 4 Commonplaces.
There are 4 activities sprinkled throughout this presentation.
We hope you’ll enjoy learning about Joseph Schwab’s 4 Commonplaces!
Great! You played the audio for this slide.
For each subsequent slide do the same
by clicking the play button on the lower righthand corner of the slide.
Whoa, ok That was a lot of information.
We’re going to dive a little deeper into the VAM, but let’s take a second to debrief and reflect.
Click on the link below to answer a couple questions about VAM and the info we have provided so far. We promise it won’t take long. Thanks!
Like any evaluation model, VAM is not without weaknesses. There are issues of reliability and validity when it comes to the student performance measures and their interpretations. Which brings up questions like:
do student performance measurements accurately represent a teacher’s contribution to student learning?
Is the teacher’s value-added score consistent across various student performance measurements and over time?
Beyond concerns regarding the statistical accuracy of VAM, critics contend that Value-Added dehumanizes the evaluation process and relies too heavily on accountability.
Sure enough, VAM has been used for performance-based pay and as a basis for hiring and firing.
Because of this, we see a lot of negative teacher perceptions of VAM in current research.
We hear and understand these concerns,
However we also argue that VAM, despite its limitations, is a necessary tool and deserves a seat at the table in the teacher evaluation process.
To address criticism, mathematicians have developed and evolved the VAM statistical formulas to control for issues of reliability and validity.
And, as we’ll see in the second half of this presentation, there are various ways to implement VAM that allow districts and schools to choose the student performance measures that make the most sense for them. Meaning, VAM can evolve and adapt to a specific school’s evaluation needs.
As instructional leaders, we have a say in how teacher value-added scores are used. While they can be employed for performance-based pay, hiring, and firing, the use of scores in those ways may not be most beneficial.
Instead, it is our recommendation that educators use the VAM to inform professional development opportunities.
For example:
What do the value-added scores reveal about the effectiveness of teachers in your school? And how can that inform opportunities to foster their professional growth?
This is where the Value-Added Model comes in.
The Value-Added Model offers an objective, quantitative, and data-based analysis of teacher performance.
As instructional leaders, we seek to provide constructive feedback to teachers that will foster their professional growth.
Evaluation tools such as observations, rubrics, and pre/post-conference meetings, give supervisors information to have productive conversations with educators about their practice in the classroom and ideas for how to strengthen it.
Value-Added data is helpful, because educators can assess whether those practices lead to student learning and increases in student achievement, the central outputs of the teaching profession.
Activity: Poll Everywhere Word Cloud
- Considering what we just saw, we’d like to start off with an activity that is similar to what Danielson calls an “informal professional conversation”. That is, let’s take a minute to discuss the big idea at play here and establish a common understanding of evaluation.
- In one word, what do you think is a necessary characteristic or component of a robust evaluation model?
- especially in light of the discrepancies we saw in the previous slides among teacher ratings, student proficiency, and public opinion
- Click the polleverywhere link below to respond with your word, next week we will update the word cloud result to share with the class.
- Try to stick to one word, and please don’t use characters or words like “of” or “the” - thank you!
Did you know? In some districts, 99% of teachers are rated effective or highly effective, but less than 50% of their students test at proficient levels.
That’s an issue. As we see here, there is a current disconnect between teacher effectiveness and student proficiency. This has direct implications for how we, as instructional leaders, should be thinking about teacher evaluation processes.
In this presentation, we will:
- Start with an overview of the Value Added Model and discuss its underlying philosophy, strengths, and possible challenges
- Then we’ll look at how VAM has been implemented in districts across the US and provide you with some information to think about for your own implementation of the VAM model as an instructional leader.
- At the end, we’ll provide supplemental information, additional resources, and provide our contact information for any questions.